Implementing reflective multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to assess orphan drugs value in the Catalan Health Service (CatSalut).
Catalan healthcare
Decision-making
Multi-criteria decision analysis
Orphan drugs
Journal
Orphanet journal of rare diseases
ISSN: 1750-1172
Titre abrégé: Orphanet J Rare Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101266602
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 06 2019
27 06 2019
Historique:
received:
29
12
2018
accepted:
07
06
2019
entrez:
29
6
2019
pubmed:
30
6
2019
medline:
31
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Orphan medicines show some characteristics that hinder the evaluation of their clinical added value. The often low level of evidence available for orphan drugs, together with a high budget impact and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio many times higher than drugs used for non-orphan diseases, represent challenges in their appraisal and effective access to clinical use. In order to explore how to handle these hurdles, the Catalan Health Service (CatSalut) began an initiative on a multidimensional assessment of drugs value during the appraisal process. Reflective multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) using analytical methods was chosen, since it may help to standardise and contextualize all the relevant data related with the drug that could contribute to a decision. The aim of the study was to determine whether the implementation of reflective MCDA methodology could support the decision-making process about orphan medicines in the context of CatSalut. The assessment and decision-making process for orphan drugs in the Programa d'Harmonització Farmacoterapeutica (PHF) of CatSalut was prioritized to test the implementation of the reflective MCDA both a qualitative and quantitatively. A staged approach was used with the following main steps: selection and structuration of quantitative criteria (Core Model) and qualitative criteria (Contextual Tool), framework scoring and assessment of three orphan drug case studies. This proof-of-concept would grant a continued refinement of the methodology and, if and when validated, its potential integration to other therapeutic areas of the PHF. The final framework was composed by 10 quantitative criteria (Core Model) and 4 qualitative criteria (Contextual Tool) according to the PHF goals being the most important criteria "disease severity", "unmet need", "comparative effectiveness" and "comparative safety /tolerability". The matrix developed for the case studies served as a guide for the selection of the essential information that the decision-makers were expected to include in a framework. The reflective discussion was considered the most relevant phase of the approach to support inputs for health decision-making processes reflecting both drug value and place in therapy. The study showed that reflective MCDA methodology could be implemented to complement the decision-making process in CatSalut, as an aid to determine the clinical added value for orphan medicines. MCDA provided transparency and a structured discussion during the committee meetings, thus increasing transparency and predictability of the relevant items supporting the agreements adopted on orphan drugs access.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Orphan medicines show some characteristics that hinder the evaluation of their clinical added value. The often low level of evidence available for orphan drugs, together with a high budget impact and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio many times higher than drugs used for non-orphan diseases, represent challenges in their appraisal and effective access to clinical use. In order to explore how to handle these hurdles, the Catalan Health Service (CatSalut) began an initiative on a multidimensional assessment of drugs value during the appraisal process. Reflective multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) using analytical methods was chosen, since it may help to standardise and contextualize all the relevant data related with the drug that could contribute to a decision. The aim of the study was to determine whether the implementation of reflective MCDA methodology could support the decision-making process about orphan medicines in the context of CatSalut.
METHODS
The assessment and decision-making process for orphan drugs in the Programa d'Harmonització Farmacoterapeutica (PHF) of CatSalut was prioritized to test the implementation of the reflective MCDA both a qualitative and quantitatively. A staged approach was used with the following main steps: selection and structuration of quantitative criteria (Core Model) and qualitative criteria (Contextual Tool), framework scoring and assessment of three orphan drug case studies. This proof-of-concept would grant a continued refinement of the methodology and, if and when validated, its potential integration to other therapeutic areas of the PHF.
RESULTS
The final framework was composed by 10 quantitative criteria (Core Model) and 4 qualitative criteria (Contextual Tool) according to the PHF goals being the most important criteria "disease severity", "unmet need", "comparative effectiveness" and "comparative safety /tolerability". The matrix developed for the case studies served as a guide for the selection of the essential information that the decision-makers were expected to include in a framework. The reflective discussion was considered the most relevant phase of the approach to support inputs for health decision-making processes reflecting both drug value and place in therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
The study showed that reflective MCDA methodology could be implemented to complement the decision-making process in CatSalut, as an aid to determine the clinical added value for orphan medicines. MCDA provided transparency and a structured discussion during the committee meetings, thus increasing transparency and predictability of the relevant items supporting the agreements adopted on orphan drugs access.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31248421
doi: 10.1186/s13023-019-1121-6
pii: 10.1186/s13023-019-1121-6
pmc: PMC6598260
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
157Références
Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017 Mar 10;12(1):50
pubmed: 28283046
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(1):111-120
pubmed: 28434413
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014 Jan;30(1):105-12
pubmed: 24451150
Value Health. 2016 Jan;19(1):1-13
pubmed: 26797229
Lancet. 2017 Jun 17;389(10087):2368-2369
pubmed: 30199663
Med Decis Making. 2012 Mar-Apr;32(2):376-88
pubmed: 21987539
Value Health. 2016 Mar-Apr;19(2):125-37
pubmed: 27021745
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Apr;18(2):135-146
pubmed: 29210308
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006 Aug 21;4:14
pubmed: 16923181