Orphan drug considerations in Health Technology Assessment ineight European countries

Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is used to assess the value of new technologies and by producing coverage recommendations it indirectly controls the uptake of new technologies in many European countries. While HTA generally relies on a robust assessment of the clinical cost-effectiveness of a new technology, the clinical and economic evidence required for this purpose is often not available for Orphan Drugs (ODs), partly because of challenges related to the recruitment of patients to participate in clinical trials. A number of European HTA agencies have started to implement specific policies to address the challenges related to evidence requirements for the case of ODs. In this study, we map out the policies currently in place in eight European countries regarding HTA and its application to the case of ODs and explore the implications these policies have for coverage decisions

Socio-economic burden of rare diseases: a systematic review of cost of illness evidence

Cost-of-illness studies, the systematic quantification of the economic burden of diseases on the individual and on society, help illustrate direct budgetary consequences of diseases in the health system and indirect costs associated with patient or carer productivity losses. In the context of the BURQOL-RD project (“Social Economic Burden and Health-Related Quality of Life in patients with rare diseases in Europe”) we studied the evidence on direct and indirect costs for 10 rare diseases (Cystic Fibrosis [CF], Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy [DMD], Fragile X syndrome [FXS], Haemophilia, Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis [JIA], Mucopolysaccharidosis [MPS], Scleroderma, Prader-Willi Syndrome [PWS], Histiocytosis and Epidermolysis Bullosa [EB]). A systematic literature review of cost of illness studies was conducted using a keyword strategy in combination with the names of the 10 rare diseases. Available disease prevalence in Europe was found to range between 1-2 per 100,000 population (PWS, a sub-type of Histiocytosis, and EB) up to 42 per 100,000 population (Scleroderma). Overall, cost evidence on rare diseases appears to be very scarce (a total of 77 studies were identified across all diseases), with CF (n = 29) and Haemophilia (n = 22) being relatively well studied, compared to the other conditions, where very limited cost of illness information was available. In terms of data availability, total lifetime cost figures were found only across four diseases, and total annual costs (including indirect costs) across five diseases. Overall, data availability was found to correlate with the existence of a pharmaceutical treatment and indirect costs tended to account for a significant proportion of total costs. Although methodological variations prevent any detailed comparison between conditions, most of the rare diseases examined are associated with significant economic burden, both direct and indirect

Variant Plasmodium ovale isolated from a patient infected in Ghana

Recent data have found that Plasmodium ovale can be separated in two distinct species: classic and variant P. ovale based on multilocus typing of different genes. This study presents a P. ovale isolate from a patient infected in Ghana together with an analysis of the small subunit RNA, cytochrome b, cytochrome c oxidase I, cysteine protease and lactate dehydrogenase genes, which show that the sample is a variant P. ovale and identical or highly similar to variant P. ovale isolated from humans in South-East Asia and Africa, and from a chimpanzee in Cameroon. The split between the variant and classic P. ovale is estimated to have occurred 1.7 million years ago

Additional resource needs for viral hepatitis elimination through universal health coverage : projections in 67 low-income and middle-income countries, 2016–30

Background: The World Health Assembly calls for elimination of viral hepatitis as a public health threat by 2030 (ie, −90% incidence and −65% mortality). However, WHO's 2017 cost projections to achieve health-related Sustainable Development Goals did not include the resources needed for hepatitis testing and treatment. We aimed to estimate the incremental commodity cost of adding scaled up interventions for testing and treatment of hepatitis to WHO's investment scenarios. Methods: We added modelled costs for implementing WHO recommended hepatitis testing and treatment to the 2017 WHO cost projections. We quantified additional requirements for diagnostic tests, medicines, health workers' time, and programme support across 67 low-income and middle-income countries, from 2016–30. A progress scenario scaled up interventions and a more ambitious scenario was modelled to reach elimination by 2030. We used 2018 best available prices of diagnostics and generic medicines. We estimated total costs and the additional investment needed over the projection of the 2016 baseline cost. Findings: The 67 countries considered included 230 million people living with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and 52 million people living with hepatitis C virus (HCV; 90% and 73% of the world's total, respectively). Under the progress scenario, 3250 million people (2400 million for HBV and 850 million for HCV) would be tested and 58·2 million people (24·1 million for HBV and 34·1 million for HCV) would be treated (total additional cost US$27·1 billion). Under the ambitious scenario, 11 631 million people (5502 million for HBV and 6129 million for HCV) would be tested and 93·8 million people (32·2 million for HBV and 61·6 million for HCV) would be treated (total additional cost$58·7 billion), averting 4·5 million premature deaths and leading to a gain of 51·5 million healthy life-years by 2030. However, if affordable HCV medicines remained inaccessible in 13 countries where medicine patents are protected, the additional cost of the ambitious scenario would increase to $118 billion. Hepatitis elimination would account for a 1·5% increase to the WHO ambitious health-care strengthening scenario costs, avert an additional 4·6% premature deaths, and add an additional 9·6% healthy life-years from 2016–30. Interpretation: Access to affordable medicines in all countries will be key to reach hepatitis elimination. This study suggests that elimination is feasible in the context of universal health coverage. It points to commodities as key determinants for the overall price tag and to options for cost reduction strategies. Funding: WHO, United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Unitaid

A critical review of methodologies used in pharmaceutical pricing policy analyses

Robust evidence from health policy research has the potential to inform policy-making, but studies have suggested that methodological shortcomings are abundant. We aimed to identify common methodological weaknesses in pharmaceutical pricing policy analyses. A systematic review (SR) of studies examining pharmaceutical pricing policies served as basis for the present analysis. We selected all studies that were included in the SR (n = 56), and those that were excluded from the SR due to ineligible study designs only (n = 101). Risk of bias was assessed and specific study design issues were recorded to identify recurrent methodological issues. Sixty-one percent of studies with a study design eligible for the SR presented with a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Potential interference of co-interventions was a source of possible bias in 53% of interrupted time series studies. Failing to consider potential confounders was the primary cause for potential bias in difference-in-differences, regression, and panel data analyses. In 101 studies with a study design not eligible for the SR, 32% were uncontrolled before-after studies and 23% were studies without pre-intervention data. Some of the methodological issues encountered may be resolved during the design of a study. Awareness among researchers on methodological issues will help improve the rigor of health policy research in general

Evidence on the effectiveness of policies promoting price transparency -: A systematic review

Policies promoting price transparency may be an important approach to control medicine prices and achieve better access to medicines. As part of a wider review, we aimed to systematically determine whether policies promoting price transparency are effective in managing the prices of pharmaceutical products. We searched for studies published between January 1, 2004 and October 10, 2019, comparing policies promoting price transparency against other interventions or a counterfactual. Eligible study designs included randomized trials, and non-randomized or quasi-experimental studies such as interrupted time-series (ITS), repeated measures (RM), and controlled before-after studies. Studies were eligible if they included at least one of the following outcomes: price (or expenditure as a proxy for price and volume), volume, availability or affordability of pharmaceutical products. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology. A total of 32011 records were retrieved, two of which were eligible for inclusion. Although based on evidence from a single study, public disclosure of medicine prices may be effective in reducing prices of medicines short-term, with benefits possibly sustained long-term. Evidence on the impact of a cost-feedback approach to prescribers was inconclusive. No evidence was found for impact on the outcomes volume, availability or affordability. The overall lack of evidence on policies promoting price transparency is a clear call for further research

Priorities for health economic methodological research: Results of an expert consultation

Background: The importance of economic evaluation in decision making is growing with increasing budgetary pressures on health systems. Diverse economic evidence is available for a range of interventions across national contexts within Europe, but little attention has been given to identifying evidence gaps that, if filled, could contribute to more efficient allocation of resources. One objective of the Research Agenda for Health Economic Evaluation project is to determine the most important methodological evidence gaps for the ten highest burden conditions in the European Union (EU), and to suggest ways of filling these gaps. Methods: The highest burden conditions in the EU by Disability Adjusted Life Years were determined using the Global Burden of Disease study. Clinical interventions were identified for each condition based on published guidelines, and economic evaluations indexed in MEDLINE were mapped to each intervention. A panel of public health and health economics experts discussed the evidence during a workshop and identified evidence gaps. Results: The literature analysis contributed to identifying cross-cutting methodological and technical issues, which were considered by the expert panel to derive methodological research priorities. Conclusions: The panel suggests a research agenda for health economics which incorporates the use of real-world evidence in the assessment of new and existing interventions; increased understanding of cost-effectiveness according to patient characteristics beyond the “-omics” approach to inform both investment and disinvestment decisions; methods for assessment of complex interventions; improved cross-talk between economic evaluations from health and other sectors; early health technology assessment; and standardized, transferable approaches to economic modeling

RARE-Bestpractices: a platform for sharing best practices for the management of rare diseases

No abstract available

RARE-Bestpractices: a platform for sharing best practices for the management of rare diseases

No abstract available

Recommendations from the European Working Group for Value Assessment and Funding Processes in Rare Diseases (ORPH-VAL)

International audienceAbstractRare diseases are an important public health issue with high unmet need. The introduction of the EU Regulation on orphan medicinal products (OMP) has been successful in stimulating investment in the research and development of OMPs. Despite this advancement, patients do not have universal access to these new medicines. There are many factors that affect OMP uptake, but one of the most important is the difficulty of making pricing and reimbursement (P&R) decisions in rare diseases. Until now, there has been little consensus on the most appropriate assessment criteria, perspective or appraisal process. This paper proposes nine principles to help improve the consistency of OMP P&R assessment in Europe and ensure that value assessment, pricing and funding processes reflect the specificities of rare diseases and contribute to both the sustainability of healthcare systems and the sustainability of innovation in this field. These recommendations are the output of the European Working Group for Value Assessment and Funding Processes in Rare Diseases (ORPH-VAL), a collaboration between rare disease experts, patient representatives, academics, health technology assessment (HTA) practitioners, politicians and industry representatives. ORPH-VAL reached its recommendations through careful consideration of existing OMP P&R literature and through a wide consultation with expert stakeholders, including payers, regulators and patients. The principles cover four areas: OMP decision criteria, OMP decision process, OMP sustainable funding systems and European co-ordination. This paper also presents a guide to the core elements of value relevant to OMPs that should be consistently considered in all OMP appraisals. The principles outlined in this paper may be helpful in drawing together an emerging consensus on this topic and identifying areas where consistency in payer approach could be achievable and beneficial. All stakeholders have an obligation to work together to ensure that the promise of OMP’s is realised