The impact of structural uncertainty on cost-effectiveness models for adjuvant endocrine breast cancer treatments: The need for disease-specific model standardization and improved guidance

__Abstract__ Introduction: Structural uncertainty relates to differences in model structure and parameterization. For many published health economic analyses in oncology, substantial differences in model structure exist, leading to differences in analysis outcomes and potentially impacting decision-making processes. The objectives of this analysis were (1) to identify differences in model structure and parameterization for cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) comparing tamoxifen and anastrazole for adjuvant breast cancer (ABC) treatment; and (2) to quantify the impact of these differences on analysis outcome metrics. Methods: The analysis consisted of four steps: (1) review of the literature for identification of eligible CEAs; (2) definition and implementation of a base model structure, which included the core structural components for all identified CEAs; (3) definition and implementation of changes or additions in the base model structure or parameterization; and (4) quantification of the impact of changes in model structure or parameterizations on the analysis outcome metrics life-years gained (LYG), incremental costs (IC) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Eleven CEA analyses comparing anastrazole and tamoxifen as ABC treatment were identified. The base model consisted of the following health states: (1) on treatment; (2) off treatment; (3) local recurrence; (4) metastatic disease; (5) death due to breast cancer; and (6) death due to other causes. The base model estimates of anastrazole versus tamoxifen for the LYG, IC and ICER were 0.263 years, €3,647 and €13,868/LYG, respectively. In the published models that were evaluated, differences in model structure included the addition of different recurrence health states, and associated transition rates were identified. Differences in parameterization were related to the incidences of recurrence, local recurrence to metastatic disease, and metastatic disease to death. The separate impact of these model components on the LYG ranged from 0.207 to 0.356 years, while incremental costs ranged from €3,490 to €3,714 and ICERs ranged from €9,804/LYG to €17,966/LYG. When we re-analyzed the published CEAs in our framework by including their respective model properties, the LYG ranged from 0.207 to 0.383 years, IC ranged from €3,556 to €3,731 and ICERs ranged from €9,683/LYG to €17,570/LYG. Conclusion:

A Blueprint for Multi-use Disease Modeling in Health Economics:Results from Two Expert-Panel Consultations

Background: The current use of health economic decision models in HTA is mostly confined to single use cases, which may be inefficient and result in little consistency over different treatment comparisons, and consequently inconsistent health policy decisions, for the same disorder. Multi-use disease models (MUDMs) (other terms: generic models, whole disease models, disease models) may offer a solution. However, much is uncertain about their definition and application. The current research aimed to develop a blueprint for the application of MUDMs. Methods: We elicited expert opinion using a two-round modified Delphi process. The panel consisted of experts and stakeholders in health economic modelling from various professional backgrounds. The first questionnaire concerned definition, terminology, potential applications, issues and recommendations for MUDMs and was based on an exploratory scoping review. In the second round, the panel members were asked to reconsider their input, based on feedback regarding first-round results, and to score issues and recommendations for priority. Finally, adding input from external advisors and policy makers in a structured way, an overview of issues and challenges was developed during two team consensus meetings. Results: In total, 54 respondents contributed to the panel results. The term ‘multi-use disease models’ was proposed and agreed upon, and a definition was provided. The panel prioritized 10 potential applications (with comparing alternative policies and supporting resource allocation decisions as the top 2), while 20 issues (with model transparency and stakeholders’ roles as the top 2) were identified as challenges. Opinions on potential features concerning operationalization of multi-use models were given, with 11 of these subsequently receiving high priority scores (regular updates and revalidation after updates were the top 2). Conclusions: MUDMs would improve on current decision support regarding cost-effectiveness information. Given feasibility challenges, this would be most relevant for diseases with multiple treatments, large burden of disease and requiring more complex models. The current overview offers policy makers a starting point to organize the development, use, and maintenance of MUDMs and to support choices concerning which diseases and policy decisions they will be helpful for.</p

Key considerations in the health technology assessment of advanced therapy medicinal products in Scotland, The Netherlands, and England

Objectives: Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are highly innovative therapies. Their costs and uncertain value claims have raised concerns among health technology assessment (HTA) bodies and payers. Little is known about how underlying considerations in HTA of ATMPs shape assessment and reimbursement recommendations. We aim to identify and assess key considerations that played a role in HTA of ATMPs underlying reimbursement recommendations. Methods: A review of HTA reports was conducted of all authorized ATMPs in Scotland, The Netherlands, and England. Considerations were extracted and categorized into EUnetHTA Core Model domains. Per jurisdiction, considerations were aggregated and key considerations identified (defined as occurring in &gt;1/assessment per jurisdiction). A narrative analysis was conducted comparing key considerations between jurisdictions and different reimbursement recommendations. Results: We identified 15 ATMPs and 18 HTA reports. In The Netherlands and England most key considerations were identified in clinical effectiveness (EFF) and cost- and economic effectiveness (ECO) domains. In Scotland, the social aspects domain yielded most key considerations, followed by ECO and EFF. More uncertainty in evidence and assessment outcomes was accepted when orphan or end-of-life criteria were applied. A higher percentage of considerations supporting recommendations were identified for products with positive recommendations compared with restricted and negative recommendations. Conclusions: This is the first empirical review of HTA’s using the EUnetHTA Core Model to identify and structure key considerations retrospectively. It provides insights in supporting and opposing considerations for reimbursement of individual products and differences between jurisdictions. Besides the EFF and ECO domain, the social, ethical, and legal domains seem to bear considerable weight in assessment of ATMPs

Healthcare costs related to respiratory syncytial virus in paediatric intensive care units in the Netherlands:a nationwide prospective observational study (the BRICK study)

Background: The implementation of the approved respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) preventive interventions in immunisation programmes is advancing rapidly. Insight into healthcare costs of RSV-related paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admissions is lacking, but of great importance to evaluate the impact of implementation. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the total annual RSV-related paediatric intensive care healthcare costs in the Netherlands. Methods: A nationwide prospective, observational, multicenter study was performed from September 2021 until June 2023. The total annual RSV-related healthcare costs on PICUs in the Netherlands were calculated using RSV-related costs (subgroup I) and consequential costs (subgroup II and III). Subgroup I comprised all PICU admitted infants ≤12 months of age with laboratory-confirmed RSV infection. Subgroup II and III consisted of postponed elective PICU admissions and refused acute PICU admissions due to RSV-related lack of PICU capacity.Findings: A total of 424 infants with RSV-related PICU admission were included. Median age at PICU admission was 46 days (IQR 25–89). The median length of PICU admission was 5 days (IQR 3–8). The total RSV-related PICU costs are € 3,826,386 in 2021–2022, and € 3,183,888 in 2022–2023. Potential costs averted by RSV preventive interventions is € 1.9 to € 2.6 million depending on season, and the duration of protection. Interpretation: RSV-related PICU admissions cost €3.1 to €3.8 million in the Netherlands during one season. The introduction of new RSV preventive interventions into the Dutch immunisation programme will generate significant cost-savings on PICUs and decreases the admission burden of PICUs. </p

Paving the path for implementation of clinical genomic sequencing globally:Are we ready?

Despite the emerging evidence in recent years, successful implementation of clinical genomic sequencing (CGS) remains limited and is challenged by a range of barriers. These include a lack of standardized practices, limited economic assessments for specific indications, limited meaningful patient engagement in health policy decision-making, and the associated costs and resource demand for implementation. Although CGS is gradually becoming more available and accessible worldwide, large variations and disparities remain, and reflections on the lessons learned for successful implementation are sparse. In this commentary, members of the Global Economics and Evaluation of Clinical Genomics Sequencing Working Group (GEECS) describe the global landscape of CGS in the context of health economics and policy and propose evidence-based solutions to address existing and future barriers to CGS implementation. The topics discussed are reflected as two overarching themes: (1) system readiness for CGS and (2) evidence, assessments, and approval processes. These themes highlight the need for health economics, public health, and infrastructure and operational considerations; a robust patient- and family-centered evidence base on CGS outcomes; and a comprehensive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach.</p

Paving the path for implementation of clinical genomic sequencing globally:Are we ready?

Despite the emerging evidence in recent years, successful implementation of clinical genomic sequencing (CGS) remains limited and is challenged by a range of barriers. These include a lack of standardized practices, limited economic assessments for specific indications, limited meaningful patient engagement in health policy decision-making, and the associated costs and resource demand for implementation. Although CGS is gradually becoming more available and accessible worldwide, large variations and disparities remain, and reflections on the lessons learned for successful implementation are sparse. In this commentary, members of the Global Economics and Evaluation of Clinical Genomics Sequencing Working Group (GEECS) describe the global landscape of CGS in the context of health economics and policy and propose evidence-based solutions to address existing and future barriers to CGS implementation. The topics discussed are reflected as two overarching themes: (1) system readiness for CGS and (2) evidence, assessments, and approval processes. These themes highlight the need for health economics, public health, and infrastructure and operational considerations; a robust patient- and family-centered evidence base on CGS outcomes; and a comprehensive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach.</p

Micro-costing diagnostics in oncology: From single-gene testing to whole genome sequencing

Purpose: Predictive diagnostics play an increasingly important role in personalized medicine for cancer treatment. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) based treatment selection is expected to rapidly increase worldwide. Detailed and comparative cost analyses of diagnostic techniques are an essential element in decision-making. This study aimed to calculate and compare the total cost of currently used diagnostic techniques and of WGS in treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), melanoma, colorectal cancer (CRC) and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in the Netherlands. Methods: The activity-based costing (ABC) method was conducted to calculate the total cost of included diagnostic techniques based on data provided by Dutch pathology laboratories and the Dutch centralized cancer WGS facility. Costs were allocated to four categories: capital costs, maintenance costs, software costs and operational costs. Outcome measures were total cost per cancer patient per included technique, and the total cost per cancer patient per most commonly applied technique (combination) for each cancer type. Results: The total cost per cancer patient per technique varied from € 58 (Sanger sequencing, 3 amplicons) to € 4738 (paired tumor-normal WGS). The operational costs accounted for the vast majority over 90 % of the total per cancer patient technique costs. The most important operational cost drivers were consumables followed by personnel (for sample preparation and primary data analysis). Conclusion: This study outlined in detail all costing aspects and cost prices of current and new diagnostic modalities used in treatment of NSCLC, melanoma, CRC and GIST in the Netherlands. Detailed cost differences and value comparisons between these diagnostic techniques enable future economic evaluations to support decision-making on implementation of WGS and other diagnostic modalities in routine clinical practice

Modelling benefits, costs and affordability of a novel gene therapy in hemophilia A

Abstract The objective was to assess undertake an early cost-effectiveness assessment of valoctocogene roxaparvovec (valrox;Roctavian®) compared to factor (F)VIII prophylaxis or emicizumab (Hemlibra®) in patients with severe Hemophilia A (HA) without FVIII-antibodies. Secondary, weWe also aimed to incorporate and quantify novel measures of value such as treatment durability, maximum value-based price (MVBP) and break-even time (i.e., time until benefits begin to offset upfront payment). We constructed a A Markov-model was constructed to model bleeds over time which were linked to costs and quality-of-life decrements. In the valrox arm, FVIII% over time were first estimated combining initial effect and treatment waning and then linked to bleeds. In FVIII- and emicizumab-arms, bleeds were based on trial evidence. Evidence and assumptions were validated using via expert elicitation. Model robustness was tested via sensitivity analyses. A Dutch societal perspective was applied with a 10-year time-horizon. Valrox in comparison to FVIII, and emicizumab showed small increases in quality-adjusted life years atand lower costs, and was therefore dominant. Valrox’ base case MVBP was estimated at €2.65 million/treatment compared to FVIII and €3.5 million/treatment versus to emicizumab. Mean break-even time was 8.03 years compared to FVIII and 5.68 years to emicizumab. Early modelling cost-effectiveness analysis Treatment of patients with HA in the Netherlands treated with valrox was estimated to resultresulted in estimated improved health and lower cost compared to prophylactic FVIII and emicizumab. We also demonstrated feasibility to of incorporation ofmodelincorporate treatment durability was demonstrated and , as well as quantification of novel outcomes such as value-based pricing scenarios and break-even ti¬me. However, more work is needed to beter characterize uncertainties, define affordability and increase informativeness for decision making. Future work should aim to better characterize uncertainties and increase translation of early economic evaluationsmodelling to direct research efforts

Micro-costing diagnostics in oncology:from single-gene testing to whole- genome sequencing

Purpose: Predictive diagnostics play an increasingly important role in personalized medicine for cancer treatment. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS)-based treatment selection is expected to rapidly increase worldwide. This study aimed to calculate and compare the total cost of currently used diagnostic techniques and of WGS in treatment of non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC), melanoma, colorectal cancer (CRC), and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) in the Netherlands. Methods: The activity-based costing (ABC) method was conducted to calculate total cost of included diagnostic techniques based on data provided by Dutch pathology laboratories and the Dutch-centralized cancer WGS facility. Costs were allocated to four categories: capital costs, maintenance costs, software costs, and operational costs. Results: The total cost per cancer patient per technique varied from € 58 (Sanger sequencing, three amplicons) to € 2925 (paired tumor-normal WGS). The operational costs accounted for the vast majority (over 90%) of the total per cancer patient technique costs. Conclusion: This study outlined in detail all costing aspects and cost prices of current and new diagnostic modalities used in treatment of NSCLC, melanoma, CRC, and GIST in the Netherlands. Detailed cost differences and value comparisons between these diagnostic techniques enable future economic evaluations to support decision-making