Do France, Germany, and Italy agree on the added therapeutic value of medicines?
HTA organizations
Joint Clinical Assessment
added therapeutic value
health technology assessment
innovativeness
Journal
International journal of technology assessment in health care
ISSN: 1471-6348
Titre abrégé: Int J Technol Assess Health Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8508113
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Aug 2023
15 Aug 2023
Historique:
medline:
16
8
2023
pubmed:
15
8
2023
entrez:
15
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of medicines is performed separately at the country level with some differences, but Italy, France, and Germany have implemented price and reimbursement systems strongly focused on the Added Therapeutic Value (ATV). This study investigates the level of agreement on ATV assessments by Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA), Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS), and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA). A database was created collecting all information about drugs with innovativeness status requests in Italy from July 2017 to December 2022 and populated with the corresponding HAS and G-BA ATV assessments. The primary comparative analysis was conducted by grouping the ATV ratings into "higher added value" and "lower or no added value", while a secondary analysis considered the Italian innovativeness status as a criterion to include the quality of evidence assessment. The concordance between ATV assessments was investigated through percentage agreement and unweighted Cohen k-value. 189 medicines/indications were included. The greatest agreement was found when comparing G-BA versus HAS (82 percent; k = 0.61, substantial agreement). Lower levels of agreements were observed for AIFA versus HAS and AIFA versus G-BA (respectively 52 percent; k = 0.17 and 57 percent; k = 0.25). The secondary analysis led to a reconciliation to moderate agreement for AIFA versus HAS (72 percent; k = 0.45) and AIFA versus G-BA (74 percent; k = 0.47). A high degree of concordance between HTA organizations is reached when considering jointly ATV and quality of evidence, suggesting that the system is extensively mature to make a Joint Clinical Assessment, avoiding duplications and reducing access inequalities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37580971
doi: 10.1017/S026646232300048X
pii: S026646232300048X
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM