Search

The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of treating chronic hepatitis C (CHC) with direct-acting agents (DAA) on the use of healthcare resources. We included all patients treated with DAA for CHC from January 2015 to December 2017 in Catalonia whose medical records from 12 months before to 24 months after treatment were available. Data were obtained from the Catalan Health Surveillance System. A total of 12,199 patients in Catalonia were treated with DAA for CHC. Of these, 11.3% had no-minimal fibrosis (F0-F1), 24.0% had moderate fibrosis (F2), 50.3% had significant fibrosis or cirrhosis (F3-F4), and 14.4% had decompensated cirrhosis. Use of healthcare resources decreased from the pre-treatment period to the post-treatment period for the following: hospital admissions due to complications of cirrhosis, from 0.19 to 0.12 per month per 100 patients (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.47-0.68); length of hospital stay, from 12.9 to 12.2 days (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.91-0.94); outpatient visits, from 65.0 to 49.2 (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.74-0.75); and number of medication containers per patient per month, from 13.9 to 12.5 (RR 0.837; 95% CI 0.835-0.838). However, the number of invoices for antineoplastic treatment increased after DAA treatment, especially for patients with high morbidity or advanced fibrosis stage. In conclusion, a decrease in health resource use was seen in CHC patients treated with DAA, as measured by length of hospital stay, number of admissions due to cirrhosis complications, outpatient visits and overall drug invoicing. However, use of antineoplastic drugs increased significantly, especially in patients with cirrhosis and high morbidity.

Catalan healthcare; Decision-making; Multi-criteria decision analysis; Orphan drugs Sanitat catalana; Presa de decisions; Anàlisi de decisions multicriteri; Medicaments orfes Sanidad catalana; Toma de decisiones; Análisis de decisiones multicriteria; Medicamentos huérfanos 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.

Objectives:The aim of this study was to adapt and assess the value of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) framework (EVIDEM) for the evaluation of Orphan drugs in Catalonia (Catalan Health Service).Methods:The standard evaluation and decision-making procedures of CatSalut were compared with the EVIDEM methodology and contents. The EVIDEM framework was adapted to the Catalan context, focusing on the evaluation of Orphan drugs (PASFTAC program), during a Workshop with sixteen PASFTAC members. The criteria weighting was done using two different techniques (nonhierarchical and hierarchical). Reliability was assessed by re-test.Results:The EVIDEM framework and methodology was found useful and feasible for Orphan drugs evaluation and decision making in Catalonia. All the criteria considered for the development of the CatSalut Technical Reports and decision making were considered in the framework. Nevertheless, the framework could improve the reporting of some of these criteria (i.e., “unmet needs” or “nonmedical costs”). Some Contextual criteria were removed (i.e., “Mandate and scope of healthcare system”, “Environmental impact”) or adapted (“population priorities and access”) for CatSalut purposes. Independently of the weighting technique considered, the most important evaluation criteria identified for orphan drugs were: “disease severity”, “unmet needs” and “comparative effectiveness”, while the “size of the population” had the lowest relevance for decision making. Test–retest analysis showed weight consistency among techniques, supporting reliability overtime.Conclusions:MCDA (EVIDEM framework) could be a useful tool to complement the current evaluation methods of CatSalut, contributing to standardization and pragmatism, providing a method to tackle ethical dilemmas and facilitating discussions related to decision making.