RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Every year in Italy, influenza affects about 4 million people. Almost 5% of them are hospitalised. During peak illness, enormous pressure is placed on healthcare and economic systems. This study aims to quantify the clinical and economic burden of severe influenza during 5 epidemic seasons (2014-2019) from administrative claims data. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of influenza between October 2014, and April 2019, were analyzed. Clinical characteristics and administrative information were retrieved from health-related Administrative Databases (ADs) of 4 Italian Local Health Units (LHUs). The date of first admission was set as the Index Date (ID). A follow-up period of six months after ID was considered to account for complications and re-hospitalizations, while a lookback period (2 years before ID) was set to assess the prevalence of underlying comorbidities. RESULTS: Out of 2,333 patients with severe influenza, 44.1% were adults ≥ 65, and 25.6% young individuals aged 0-17. 46.8% had comorbidities (i.e., were at risk), mainly cardiovascular and metabolic diseases (45.3%), and chronic conditions (24.7%). The highest hospitalization rates were among the elderly (≥ 75) and the young individuals (0-17), and were 37.6 and 19.5/100,000 inhabitants/year, respectively. The average hospital stay was 8 days (IQR: 14 - 4). It was higher for older individuals (≥ 65 years, 11 days, [17 - 6]) and for those with comorbidities (9 days, [16 - 6]), p-value < 0.001. Similarly, mortality was higher in elderly and those at risk (p-value < 0.001). Respiratory complications occurred in 12.7% of patients, and cardiovascular disorders in 5.9%. Total influenza-related costs were 9.7 million with hospitalization accounting for 95% of them. 47.3% of hospitalization costs were associated with individuals ≥ 65 and 52.9% with patients at risk. The average hospitalisation cost per patient was 4,007. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study showed that during the 2014-2019 influenza seasons in Italy, individuals of extreme ages and those with pre-existing medical conditions, were more likely to be hospitalized with severe influenza. Together with complications and ageing, they worsen patient's outcome and may lead to a prolonged hospitalization, thus increasing healthcare utilization and costs. Our data generate real-world evidence on the burden of influenza, useful to inform public health decision-making.
Asunto(s)
Hospitalización , Gripe Humana , Humanos , Italia/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/economía , Gripe Humana/mortalidad , Anciano , Masculino , Femenino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adolescente , Persona de Mediana Edad , Niño , Adulto , Preescolar , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/economía , Lactante , Adulto Joven , Recién Nacido , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estaciones del Año , Comorbilidad , Costo de Enfermedad , Bases de Datos FactualesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Genomic and molecular alterations are increasingly important in cancer diagnosis, and scientific advances are opening new treatment avenues. Precision oncology (PO) uses a patient's genomic profile to determine optimal treatment, promising fewer side effects and higher success rates. Within PO, tumor-agnostic (TA) therapies target genomic alterations irrespective of tumor location. However, traditional value frameworks and approval pathways pose challenges which may limit patient access to PO therapies. OBJECTIVES: This study describes challenges in assessing PO and TA medicines, explores possible solutions, and provides actionable recommendations to facilitate an iterative life-cycle assessment of these medicines. METHODS: After reviewing the published literature, we obtained insights from key stakeholders and European experts across a range of disciplines, through individual interviews and an industry workshop. The research was guided and refined by an international expert committee through 2 sounding board meetings. RESULTS: The current challenges faced by PO and TA medicines are multiple and can be demonstrated through real-world examples of the current barriers and opportunities. A life-cycle approach to assessment should be taken, including key actions at the early stages of evidence generation, regulatory and reimbursement stage, as well as payment and adoption solutions that make use of the evolving evidence base. Working toward these solutions to maximize PO medicine value is a shared responsibility and stands to benefit all stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Our call to action is to expand access to comprehensive genomic testing, foster a learning health care system, enable fast and equitable access to cost-effective treatments, and ultimately improve health outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Medicina de Precisión , Humanos , Medicina de Precisión/métodos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Oncología Médica/métodos , Oncología Médica/normas , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/farmacologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The uptake of complex technologies and platforms has resulted in several challenges in the pricing and reimbursement of innovative pharmaceuticals. To address these challenges, plenty of concepts have already been described in the scientific literature about innovative value judgment or payment models, which are either (1) remaining theoretical; or (2) applied only in pilots with limited impact on patient access; or (3) applied so heterogeneously in many different countries that it prevents the health care industry from meeting expectations of HTA bodies and health care payers in the evidence requirements or offerings in different jurisdictions. AREAS COVERED: This paper provides perspectives on how to reduce the heterogeneity of pharmaceutical payment models across European countries in five areas, including 1) extended evaluation frameworks, 2) performance-based risk-sharing agreements, 3) pooled procurement for low volume or urgent technologies, 4) alternative access schemes, and 5) delayed payment models for technologies with high upfront costs. EXPERT OPINION: Whilst pricing and reimbursement decisions will remain a competence of EU member states, there is a need for alignment of European pharmaceutical payment model components in critical areas with the ultimate objective of improving the equitable access of European patients to increasingly complex pharmaceutical technologies.
Asunto(s)
Costos de los Medicamentos , Tecnología Farmacéutica , Humanos , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Europa (Continente) , Preparaciones FarmacéuticasRESUMEN
The evaluation of pharmaceutical innovation and therapeutic value is an increasingly complex exercise for which different approaches are adopted at the national level, despite the need for standardisation of processes and harmonisation of public health decisions. The objective of our analysis was to compare the approaches of the AIFA (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco) and the HAS (Haute Autorité de Santé) in assessing the same medicinal products. In Italy, the 1525/2017 AIFA Deliberation introduces a transparent scheme for the evaluation of innovative status (innovative, conditional, not innovative) based on the therapeutic added value (TAV), therapeutic need, and quality of evidence. In contrast, in France, the HAS makes judgements using the effective clinical benefit (Service Médical Rendu) and improvement of effective clinical benefit (Amélioration du Service Médical Rendu, ASMR). This analysis focused on medicinal products evaluated both by the AIFA and by the HAS from July 2017 to September 2021. Similarities between AIFA and HAS evaluations were investigated in terms of the TAV, recognition of innovativeness, and the ASMR. Both total and partial agreements were considered relevant. Therefore, raw agreement, Cohen's kappa (weighted and unweighted), and Bangdiwala's B-statistic were estimated. A total of 102 medicinal products were included in this study. Out of these, 38 (37.2%) were orphan drugs, while 56 (54.9%) had a clinical indication for the treatment of cancer. The AIFA and HAS reached a higher level of agreement on the innovativeness status compared with the TAV. A moderate total agreement emerged in the recognition of innovativeness (k = 0.463, p-value ≤0.0001), and partial agreement was substantial (equal weight k = 0.547, squared k = 0.638), while a lack of agreement resulted in a comparison of the TAV according to the AIFA and the ASMR recognised by the HAS. Indeed, whereas the AIFA determined the TAV to be important, the HAS considered it to be moderate. In addition, whereas the AIFA identified a bias towards a moderate TAV, the HAS identified a bias towards a minor ASMR. A higher level of agreement was reached, both on the TAV and on innovative status, for less critical medical products (non-cancer-related, or non-orphan, or with a standard European Medicines Agency approval). These results underline the importance of implementing European procedures that are more broadly aligned in terms of value definition criteria.
RESUMEN
Managed entry agreements (MEA) represent one of the main topics of discussion between the European National Payers Authorities. Several initiatives on the subject have been organized over the past few years and the scientific literature is full of publications on the subject. There is currently little international sharing of information between payers, mainly as a result of the confidentiality issues. There are potential benefits from the mutual sharing of information, both about the existence of MEAs and on the outcomes and results. The importance of involving all the players in the decision-making process on market access for a medicinal product (MP) is that it may help to make new therapies available to patients in a shorter time. The aim of this project is to propose a new pathway of value-based MEA (VBMEA), based on the analysis of the current Italian pricing and reimbursement framework. This requires elaboration of a transparent appraisal and MEA details with at least a 24-month contract. The price of the MP is therefore valued based on the analysis of the VBMEA registries of the Italian Medicines Agency. Although the proposal focuses on the Italian context, a similar approach could also be adapted in other nations, considering the particularities of the single health technology assessment (HTA)/payer system.
RESUMEN
Italy has a well-established prominent system of national registries to support managed entry agreements (MEAs), monitoring innovative medicinal products (MPs) with clinical as well as economic uncertainties to ensure appropriate use and best value for money. The technological architecture of the registries is funded by pharmaceutical companies, but fully governed by the national medicines agency (AIFA). A desktop analysis was undertaken of data over a 15-year timeframe of all AIFA indication-based registries and associated EMA information. The characteristics of registries were evaluated, comparing orphan MPs vs. all MPs exploring cancer and non-cancer indications. OMP (orphan medicinal product) registries' type vs. AIFA innovation status and EMA approval was reviewed. Of the 283 registries, 182 are appropriateness registries (35.2% relate to OMPs, with an almost equal split of cancer vs. non-cancer for OMPs and MPs), 35 include financial-based agreements [20% OMPs (2 non-cancer, 5 cancer)], and 60 registries are payment by result agreements [23.3% OMPs (4 non-cancer, 10 cancer)]. Most OMPs (53/88) came through the normal regulatory route. With the strengthening of the system for evaluation of innovation, fewer outcomes-based registries have been instigated. AIFA has overcome many of the challenges experienced with MEA through developing an integrated national web-based data collection system: the challenge that remains for AIFA is to move from using the system for individual patient decisions about treatment to reviewing the wealth of data it now holds to optimize healthcare.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Enthusiasm for the use of outcomes-based managed entry agreements (OBMEAs) to manage uncertainties apparent at the time of appraisal/pricing and reimbursement of new medicines has waned over the past decade, as challenges in establishment, implementation and re-appraisal have been identified. With the recent advent of innovative treatments for rare diseases that have uncertainties in the clinical evidence base, but which could meet a high unmet need, there has been renewed interest in the potential of OBMEAs. The objective of this research was to review the implementation of OBMEAs for two case studies across countries in the European Union, Australia and Canada, to identify good practices that could inform development of tools to support implementation of OBMEAs. METHODS: To investigate how OBMEAs are being implemented with rare disease treatments, we collected information from health technology assessment/payer experts in countries that had implemented OBMEAs for either nusinersen in spinal muscular atrophy or tisagenlecleucel in two cancer indications. Operational characteristics of the OBMEAs that were publicly available were documented. Then, the experts discussed issues in implementing these OBMEAs and specific approaches taken to overcome challenges. RESULTS: The OBMEAs identified were based on individual outcomes to ensure appropriate use, manage continuation of treatment and in two cases linked to payment schedules, or they were population based, coverage with evidence development. For nusinersen, population-based OBMEAs are documented in Belgium, England and the Netherlands and individual-based schemes in Bulgaria, Ireland, Italy and Lithuania. For tisagenlecleucel, there were population-based schemes in Australia, Belgium, England and France and individual-based schemes in Italy and Spain. Comparison of the OBMEA constructs showed some clear published frameworks and clarity of the uncertainties to be addressed that were similar across countries. Agreements were generally made between the marketing authorisation holder and the payer with involvement of expert physicians. Only England and the Netherlands involved patients. Italy used its long-established, national, web-based, treatment-specific data collection system linked to reimbursement and Spain has just developed such a national treatment registry system. Other countries relied on a variety of data collection systems (including clinical registries) and administrative data. Durations of agreements varied for these treatments as did processes for interim reporting. The processes to ensure data quality, completeness and sufficiency for re-analysis after coverage with evidence development were not always clear, neither were analysis plans. CONCLUSIONS: These case studies have shown that important information about the constructs of OBMEAs for rare disease treatments are publicly available, and for some jurisdictions, interim reports of progress. Outcomes-based managed entry agreements can play an important role not only in reimbursement, but also in treatment optimisation. However, they are complex to implement and should be the exception and not the rule. More recent OBMEAs have developed document covenants among stakeholders or electronic systems to provide assurances about data sufficiency. For coverage with evidence development, there is an opportunity for greater collaboration among jurisdictions to share processes, develop common data collection agreements, and share interim and final reports. The establishment of an international public portal to host such reports would be particularly valuable for rare disease treatments.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Raras , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Humanos , Oligonucleótidos , Enfermedades Raras/tratamiento farmacológico , Receptores de Antígenos de Linfocitos TRESUMEN
In the field of rare diseases (RDs), the evidence standard is often lower than that required by health technology assessment (HTA) and payer authorities. In this commentary, we propose that appropriate economic evaluation for rare disease treatments should be initially informed by cost-of-illness (COI) studies conducted using a societal perspective. Such an approach contributes to improving countries' understanding of RDs in their entirety as societal and not merely clinical, or product-specific issues. In order to exemplify how the disease burden's distribution has changed over the last fifteen years, key COI studies for Hemophilia, Fragile X Syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis are examined. Evidence shows that, besides methodological variability and cross-country differences, the disease burden's share represented by direct costs generally grows over time as novel treatments become available. Hence, to support effective decision-making processes, it seems necessary to assess the re-allocation of the burden produced by new medicinal products, and this approach requires identifying cost drivers through COI studies with robust design and standardized methodology.
Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Fibrosis Quística , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Enfermedades Raras/epidemiología , Evaluación de la Tecnología BiomédicaRESUMEN
Although there are a growing number of well-reported, late-stage clinical trial failures in Alzheimer's disease, the introduction of a disease-modifying therapy within the next 5 years may be anticipated. These treatments are likely to target Alzheimer's disease in the earlier disease stages, unlike drugs that are currently available that treat symptoms of moderate-to-severe dementia. Therefore, there is a need to establish a consensus on regulatory and health technology assessment requirements for Alzheimer's disease, as a new drug will need to undergo regulatory and health technology assessments before it becomes available to patients. This article reports the discussions and activities of the regulatory and health technology assessment expert advisory group of the 2-year ROADMAP (real-world outcomes across the Alzheimer's disease spectrum: a multimodal data access platform) project. The expert advisory group discussions identified a lack of consensus on validated outcomes in the earliest Alzheimer's disease stages, the need for filling gaps between outcomes used across clinical trials and real-world settings, and the role that real-world evidence might have in characterising the impact of a possible disease-modifying therapy on caregivers, resource use and long-term outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de Alzheimer/tratamiento farmacológico , Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Resultado del Tratamiento , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Modelos EconométricosRESUMEN
In order to investigate the influence of season and month of birth on the risk of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD) in Italy, we evaluated the month birth and sex of all patients, recorded in the anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) monitoring registry of the Italian Medicines Agency, born between 1925-1944, who received intravitreal anti-VEGF injections for n-AMD between January 1, 2013 and July 29, 2015. The numbers of all births in Italy in the same years, extracted from the Italian National Institute of Statistics, were used to calculate the expected number of n-AMD cases. Overall, 45,845 patients (19,207 men, 26,638 women) received intravitreal anti-VEGF for n-AMD; in the same years, 20,140,426 people (10,334,262 male, 9,806,164 female) were born in Italy. Comparing the observed number of n-AMD cases with the expected number of n- AMD cases in each season, we found that the season-specific risk for n-AMD was 2.5% higher for those born in summer (OR=1.03, Bonferroni-corrected P=0.008) and 3% lower for those born in winter (OR=0.96, Bonferroni-corrected P=0.0004). When considering the month of birth, the risk of n-AMD was 5.9% lower for people born in January (OR=0.93, Bonferroni-corrected P=0.0012). The factors causing such differences should be determined.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de la Angiogénesis/uso terapéutico , Degeneración Macular/epidemiología , Neovascularización Patológica/epidemiología , Estaciones del Año , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/antagonistas & inhibidores , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aptámeros de Nucleótidos/uso terapéutico , Bevacizumab/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Italia/epidemiología , Degeneración Macular/tratamiento farmacológico , Masculino , Neovascularización Patológica/tratamiento farmacológico , Ranibizumab/uso terapéutico , Receptores de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/uso terapéutico , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/uso terapéutico , Sistema de Registros , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The AIFA (Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco--Italian Medicines Agency) Monitoring Registries track the eligibility of patients and the complete flow of treatments, guaranteeing appropriateness in use of pharmaceutical products, according to approved indications. METHODS: This study describes the Italian pharmaceutical context and the aims and functioning of AIFA Monitoring Registries, focusing on the applications to the Managed Entry Agreements (MEAs) and HTA approaches. RESULTS: The AIFA Monitoring Registries System has been operational in Italy since 2005. In 2012, the system became part of the NHS Information Technology system, aiming at enhancing appropriate use of pharmaceuticals and efficiency of the administrative activity. Currently, seventy-six medicines are monitored through the system, corresponding to fifty-eight therapeutic indications; individual treatments recorded are more than 515,000, for a population of approximately 505,000 patients. For each monitored product, patients eligible for treatment are registered in the specific therapeutic indication dynamic monitoring database to collect epidemiologic and clinical data, including data on the safety profile, and ex-post information missing at first evaluation stage. CONCLUSIONS: AIFA Monitoring Registries allow the evaluation of the pharmaceuticals' performance in clinical practice and may promote innovation and quicker access to medicines at affordable prices, for the benefit of patients.
Asunto(s)
Monitoreo de Drogas , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción , Sistema de Registros , Humanos , Italia , Medicina EstatalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: National payers across Europe have been increasingly looking into innovative reimbursement approaches - called managed entry agreements (MEAs) - to balance the need to provide rapid access to potentially beneficial orphan medicinal products (OMPs) with the requirements to circumscribe uncertainty, obtain best value for money or to ensure affordability. This study aimed to identify, describe and classify MEAs applied to OMPs by national payers and to analyse their practice in Europe. METHODS: To identify and describe MEAs, national health technology assessments and reimbursement decisions on OMPs across seven European countries were reviewed and their main characteristics extracted. To fill data gaps and validate the accuracy of the extraction, collaboration was sought from national payers. To classify MEAs, a bespoke taxonomy was implemented. Identified MEAs were analysed and compared by focusing on five key themes, namely by describing the MEAs in relation to: drug targets and therapeutic classes, geographical spread, type of MEA applied, declared rationale for setting-up of MEAs, and evolution over time. RESULTS: 42 MEAs for 26 OMPs, implemented between 2006 and 2012 and representing a variety of MEA designs, were identified. Italy was the country with the highest number of schemes (n=15), followed by the Netherlands (n=10), England and Wales (n=8), Sweden (n=5) and Belgium (n=4). No MEA was identified for France and Germany due to data unavailability. Antineoplastic agents were the primary targets of MEAs. 55% of the identified MEAs were performance-based risk-sharing arrangements; the other 45% were financial-based. Nine of these 26 OMPs were subject to MEAs in two or three different countries, resulting in 24 MEAs. 60% of identified MEAs focused on conditions whose prevalence is less than 1 per 10,000. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that a variety of MEAs were increasingly used by European payers to manage aspects of uncertainty associated with the introduction of OMPs in the healthcare system, and which may be of a clinical, utilisation, or budgetary nature. It remains unclear whether differences in the use of MEAs reflect differences in how 'uncertainty' and 'value' are perceived across healthcare systems.
Asunto(s)
Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Producción de Medicamentos sin Interés Comercial/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Europa (Continente) , HumanosRESUMEN
Research on lipase inhibitors could help in the therapy of diseases caused by lipase-producing microorganisms and in the design of novel lipase substrate specificities for biotechnology. Here we report a fast and sensitive colorimetric microassay that is low-cost and suitable for high-throughput experiments for the evaluation of lipase activity and inhibition. Comparison of Candida rugosa activity and inhibition with previous HPLC results validated the method, and revealed the importance of the reaction mixture composition. The assay was used to evaluate the effect of saturated fatty acids on Bacillus-related lipases. Cell-bound esterases were strongly inhibited by fatty acids, suggesting a negative feedback regulation by product, and a role of these enzymes in cell membrane turnover. Bacillus subtilis LipA was moderately activated by low concentrations of fatty acids and was inhibited at greater concentrations. LipB-like esterases were highly activated by myristic and lauric acids and were only slightly inhibited by high capric acid concentrations. Such an activation, reported here for the first time in bacterial lipases, seems to be part of a regulatory system evolved to ensure a high use of carbon sources, and could be related to the successful adaptation of Bacillus strains to nutrient-rich environments with strong microbial competition.