Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Appraisal of Novel Oncological Therapies by the Scottish Medicines Consortium and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: A Comparative Study of Six Years of Data.
Taylor, Rory.
Afiliação
  • Taylor R; Internal Medicine, Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, GBR.
Cureus ; 15(12): e50560, 2023 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38222244
ABSTRACT
Background and aims Pharmacoeconomic assessment of novel oncological therapies is an increasingly important factor in determining patient access to therapies. Organisations such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England and the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) in Scotland assess medications for their cost-effectiveness through health technology assessments (HTA) and provide guidance on whether the public health service should fund a therapy. We assessed six years of data to determine if there were any differences in timescales and decisions between NICE and SMC for new oncological therapies. Methods and results Time (days) from marketing authorisation (MA) to publication of final HTA guidance was calculated for single technology appraisals published by NICE and SMC between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022, for oncological therapies. We assessed 161 HTAs by NICE and 148 HTAs by SMC published in the study period. The median time from MA to publication of HTA guidance was 291 days (IQR 222-406) for SMC and 257 days (IQR 167-448) for NICE (p=0.054). For solid organ cancer therapies, NICE was significantly faster in publishing guidance, with a median of 231.5 days (IQR 148-392.25), compared to SMC, which took 273 days (IQR 202-378) (p=0.039). Overall recommendation of technologies was similar between the SMC and NICE (90.5% and 89.4%, respectively), with discordance in a minority of cases (12.6%). Conclusions Recommendation rates for single HTAs are similar between NICE and SMC for oncological therapies with discordance in a minority of cases. The time from MA to publication of HTA guidance was similar overall, but NICE was faster in publishing HTA guidance for solid organ cancer indications. Differences in methodology and process between the two organisations, in particular the presence of the Cancer Drugs Fund in England, may explain this difference in publication times.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Health_technology_assessment / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Health_technology_assessment / Prognostic_studies Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos