Differences in Health Technology Assessment Recommendations Among European Jurisdictions: The Role of Practice Variations

Abstract

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) plays an important role in reimbursement decision-making in many countries, but recommendations vary widely throughout jurisdictions, even for the same drug. This variation may be due to differences in the weighing of evidence or differences in the processes or procedures, which are known as HTA practices. Objective: To provide insight into the effects of differences in practices on interpretation of intercountry differences in HTA recommendations for conditionally approved drugs. Methods: HTA recommendations for conditionally approved drugs (N = 27) up until June 2017 from England/Wales, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Scotland were included. Recommendations and practice characteristics were extracted from these five jurisdictions and this data was validated. The effect of nonsubmissions, resubmissions, and reassessments; costeffectiveness assessments; and price negotiations on changes in the percentage of negative recommendations and the interpretation of intercountry differences in HTA outcomes were analyzed using Fisher exact tests. Results: The inclusion of cost-effectiveness assessments led to significant increases in the proportion of negative recommendations in England/Wales (from 4% to 50%, P,.01) and Scotland (from 21% to 71%, P,.01). The subsequent inclusion of price negotiations led to significant reductions in the proportion of negative recommendations in England/ Wales (from 50% to 14%, P,.01), France (from 31% to 3%, P=.012), and Germany (from 34% to 0%, P,.01). Results indicated that the inclusion of nonsubmissions and resubmissions might affect Scottish negative HTA recommendations (from 7% to 21%), but this effect was not significant. No significant effects were observed in the Netherlands, possibly owing to sample size. Conclusion: Variations in HTA practices between international jurisdictions can have a substantial and significant impact on conclusions about recommendations by HTA bodies, as exemplified in this cohort of conditionally approved products. Studies comparing international HTA recommendations should carefully consider possible practice variations between jurisdictions.

Application of Managed Entry Agreements for Innovative Therapies in Different Settings and Combinations: A Feasibility Analysis

“…The identified benefits and limitations of the MEAs may seem contradictory. However, this observation relates to the various perspectives or interests of stakeholders involved [82][83][84][85][86]. Restrictive reimbursement for a subgroup, for example, always has multiple perspectives, i.e., loss of revenue for the company or lack of access for a specific patient population, but an opportunity for an HTA organization or payer to gain evidence that is lacking.…”

Associations between uncertainties identified by the European Medicines Agency and national decision making on reimbursement by HTA agencies

“…This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved Consortium; ZIN, Zorginstituut Nederland 1 epoetin theta (Eporatio) and denosumab (Prolia) were initially approved for two indications, golimumab (Simponi) was initially approved for three indications (see Table S1) 2 HAS further split one EMA approved indication into two subindications, which resulted in two separate recommendations 3 NICE further split two EMA approved indications into two subindications each, which resulted in four separate recommendations…”

EU health solidarity in times of crisis: explaining public preferences towards EU risk pooling for medicines

“…Organizing the availability of medicines at the EU level would probably also involve more central EU expertise as to the efficacy of different modes of use and prescription. At the EU level, this discussion is also at stake in the context of 'health technology assessments' (Löblová, 2021;Vreman et al, 2020). In this regard, the determination of reimbursement for medicines through the national baskets of care is an important biomedical, ethical and political debate that may evoke more or less public support and social legitimacy.…”