Fischer R, Furlong P, Kennedy A, Maynard K, Penrod M, Miller D, Laverty CG, Lowes LP, Kuntz NL, Shieh PB, Kondejewski J, Neumann PJ, Shafrin J, and Willke RJ
Purpose: Traditional value assessment frameworks are challenged in comprehensively assessing the societal value new therapies bring to individuals with rare, progressive, genetic, fatal, neuromuscular diseases such as Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). The objective of this study was to identify how value assessment frameworks may need to be adapted to measure the value to society of DMD therapies., Patients and Methods: Three stakeholder groups (6 patient advocates, 4 clinicians, 3 health economists; N = 13) participated in semi-structured interviews around the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research's Value Flower, which includes elements to consider within value assessments of healthcare technologies., Results: All stakeholders agreed that traditional value assessment frameworks based on the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) are narrow and will undervalue new DMD therapies. All stakeholders expressed some level of concern that using the QALY as a key metric of value discriminates against patients with severe progressive diseases and disabilities. Some stakeholders saw value in using the QALY for cross-disease comparisons in resource-constrained environments if the methodology was appropriate. All stakeholders recommended considering additional elements of value in decision-making around new DMD therapies. These elements reflect: economic and humanistic costs incurred by patients, caregivers, and families with Duchenne, such as indirect out-of-pocket costs, lost productivity, and family spillovers; meaningful attributes for individuals with disabilities and high unmet need, such as severity of disease, value of hope, and real option value; and factors that contribute to improvements in population health, such as insurance value, equity, and scientific spillovers., Conclusion: These findings highlight the need to expand traditional value assessment frameworks and take a holistic approach that incorporates the perspectives of individuals with Duchenne, caregivers, clinicians, and health economists when assessing the societal value of new DMD therapies. Broadening value assessment will prevent restricted or delayed access to therapies for individuals with Duchenne., Competing Interests: RF, PF, AK, and DM have no conflicts of interest to report for this work. KM reports grants from Sarepta, outside the submitted work. MP reports grants from Sarepta Therapeutics, PTC Therapeutics, Pfizer, Edgewise Therapeutics, and NS Pharma, outside the submitted work. CGL serves on advisory boards/consults with Avidity, Biogen, Roche, Novartis, and Sarepta Therapeutics. LL provides training for Sarepta Therapeutics and reports personal fees from Sarepta Therapeutics and Atom International for training services. NLK serves on advisory boards/consults with Astellas, Argenx, Biogen, Novartis, Roche, and Sarepta Therapeutics. PBS has served as a consultant to Novartis Gene Therapies, Biogen, Genentech, Sarepta Therapeutics, Pfizer, Solid Biosciences, Astellas Gene Therapies, Argenx, Alexion, Catalyst Pharma, Grifols, Avidity, Dyne, AMO Pharma, Abcuro, UCB, and CSL Behring. JK is an employee of SNELL Medical Communication, Inc., which has received funding from Sarepta Therapeutics. PJN has consulted and participated on advisory boards for Sarepta Therapeutics and reports personal fees from Roche Holding AG. JS is an employee of FTI Consulting, a consulting firm to healthcare, life sciences, and other industries. RJW served as a consultant to Sarepta Therapeutics in the work leading to the creation of this manuscript and has served on advisory boards and as a consultant on projects sponsored by several other biopharmaceutical companies. RJW also reports personal fees from Sarepta Therapeutics. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Fischer et al.)