Search

Objective: Currently there are no disease-specific approved therapies for non-alcoholic fatty liver (NAFL) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH); however, several treatments are under development. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of hypothetical innovative therapies compared with lifestyle intervention alone and combined with pioglitazone, and assess the health economic consequences of their future availability for patients. Methods: A Markov cohort model was developed, considering fourteen disease health states and one absorbing state representing death. Transition probabilities, costs, utilities, and treatment efficacy were based on published data and assumptions. Four treatment strategies were considered, including two existing therapies (lifestyle intervention, small molecule treatment) and two hypothetical interventions (biological and curative therapy). The analysis was performed from the US third-party payer perspective. Results: The curative treatment with the assumed efficacy of 70% of patients cured and assumed price of $500,000 was the only cost-effective option. Although it incurred higher costs (a difference of $188,771 vs. lifestyle intervention and $197,702 vs. small molecule), it generated more QALYs (a difference of 1.58 and 1.38 QALYs, respectively), resulting in an ICER below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY. The sensitivity analyses showed that the results were robust to variations in model parameters. Conclusions: This study highlighted the potential benefits of therapies aimed at curing a disease rather than stopping its progression. Nonetheless, each of the analyzed therapies could be cost-effective compared with lifestyle intervention at a relatively high price.

Summary: Background: Antipsychotics are the gold standard treatment for schizophrenia, but many patients who receive treatment experience persistent symptoms. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of augmentation drugs for the treatment of schizophrenia. Methods: In accordance with the PRISMA statement, the PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, clinical trial and EUDRACT databases were searched from inception to May 15th, 2023. To ensure the robustness of the results, only double-blind randomised controlled trials with a low risk of bias (measured by the Risk Of Bias v2 (ROB2) tool) were included. The studies were categorised according to the background regimen: participants were treated with risperidone, mixed antipsychotics or clozapine. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. PROSPERO register: CRD42023420964. Findings: A total of 44 trials (comprising 45 augmentation drugs and 3358 participants) were included in the analysis. One-third of the drugs (16 drugs) demonstrated significant efficacy vs. placebo for at least one outcome. The most notable effect sizes (ESs) were observed for the use of tropisetron (standard mean difference: −0.83 [95% interval confidence −1.12 to −0.55]), memantine (−0.50 [−0.66 to −0.32]) and minocycline (−0.56 [−0.72 to −0.39]) to treat negative symptoms among patients treated with risperidone (moderate-to-high ESs). Studies involving mixed antipsychotics yielded lower ESs (small-to-moderate). Sodium benzoate (−0.41 [−0.60 to −0.21]) and memantine (−0.23 [−0.36 to −0.11]) were found have significant effects on positive symptoms, while memantine demonstrated efficacy for negative symptoms (−0.32 [−0.45 to −0.19]) and general psychopathology (−0.32 [−0.44 to −0.20]). Studies focusing exclusively on patients treated with clozapine revealed that duloxetine produced the best results (negative symptoms: −1.12 [−1.35 to −0.91]). Sodium benzoate was the only augmentation drug that demonstrated efficacy in relieving persistent positive symptoms (−0.32 [−0.59 to −0.08]) among patients treated with clozapine. Treatment with clozapine in combination with antipsychotics yielded small-to-moderate ESs. Interpretation: The GRADE framework indicated that the quality of the evidence among the included studies was moderate, primarily due to the limited number of randomised controlled trials with a low risk of bias. Important drugs did not appear in these results due to insufficient low-risk-of-bias data for these medications. These results highlight new pathways for treating schizophrenia that should be incorporated into future guidelines after further validation. Funding: No funding.

Aim. Baloxavir marboxil (baloxavir) is the first cap-dependent endonuclease inhibitor being studied for the treatment of influenza in single oral dosing regimen. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the efficacy and safety of baloxavir compared to other antivirals for influenza in otherwise healthy patients. Methods. A systematic literature review was performed on 14 November 2016 in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and ICHUSHI to identify randomized controlled trials assessing antivirals for influenza. A NMA including 22 trials was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of baloxavir with other antivirals. Results. The time to alleviation of all symptoms was significantly shorter for baloxavir compared to zanamivir (difference in median time 19.96 h; 95% CrI [3.23, 39.07]). The time to cessation of viral shedding was significantly shorter for baloxavir than zanamivir and oseltamivir (47.00 h; 95% CrI [28.18, 73.86] and 56.03 h [33.74, 87.86], respectively). The mean decline in virus titer from baseline to 24 h was significantly greater for baloxavir than for the other drugs. Other differences in efficacy outcomes were not significant. No significant differences were found between baloxavir and the other antivirals for safety, except total drug-related adverse events where baloxavir demonstrated a decrease compared to oseltamivir and laninamivir. Conclusion. The NMA suggests that baloxavir demonstrated better or similar efficacy results compared to other antivirals with a comparable safety profile. Baloxavir led to a significant decrease in viral titer versus zanamivir, oseltamivir and peramivir and decreased viral shedding versus zanamivir and oseltamivir.

Background and objective: Although the treatment of chronic hepatitis C (CHC) has significantly evolved with the introduction of direct-acting antivirals, the treatment uptake rates have been low especially among marginalized groups in the UK, such as people who inject drug (PWID) and men who have sex with men (MSM). Cutting health inequality is a major focus of healthcare agencies. This study aims to identify the optimal allocation of treatment budget for chronic hepatitis CHC among populations and treatments in the UK so that liver-related mortality in patients with CHC is minimized, given the constraint of treatment budget and equity issue. Methods: A constrained optimization modelling of resource allocation for the treatment of CHC was developed in Excel from the perspective of the UK National Health System over a lifetime horizon. The model was designated with the objective function of minimizing liver-related deaths by varying the decision variables, representing the number of patients receiving each treatment (elbasvir-grazoprevir, ombitasvir-paritaprevir-ritonavir-dasabuvir, sofosbuvir-ledipasvir, and pegylated interferon-ribavirin) in each population (the general population, PWID, and MSM). Two main constraints were formulated including treatment budget and the issue of equity. The model was populated with UK local data applying linear programming and underwent internal and external validation. Scenario analyses were performed to assess the robustness of model results. Results: Within the constraints of no additional funding over original spending in status quo and the consideration of the issue of equity among populations, the optimal allocation from the constrained optimization modelling (treating 13,122 PWID, 160 MSM, and 904 general patients with ombitasvir-paritaprevir-ritonavir-dasabuvir) was found to treat 2,430 more patients (relative change: 20.7%) and avert 78 liver-related deaths (relative change: 0.3%) compared with the current allocation. The number of patients receiving treatment increased 4,928 (relative change: 60.1%) among PWID and 42 (relative change: 35.8%) among MSM. Conclusion: The current allocation of treatment budget for CHC is not optimal in the UK. More patients would be treated, and more liver-related deaths would be avoided using a new allocation from a constrained optimization modelling without incurring additional spending and considering the issue of equity.

Background: Gene therapies can treat, prevent, or cure a disease by changing the expression of a person’s genes. They are an innovative strategy for treating genetic disorders; however, they are still emerging on the market access and in the healthcare system. Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies have not yet elaborated any standardised approach for assessing gene therapies; therefore, significant differences can be seen during HTAs carried out in various countries. In this review, we focused on submitted economic models of gene therapies approved for use by the US FDA and EMA with the aim to provide a comprehensive summary of how selected HTA bodies assessed the cost-effectiveness of gene therapies. An additional objective was to examine and discuss differences in the methods used in economic models across countries and drugs. Methods: We identified economic models of gene therapies from six countries (NICE, IQWiG, SMC, HAS, CADTH, ICER) and focused on nine agents (Glybera, Imlygic, Strimvelis, Yescarta, Kymriah, Luxturna, Zynteglo, Zolgensma, Tecartus). Details of cost-utility evaluations and budget impact models were reviewed and extracted. Results: Overall, 983 publications were identified, and 17 studies were included for the analysis. Reviewed evaluations of gene therapies differed in terms of the study perspective, discounting, extrapolation of outcomes based on limited and immature data, time horizon, and adequate estimation of benefits in terms of quality-adjusted life-years. Methods of economic evaluations were in line with the current recommendations; however, long-term follow-up studies are still missing. Conclusions: Discrepancies in an economic evaluation of gene therapies between different HTA bodies are rooted in a lack of general assessment frameworks specific to gene therapies. Although challenges were resolved by adjustments to the currently used value assessment framework, new methodological approaches would be useful. In addition, to improve the methods and quality of an evaluation, further research would be valuable.

The results of a clinical trial comparing hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin to the standard of care for the treatment of COVID-19 were recently published by Philippe Gautret et al. This study provides outstanding results for the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin over the standard of care, but the evidence was deemed insufficiently robust to warrant a public health decision to widen the use of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19. We provide a scientific critical review of the Gautret et al. publication, put the results in the context of the current knowledge, provide an evaluation of the validity of the results (from a methodologic perspective), and discuss public health implications. The study has a number of limitations, including small sample size, lack of comparability between patients in active treatment and control arms, lack of blinding, use of interim analyses without controlling for the risk of type 1 error, use of analysis in the per-protocol population instead of the intention-to-treat population, and inconsistencies between the study protocol and article. However, none of these observations is of a nature to reverse the conclusions. The study brings useful knowledge consistent with available evidence and clinical practice from China and South Korea, which could have prompted quicker policy decision-making.

Abstract Background The introduction of the orphan drug legislation led to the increase in the number of available orphan drugs, but the access to them is often limited due to the high price. Social preferences regarding funding orphan drugs as well as the criteria taken into consideration while setting the price remain unclear. The study aimed at identifying the determinant of orphan drug prices in France using a regression analysis. Methods All drugs with a valid orphan designation at the moment of launch for which the price was available in France were included in the analysis. The selection of covariates was based on a literature review and included drug characteristics (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) class, treatment line, age of target population), diseases characteristics (severity, prevalence, availability of alternative therapeutic options), health technology assessment (HTA) details (actual benefit (AB) and improvement in actual benefit (IAB) scores, delay between the HTA and commercialisation), and study characteristics (type of study, comparator, type of endpoint). The main data sources were European public assessment reports, HTA reports, summaries of opinion on orphan designation of the European Medicines Agency, and the French insurance database of drugs and tariffs. A generalized regression model was developed to test the association between the annual treatment cost and selected covariates. Results A total of 68 drugs were included. The mean annual treatment cost was €96,518. In the univariate analysis, the ATC class (p = 0.01), availability of alternative treatment options (p = 0.02) and the prevalence (p = 0.02) showed a significant correlation with the annual cost. The multivariate analysis demonstrated significant association between the annual cost and availability of alternative treatment options, ATC class, IAB score, type of comparator in the pivotal clinical trial, as well as commercialisation date and delay between the HTA and commercialisation. Conclusion The orphan drug pricing is a multivariate phenomenon. The complex association between drug prices and the studied attributes and shows that payers integrate multiple variables in decision making when setting orphan drug prices. The interpretation of the study results is limited by the small sample size and the complex data structure.

Ontario, Canada, immunizes against influenza using a trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3) under a Universal Influenza Immunization Program (UIIP). The UIIP offers IIV3 free-of-charge to all Ontarians over 6 months of age. A newly approved quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4) offers wider protection against influenza B disease. We explored the expected cost-utility and budget impact of replacing IIV3 with IIV4, within the context of Ontario's UIIP, using a probabilistic and static cost-utility model. Wherever possible, epidemiological and cost data were obtained from Ontario sources. Canadian or U.S. sources were used when Ontario data were not available. Vaccine efficacy for IIV3 was obtained from the literature. IIV4 efficacy was derived from meta-analysis of strain-specific vaccine efficacy. Conservatively, herd protection was not considered. In the base case, we used IIV3 and IIV4 prices of $5.5/dose and $7/dose, respectively. We conducted a sensitivity analysis on the price of IIV4, as well as standard univariate and multivariate statistical uncertainty analyses. Over a typical influenza season, relative to IIV3, IIV4 is expected to avert an additional 2,516 influenza cases, 1,683 influenza-associated medical visits, 27 influenza-associated hospitalizations, and 5 influenza-associated deaths. From a societal perspective, IIV4 would generate 76 more Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and a net societal budget impact of $4,784,112. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio for this comparison was $63,773/QALY. IIV4 remains cost-effective up to a 53% price premium over IIV3. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that IIV4 was cost-effective with a probability of 65% for a threshold of $100,000/QALY gained. IIV4 is expected to achieve reductions in influenza-related morbidity and mortality compared to IIV3. Despite not accounting for herd protection, IIV4 is still expected to be a cost-effective alternative to IIV3 up to a price premium of 53%. Our conclusions were robust in the face of sensitivity analyses.

Introduction: Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies express a clear preference for randomized controlled trials when assessing the comparative efficacy of two or more treatments. However, an indirect treatment comparison (ITC) is often necessary where a direct comparison is unavailable or, in some cases, not possible. Numerous ITC techniques are described in the literature. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify all the relevant literature on existing ITC techniques, provide a comprehensive description of each technique and evaluate their strengths and limitations from an HTA perspective in order to develop guidance on the most appropriate method to use in different scenarios. Methods: Electronic database searches of Embase and PubMed, as well as grey literature searches, were conducted on 15 November 2021. Eligible articles were peer-reviewed papers that specifically described the methods used for different ITC techniques and were written in English. The review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: A total of 73 articles were included in the SLR, reporting on seven different ITC techniques. All reported techniques were forms of adjusted ITC. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was the most frequently described technique (in 79.5% of the included articles), followed by matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) (30.1%), network meta-regression (24.7%), the Bucher method (23.3%), simulated treatment comparison (STC) (21.9%), propensity score matching (4.1%) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (4.1%). The appropriate choice of ITC technique is critical and should be based on the feasibility of a connected network, the evidence of heterogeneity between and within studies, the overall number of relevant studies and the availability of individual patient-level data (IPD). MAIC and STC were found to be common techniques in the case of single-arm studies, which are increasingly being conducted in oncology and rare diseases, whilst the Bucher method and NMA provide suitable options where no IPD is available. Conclusion: ITCs can provide alternative evidence where direct comparative evidence may be missing. ITCs are currently considered by HTA agencies on a case-by-case basis; however, their acceptability remains low. Clearer international consensus and guidance on the methods to use for different ITC techniques is needed to improve the quality of ITCs submitted to HTA agencies. ITC techniques continue to evolve quickly, and more efficient techniques may become available in the future.

Background: Pain, a common symptom of hemophilia, begins early in life primarily due to joint bleeding. Recurrent bleeding adversely affects patients’ pain-related physical functioning, which can negatively impact their quality of life (QoL). Objective: Post hoc analysis of data from the A-LONG study (NCT01181128), to assess change over time in pain-related QoL in patients with severe hemophilia A treated prophylactically with recombinant factor VIII Fc fusion protein (rFVIIIFc). Methods: Patients who completed Haem-A-QoL (17–65 years) and EQ-5D-3L (⩾12–65 years) questionnaires at baseline (BL) and end of study (EoS). Individual-level changes were assessed using three pain-related items of the Haem-A-QoL ‘Physical Health’ domain and the pain/discomfort item of EQ-5D-3L. Distributions of responses (EoS versus BL) were compared using McNemar’s test. Results: A significantly greater proportion of patients reported they did not experience painful swellings ( n = 87; 66% versus 46%, p < 0.01) or pain in their joints ( n = 89; 42% versus 27%; p < 0.05) at EoS versus BL. The proportion of patients who did not find it painful to move numerically increased at EoS versus BL ( n = 86; 47% versus 38%; p = NS). A significantly greater proportion of patients reported no pain/discomfort at EoS versus BL ( n = 116; 45% versus 34%; p < 0.05). Conclusion: This study reports the effect of FVIII prophylaxis on patient-reported measures of pain over time in patients with severe hemophilia A. The results of this post hoc analysis showed improvements in pain from BL to EoS in patients receiving rFVIIIFc individualized prophylaxis indicating effective pain management, a key component of patient care.

Abstract Background Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) may lead to visual loss and blindness. Several pharmacological treatments are available on the National Health Service (NHS) to United Kingdom patients affected by this condition, including intravitreal vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (anti-VEGFs) and two types of intravitreal steroid implants, releasing dexamethasone or fluocinolone acetonide (FAc). This study aimed to assess the value for money (cost-effectiveness) of the FAc 0.2 μg/day implant (ILUVIEN®) in patients with chronic DMO considered insufficiently responsive to other therapies. Methods We developed a Markov model with a 15-year time horizon to estimate the impact of changes in best-corrected visual acuity in DMO patients on costs and quality-adjusted life years. The model considered both eyes, designated as the “study eye”, defined at model entry as phakic with an ongoing cataract formation or pseudophakic, and the “fellow eye”. The model compared the FAc 0.2 μg/day implant with a 700 μg dexamethasone implant (pseudophakic patients only) or with usual care, defined as a mixture of laser photocoagulation and anti-VEGFs (phakic and pseudophakic patients). Costs were estimated from the perspective of the NHS and Personal Social Services; full NHS prices were used for drugs. Results In patients who were pseudophakic at baseline, at 36 months, the FAc implant provided an additional gain of 4.01 and 3.64 Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters compared with usual care and the dexamethasone implant, respectively. Over the 15-year time horizon, this translated into 0.185 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an extra cost of £3066 compared with usual care, and 0.126 additional QALYs at an extra cost of £1777 compared with dexamethasone. Thus, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were £16,609 and £14,070 per QALY gained vs. usual care and dexamethasone, respectively. In patients who were phakic at baseline, the FAc 0.2 μg/day implant provided an additional gain of 2.96 ETDRS letters at 36 months compared with usual care, which, over 15 years, corresponded to 0.11 additional QALYs at an extra cost of £3170, resulting in an ICER of £28,751 per QALY gained. Conclusion The FAc 0.2 μg/day implant provided good value for money compared with other established treatments, especially in pseudophakic patients.

Objective This study aims at investigating associations between COVID-19 mortality and SARS-COV-2 variants spread during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. Methods For 38 European countries, data on numbers of COVID-19 deaths, SARS-COV-2 variants spread through time using Nextstrain classification, demographic and health characteristics were collected. Cumulative number of COVID-19 deaths and height of COVID-19 daily deaths peak during the second wave of the pandemic were considered as outcomes. Pearson correlations and multivariate generalized linear models with selection algorithms were used. Results The average proportion of B.1.1.7 variant was found to be a significant predictor of cumulative COVID-19 deaths within two months before the peak and between 1 January–25 February 2021, as well as of the deaths peak height considering proportions during the second wave and the pre-peak period. The average proportion of EU2 variant (S:477 N) was a significant predictor of cumulative COVID-19 deaths in the pre-peak period. Conclusions Our findings suggest that spread of a new variant of concern B.1.1.7 had a significant impact on mortality during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Europe and that proportions of EU2 and B.1.1.7 variants were associated with increased mortality in the initial phase of that wave.

Objectives: Inclusion of patient preference (PP) data in decision making has been largely discussed in recent years. Healthcare decision makers—regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA)—are more and more conscious of the need for a patient-centered approach to decide on optimal allocation of scarce money, time, and technological resources. This literature review aims to examine the use of and recommendations for the integration of PP in decision making.Methods: A literature search was conducted through PubMed/Medline in May 2019 to identify publications on PP studies used to inform benefit–risk assessments (BRAs) and HTAs and patient-centered projects and guidelines related to the inclusion of PPs in health policy decision making. After title and abstract screening and full-text review, selected publications were analyzed to retrieve data related to the collection, use, and/or submission of PPs informing BRA or HTA as well as attempts and initiatives in recommendations for PPs integration in decision-making processes.Results: Forty-nine articles were included: 24 attempts and pilot project discussions and 25 PP elicitation studies. Quantitative approaches, particularly discrete choice experiments, were the most used (24 quantitative elicitation studies and 1 qualitative study). The objective of assessing PPs was to prioritize outcome-specific information, to value important treatment characteristics, to provide patient-focused benefit–risk trade-offs, and to appraise the patients' willingness to pay for new technologies. Moreover, attempts and pilot projects to integrate PPs in BRAs and HTAs were identified at the European level and across countries, but no clear recommendations have been issued yet. No less than seven public and/or private initiatives have been undertaken by governmental agencies and independent organizations to set guidance targeting improvement of patients' involvement in decision making.Conclusion: Despite the initiatives undertaken, the pace of progress remains slow. The use of PPs remains poorly implemented, and evidence of proper use of these data in decision making is lacking. Guidelines and recommendations formalizing the purpose of collecting PPs, what methodology should be adopted and how, and who should be responsible for generating these data throughout the decision-making processes are needed to improve and empower integration of PPs in BRA and HTA.

Objectives: Cervical cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality in women in China. This analysis is a quantitative evidence synthesis pooling information about each cervical cancer risk factor. Methods: A meta-model was developed to estimate the risk of cervical cancer for a woman aged 18–85 years in Mainland China based on her risk profile at the time of assessment. The meta-model was built using findings of a systematic literature review that identified 21 case–control studies reporting data on 105 groups of cervical cancer risk factors in Chinese women. Extracted risk factors were ranked, and 17 were selected by Chinese clinical experts for inclusion in the meta-model. Risk equations were developed for each selected study. Predicted risks for each study were dependent on the risk profile under consideration and study-specific risks were pooled to an overall risk estimate using a random-effects meta-analysis. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using 100 artificial patient profiles (in the absence of patient data). Results: Predicted risks for the 100 profiles suggested that the model had good face validity and could differentiate between high and non-high cervical cancer risk profiles. Conclusion: This innovative meta-model approach assesses cervical cancer risk in Chinese women from a holistic perspective and could be adapted for other diseases and settings.

Objectives: While several authors have suggested using a multi-criteria approach for orphan drug assessment and proposed lists of determinants of orphan drug value, studies on social preferences regarding these determinants remain limited. The current study aimed to identify preferences of the French general population regarding attributes characterizing the value of orphan drugs in a discrete choice experiment.Methods: The list of attributes was formed based on a literature search and was refined through expert interviews, a focus group, and a pilot study. The final list included nine attributes: disease-associated disability, disease-associated mortality, number of patients, availability of alternative treatments, treatment impact on disease disability, treatment impact on mortality, treatment safety, uncertainty around therapeutic effect, and annual treatment cost per patient. Members of the General Public were presented with 12 choice sets containing two drug profiles described according to the attributes and an option to fund neither of these treatments. The questionnaire was disseminated online. A conditional logit model with random effects was used to estimate the weight of each attribute.Results: A total of 958 persons participated in the study (48.7% male, mean age: 47.5 years). All attributes except for disease-associated disability had a statistically significant influence on the choices made by participants. The attribute with the highest weight was treatment impact on mortality (p < 0.0001), followed by uncertainty around therapeutic effect (p < 0.0001). The direction of results was generally consistent with intuition: patients preferred a drug with a larger impact on mortality, a larger impact on disability, with mild or no adverse events, with less uncertainty. Although patients appeared to prefer drugs with a lower budget impact, the relationship between patient preferences and costs was more complex.Conclusions: Preferences of the general public between orphan drugs are mostly driven by the impact on mortality and the degree of certainty regarding the available evidence.

Objective: To provide recommendations for addressing previously identified key challenges in health economic evaluations of Gene Replacement Therapies (GRTs), including: 1) the assessment of clinical effectiveness; 2) the valuation of health outcomes; 3) the time horizon and extrapolation of effects beyond trial duration; 4) the estimation of costs; 5) the selection of appropriate discount rates; 6) the incorporation of broader elements of value; and 7) affordability. Methods: A literature review on economic evaluations of GRT was performed. Interviews were conducted with 8 European and US health economic experts with experience in evaluations of GRT. Targeted literature reviews were conducted to investigate further potential solutions to specific challenges. Recommendations: Experts agreed on factors to be considered to ensure the acceptability of historical cohorts by HTA bodies. Existing prospective registries or, if not available, retrospective registries, may be used to analyse different disease trajectories and inform extrapolations. The importance of expert opinion due to limited data was acknowledged. Expert opinion should be obtained using structured elicitation techniques. Broader elements of value, beyond health gains directly related to treatment, can be considered through the application of a factor to inflate the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) or a higher cost-effectiveness threshold. Additionally, the use of cost-benefit analysis and saved young life equivalents (SAVE) were proposed as alternatives to QALYs for the valuations of outcomes of GRT as they can incorporate broader elements of value and avoid problems of eliciting utilities for paediatric diseases. Conclusions: While some of the limitations of economic evaluations of GRT are inherent to limited clinical data and lack of experience with these treatments, others may be addressed by methodological research to be conducted by health economists.

Abstract Background Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are often used in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies. Using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology, this study conducted in France was designed to assess patients’ preferences for different attributes of DPIs. Methods Attributes of DPIs were defined based on a literature review, patient focus group discussions and interviews with healthcare professionals (qualitative phase of the study). An online survey was then conducted among French patients with asthma or COPD to elicit patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for these attributes using the DCE methodology (quantitative phase). A fractional factorial design including three blocks of 12 choice sets was created. Each choice set comprised three alternatives: two fictitious inhalers and the patient’s current inhaler. Marginal utilities were estimated using a ranked ordered logit model. Interactions between attributes and disease (asthma or COPD) were tested. Results Six DPI attributes were defined based on the qualitative phase: ease of use/fool-proof priming; accurate and easy-to-read dose counter; dose confirmation; hygiene of the mouthpiece; flexibility of the device handling; ability to use the inhaler with breathing difficulties. Overall, 201 patients with asthma and 93 with COPD were included in the online survey. Patients with asthma placed most value on an inhaler that requires one step for dose preparation (WTP €4.83 [95% CI: €3.77–€5.90], relative to an inhaler requiring four steps) and one that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP €4.49 [95% CI: €2.95–€6.02]). Patients with COPD placed most value on an inhaler that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP €7.70 [95% CI: €5.65–€9.76]) and on the accuracy of the dose counter (WTP €5.87 [95% CI: €3.98–€ 7.77]). Conclusion This study suggests that asthma and COPD patients would be willing to change their inhaler if they were offered the option of a new inhaler with improved characteristics and they place a high value on an inhaler with ease of use during breathing difficulty episodes.

The importance of understanding the impact of disease and treatment on children’s Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) has given rise to an increasing use of child self-report and observer or proxy instruments. In this article, we review the status quo and challenges of HRQoL measurement specific to children under five. A number of HRQoL questionnaires exist for use with children and/or proxies, and both guidelines and reviews have been published on paediatric HRQoL. However, none address the challenges of measurement for children under five, for whom proxy measures should be used. In reality, there is significant heterogeneity in the cut-off age for self-report questionnaires. Recommendations are that proxies should be used for observable concepts, but not for concepts that require interpretation. Some research has been undertaken on dimensions/concepts in paediatric HRQoL questionnaires. However, no HRQoL models have been developed specifically for children, and heterogeneity in questionnaire dimensions underlines that there is no clear grasp of what HRQoL means in paediatric populations. There is a need to carry out research in order to develop theoretical models of HRQoL that are specific to children at different developmental stages, in order to evaluate and support new and existing measures for paediatric HRQoL and their use in clinical practice as well as clinical trials.

Background and Objectives: Utility elicitation studies for schizophrenia generate different utility values for the same health states. We reviewed utility values used in schizophrenia pharmacoeconomic evaluations and evaluated the impact of their selection on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Methods: A systematic search was performed in Medline and Embase. Health state definitions, associated utility values, elicitation studies, and value selection processes were extracted. Sets of utility values for all schizophrenia health states were used in a cost-effectiveness model to evaluate the ICER. Results: Thirty-five cost-utility analyses (CUAs) referring to 11 utility elicitation studies were included. The most frequent health states were ‘stable’ (28 CUAs, 7 utility elicitation studies, 10 values, value range 0.650–0.919), ‘relapse requiring hospitalisation’ (18, 5, 7, 0.270–0.604), ‘relapse not requiring hospitalisation’ (18, 5, 10, 0.460–0.762), and ‘relapse only’ (10, 5, 6, 0.498–0.700). Seventeen sets of utility values were identified with difference in utility values between relapse and stable ranging from −0.358 to −0.050, resulting in ICERs ranging from −56.2% to +222.6% from average. Conclusion: The use of utility values for schizophrenia health states differs among CUAs and impacts on the ICER. More rigorous and transparent use of utility values and sensitivity analysis with different sets of utility values are suggested for future CUAs.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of solifenacin 5 mg/day versus other oral antimuscarinic agents used for overactive bladder (OAB) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. Study design: In a Markov model, hypothetical patients received solifenacin 5 mg/day or a comparator antimuscarinic, after which they could switch to an alternative antimuscarinic. The model estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over a 5-year period. Results: Solifenacin 5 mg/day was the dominant treatment strategy (i.e., less costly and more effective) versus tolterodine extended-release (ER) 4 mg/day, fesoterodine 4 and 8 mg/day, oxybutynin ER 10 mg/day and solifenacin 10 mg/day, and was cost-effective (i.e., ICERs below the £30,000 per QALY threshold generally applied in the NHS) versus oxybutynin immediate release (IR) 10 mg/day, tolterodine IR 4 mg/day and trospium chloride 60 mg/day. The probability of solifenacin 5 mg/day being dominant/cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30,000 per QALY was 57–98%. Conclusions: Solifenacin 5 mg/day appears to be a cost-effective strategy for the treatment of OAB over a 5-year timeframe compared with other oral antimuscarinic agents in the UK. These findings are important for decision-makers considering the economic implications of selecting treatments for OAB.

Background: Despite the guidelines for Economic and Public Health Assessment Committee (CEESP) submission having been available for nearly six years, the dossiers submitted continue to deviate from them, potentially impacting product prices. Objective: to review the reports published by CEESP, analyse deviations from the guidelines, and discuss their implications for the pricing and reimbursement process. Study design: CEESP reports published until January 2017 were reviewed, and deviations from the guidelines were extracted. The frequency of deviations was described by type of methodological concern (minor, important or major). Results: In 19 reports, we identified 243 methodological concerns, most often concerning modelling, measurement and valuation of health states and results presentation and sensitivity analyses; nearly 63% were minor, 33% were important and 4.5% were major. All reports included minor methodological concerns, and 17 (89%) included at least one important and/or major methodological concern. Global major methodological concerns completely invalidated the analysis in seven dossiers (37%). Conclusion: The CEESP submission dossiers fail to adhere to the guidelines, potentially invalidating the health economics analysis and resulting in pricing negotiations. As these negotiations tend to be unfavourable for the manufacturer, the industry should strive to improve the quality of the analyses submitted to CEESP.

**Background:** Overactive bladder (OAB) is a symptom-defined disorder. A range of instruments are available for assessing OAB symptom bother, urinary urgency and the effects of symptoms on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), but few have been specifically designed and validated for this condition. HRQoL instruments should capture the concepts that are most relevant to patients. To our knowledge, there is no existing published conceptual framework for OAB. **Objectives:** We performed a qualitative study to explore the impact of symptoms of OAB on affected patients and to develop a conceptual framework for OAB. **Methods:** Patients diagnosed with OAB living in the United Kingdom were interviewed on the telephone by a trained psychologist using an interview discussion guide. Interview transcripts were analyzed thematically by two psychologists. Data collection and analysis was completed when data saturation, i.e. when little or no new information was obtained, was achieved. **Results:** A total of 30 patients were interviewed. Fifteen patients (50%) had urge incontinence (i.e. OAB-wet). Interview data showed that OAB affected role functioning, sleep quality, social functioning, and emotional/mental functioning. In addition, patients often adopted non-medical coping strategies to manage their symptoms (e.g. planning activities). Factors which affected more than 50% of patients were going for a short walk, waking up at night, travelling/holidays, socializing/going out, embarrassment/shame, need to plan activities, and restriction of places visited. More patients with OAB-wet reported impairment of social and emotional/mental functioning than patients with OAB-dry. A conceptual framework for adults with OAB depicting the relationships between OAB concepts (or outcomes) was developed. **Conclusions:** OAB has a profound effect on patient HRQoL and negatively affects a broad range of functions, including daily and work activities, leisure and social activities, psychological well-being, and sleep capacity. The conceptual framework emerging from this study supports the utilization of existing disease-specific HRQoL instruments, but identifies that work-related effects, which are relevant for OAB patients, are missing from currently available measures.