BackgroundReimbursement decisions are conventionally based on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which often have high internal validity but low external validity. Real-world data (RWD) may provide complimentary evidence for relative effectiveness assessments (REAs) and cost-effectiveness assessments (CEAs). This study examines whether RWD is incorporated in health technology assessment (HTA) of melanoma drugs by European HTA agencies, as well as differences in RWD use between agencies and across time.MethodsHTA reports published between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016 were retrieved from websites of agencies representing five jurisdictions: England [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)], Scotland [Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC)], France [Haute Autorité de santé (HAS)], Germany [Institute for Quality and Efficacy in Healthcare (IQWiG)] and The Netherlands [Zorginstituut Nederland (ZIN)]. A standardized data extraction form was used to extract information on RWD inclusion for both REAs and CEAs.ResultsOverall, 52 reports were retrieved, all of which contained REAs; CEAs were present in 25 of the reports. RWD was included in 28 of the 52 REAs (54%), mainly to estimate melanoma prevalence, and in 22 of the 25 (88%) CEAs, mainly to extrapolate long-term effectiveness and/or identify drug-related costs. Differences emerged between agencies regarding RWD use in REAs; the ZIN and IQWiG cited RWD for evidence on prevalence, whereas the NICE, SMC and HAS additionally cited RWD use for drug effectiveness. No visible trend for RWD use in REAs and CEAs over time was observed.ConclusionIn general, RWD inclusion was higher in CEAs than REAs, and was mostly used to estimate melanoma prevalence in REAs or to predict long-term effectiveness in CEAs. Differences emerged between agencies’ use of RWD; however, no visible trends for RWD use over time were observed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40273-017-0596-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objective: To compare the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) and functional electrical stimulation (FES) over 12 months in people with Multiple Sclerosis with foot drop. Design: Multicentre, powered, non-blinded, randomized trial. Setting: Seven Multiple Sclerosis outpatient centres across Scotland. Subjects: Eighty-five treatment-naïve people with Multiple Sclerosis with persistent (>three months) foot drop. Interventions: Participants randomized to receive a custom-made, AFO (n = 43) or FES device (n = 42). Outcome measures: Assessed at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months; 5-minute self-selected walk test (primary), Timed 25 Foot Walk, oxygen cost of walking, Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Euroqol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, Activities-specific Balance and Confidence Scale, Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Score, and equipment and National Health Service staff time costs of interventions. Results: Groups were similar for age (AFO, 51.4 (11.2); FES, 50.4(10.4) years) and baseline walking speed (AFO, 0.62 (0.21); FES 0.73 (0.27) m/s). In all, 38% dropped out by 12 months (AFO, n = 21; FES, n = 11). Both groups walked faster at 12 months with device (P < 0.001; AFO, 0.73 (0.24); FES, 0.79 (0.24) m/s) but no difference between groups. Significantly higher Psychological Impact of Assistive Devices Scores were found for FES for Competence (P = 0.016; AFO, 0.85(1.05); FES, 1.53(1.05)), Adaptability (P = 0.001; AFO, 0.38(0.97); FES 1.53 (0.98)) and Self-Esteem (P = 0.006; AFO, 0.45 (0.67); FES 1 (0.68)). Effects were comparable for other measures. FES may offer value for money alternative to usual care. Conclusion: AFOs and FES have comparable effects on walking performance and patient-reported outcomes; however, high drop-outs introduces uncertainty.

An electronic version of this title, in Adobe Acrobat format, is available for downloading free of charge for personal use from the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk). A fully searchable DVD is also available (see below).Printed copies of HTA journal series issues cost £20 each (post and packing free in the UK) to both public and private sector purchasers from our despatch agents.Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per issue and for the rest of the world £3 per issue. How to order:-fax (with credit card details) -post (with credit card details or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you to either print out your order or download a blank order form. Contact details are as follows:Synergie UK (HTA Department) Digital House, The Loddon Centre Wade Road Basingstoke Hants RG24 8QW Email: orders@hta.ac.uk Tel: 0845 812 4000 -ask for 'HTA Payment Services' (out-of-hours answer-phone service) Fax: 0845 812 4001 -put 'HTA Order' on the fax header Payment methods Paying by chequeIf you pay by cheque, the cheque must be in pounds sterling, made payable to University of Southampton and drawn on a bank with a UK address.Paying by credit card You can order using your credit card by phone, fax or post. SubscriptionsNHS libraries can subscribe free of charge. Public libraries can subscribe at a reduced cost of £100 for each volume (normally comprising 40-50 titles). The commercial subscription rate is £400 per volume (addresses within the UK) and £600 per volume (addresses outside the UK). Please see our website for details. Subscriptions can be purchased only for the current or forthcoming volume.How do I get a copy of HTA on DVD?Please use the form on the HTA website (www.hta.ac.uk/htacd/index.shtml). HTA on DVD is currently free of charge worldwide.The website also provides information about the HTA programme and lists the membership of the various committees. HTA NIHR Health Technology Assessment programmeThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care. The research findings from the HTA programme directly influence decision-making bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the National Screening Committee (NSC). HTA findings also help to improve the quality of clinical practice in the NHS indirectly in that they form a key component of the 'National Knowledge Service' . The HTA programme is needs led in that it fills gaps in the evidence needed by the NHS. There are three routes to the start of projects. First is the commissioned route. Suggestions for research...

Background Foot drop affects walking in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). This study compares the initial orthotic effects of two treatments for foot drop: ankle-foot orthoses (AFO) and functional electrical stimulation (FES), on the speed and oxygen cost of walking in MS. Method and materials Seventy-eight pwMS were randomised to receive AFO or FES (ODFS PACE (OML, Salisbury, UK)). Participants completed the 25-ft walk test (25ftWT) and 5-min self-selected walk test (5minSSWT), from which oxygen cost was determined, with and without their device. Between-, within- and sub-group analyses (based on baseline walking speed of <0.8 m/s (slow) or ≥0.8 m/s (fast)) were undertaken. Results No significant differences between baseline measures were observed. The AFO group walked significantly slower than the FES group (5minSSWT, p = 0.037, 0.11 m/s). The AFO group walked significantly slower with than without AFO (25ftWT, p = 0.037), particularly in the fast-walking group ( p = 0.011). The slow-walking FES group walked significantly faster with FES than without (25ftWT; p = 0.029, 5minSSWT; p = 0.037). There were no differences in the fast-walking FES group or in the oxygen cost for either device. Conclusion AFO reduced walking speed, particularly in fast walkers. FES increased walking speed in slow, but not fast walkers.

0 1 7 ) A 3 9 9 -A 8 1 1 A401 representing 5 jurisdictions: England (NICE), Scotland (SMC), France (HAS), Germany (IQWiG) and the Netherlands (ZIN). A standardized data-extraction form was used to extract information on RWD inclusion for both REAs and CEAs. A panel of senior HTA assessors representing the 5 agencies was consulted to check the robustness of data extracted and interpretation. Results: Fifty-two reports were retrieved. All 52 reports contained REAs; CEAs were present in 25. RWD was included in 28 of 52 REAs (54%); mainly to estimate melanoma prevalence. RWD was included in 22 of 25 (88%) of CEAs; mainly to extrapolate long-term effectiveness and/or identify drug-related costs drugs. Differences emerged between agencies regarding RWD use in REAs; ZIN and IQWiG cited RWD for evidence on prevalence whereas NICE, SMC and HAS additionally cited RWD use for drug effectiveness. No visible trend for RWD use in REAs and CEAs over time was observed. ConClusions: In general, RWD inclusion was higher in CEAs than REAs. It was mostly used to estimate melanoma prevalence in REAs or to predict long-term effectiveness in CEAs. Differences emerged between agencies' use of RWD. However, no visible trends for RWD use over time were observed. Future research should explore the use of RWD in HTA of drugs in other disease indications and in conditional reimbursement schemes.objeCtives: Reimbursement decisions are conventionally based on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which often have high internal validity but low external validity. Real-world data (RWD) may provide complimentary evidence for relative effectiveness assessments (REAs) and cost-effectiveness assessments (CEAs). This study examines whether RWD is incorporated in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of melanoma drugs by European HTA agencies, differences in RWD use between agencies and across time. Methods: HTA reports published between 01.01.2011 and 31.12.2016 were retrieved from websites of agencies