European Health Technology Assessment (EU HTA)

Editors


E-Mail Website
Collection Editor
1. Medical School of Hanover, 30625 Hanover, Germany
2. European Access Academy, 4059 Basel, Switzerland
Interests: health economic; health technology assessment; health services; health outcomes and management

E-Mail Website
Collection Editor
Public Health Department, Aix-Marseille University, 13002 Marseille, France
Interests: health economics; outcome research; pricing; market access; epidemiology; risk management; governmental affairs; competitive intelligence

Topical Collection Information

Dear Colleagues,

The Health Technology Assessment (HTA) process in Europe has been emerging over the past two decades, with various pilot projects and joint actions paving the way for a unified approach.

The EU-HTA initiative aims to establish a harmonized framework for assessing the clinical and economic value of health technologies, make innovative health technologies more widely available to patients, reduce the duplication of efforts by national HTA bodies, and ensure resource efficiency across member states. This process is expected to significantly shape market access strategies in Europe over the next decade.

While the EU-HTA process differs from the drug regulatory process overseen by the EMA, the latter’s experience can serve as a valuable benchmark for the future evolution of EU-HTA. Like the EMA, the EU-HTA initiative is likely to go through various phases, including conception, initiation, positioning, and maturation, before establishing itself as a well-respected international organization advising Member States and informing the European Commission.

We are now setting the foundation of the EU-HTA that will shape the future. It has become a pivotal topic in the field of HTA, as it has the potential to streamline the evaluation process, promote transparency, and facilitate harmonized access to innovative healthcare solutions for patients across Europe.

While a wealth of information is available through various sources, such as the EU’s official website, scientific publications, blogs, conferences, and webinars, there is a need for a comprehensive resource that consolidates relevant information and diverse perspectives on the EU-HTA. By gathering insights from multiple stakeholders, we can gain a deeper understanding of the current status, challenges, opportunities, and future prospects of this initiative.

With the EU HTA Assessments starting from January 2025, we believe that it is the right time to make a pause and consider a multi-stakeholder perspective on this status, an analysis of challenges and opportunities, and some prospective views about EU-HTA. We are pleased to announce that the European Access Academy (EAA) and the Market Access Society (MAS) have joined forces to edit a Collection of the Journal of Market Access and Health Policy focused on the EU-HTA.

We encourage you to consider contributing to this Collection and sharing your expertise and/or perspective with the broader market access and HTA communities. Your role and insights are invaluable in shaping the discourse around this transformative regulation. Please feel free to reach out to us with any questions or to discuss potential contribution ideas. We look forward to receiving your valuable contributions.

Prof. Dr. Jörg Ruof
Prof. Dr. Mondher Toumi
Collection Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the collection website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Market Access & Health Policy is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1500 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • EU HTA regulation
  • EU HTA process
  • innovative health technologies
  • patient access
  • European Access Environment
  • HTA procedures
  • EU HTA initiative
  • HTA bodies
  • European Access Academy
  • Market Access Society
  • HTA community

Published Papers (15 papers)

2025

Jump to: 2024

21 pages, 615 KiB  
Article
The PICO Puzzle: Can Public Data Predict EU HTA Expectations for All EU Countries?
by Karolin Eberle, Lisa-Maria Hagemann, Maria Katharina Schweitzer, Martin Justl, Jana Maurer, Alexandra Carls and Eva-Maria Reuter
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(3), 32; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13030032 - 26 Jun 2025
Viewed by 339
Abstract
With the European Union (EU) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) regulation, Joint Clinical Assessments (JCA) are now required for oncological and advanced therapy medicinal products. The JCA assessment scope is determined through the PICO framework (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). Given the tight JCA timelines, [...] Read more.
With the European Union (EU) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) regulation, Joint Clinical Assessments (JCA) are now required for oncological and advanced therapy medicinal products. The JCA assessment scope is determined through the PICO framework (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome). Given the tight JCA timelines, Health Technology Developers (HTD) must anticipate PICO elements early to prepare dossiers effectively. This study investigates whether PICO can be predicted across EU member states using publicly available information. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify relevant peer-reviewed articles. Additionally, an extensive search of publicly available HTA documents, including reports, methodological guidelines, submission templates, and market access information was performed across 29 European countries. Relevant information for PICO anticipation was extracted. For many member states, a wealth of relevant information is publicly accessible: 66% have HTA reports publicly available, 79% have HTA methodological guidelines, 69% have dossier templates, and 100% have market access status lists. Between countries, the requirements for population and outcomes are largely aligned, making comparator the central element in PICO anticipation. PICO can be anticipated reliably based on public information. HTDs must be prepared to adjust their strategies as national procedures adapt, ensuring alignment with both current and emerging EU and national requirements. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 1004 KiB  
Perspective
Opportunities for and Challenges of Conducting Indirect Treatment Comparisons and Meta-Analyses for Vaccines in Post-EU HTA Regulation Era
by Charlotte Graham, Erin Barker, Joe Moss, Emily Gregg, Rachael McCool, Nathalie Largeron, Mélanie Trichard, José Bartelt-Hofer and Maribel Tribaldos
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 31; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020031 - 11 Jun 2025
Viewed by 613
Abstract
The dynamic nature of infectious diseases introduces inherent challenges to the design of vaccine clinical trials, which consequently makes vaccine indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) and meta-analyses (MAs) more challenging compared with regular pharmaceuticals. However, comparisons of efficacy and safety between vaccines are being [...] Read more.
The dynamic nature of infectious diseases introduces inherent challenges to the design of vaccine clinical trials, which consequently makes vaccine indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) and meta-analyses (MAs) more challenging compared with regular pharmaceuticals. However, comparisons of efficacy and safety between vaccines are being frequently required in vaccine decision making due to a low number of head-to-head clinical trials in the vaccine landscape. The introduction of the European Union Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Regulation (EU HTAR) aims to harmonize HTA efforts across Europe. However, the EU HTAR could also escalate existing challenges for conducting vaccine MAs and ITCs. Such challenges include generating efficacy evidence in time for Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA), incorporating high levels of heterogeneity due to infectious disease-specific characteristics, and tackling a high number of PICOs per submission—likely driven by heterogeneity in the available data and differences in national vaccine calendars. Opportunities to tackle these challenges include introducing a stepwise approach to vaccine assessment in JCA, best-practice recommendations for conducting/interpreting vaccine MAs and ITCs, and condensing the number of PICOs to create larger ‘catch-all’ ITC networks. This perspective article explores these challenges and opportunities further. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 768 KiB  
Review
Health Technology Assessment and Cardiology: A Review of the Present and Future of Innovation
by Ruben Casado-Arroyo and Lucia Osoro
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 30; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020030 - 9 Jun 2025
Viewed by 368
Abstract
Background and Objective: Innovation is a key enabler of patient-centered care in cardiology, with new medical devices and digital health technologies offering the potential to improve outcomes and efficiency. However, the evaluation of these innovations poses challenges for clinicians, regulators, and procurement stakeholders, [...] Read more.
Background and Objective: Innovation is a key enabler of patient-centered care in cardiology, with new medical devices and digital health technologies offering the potential to improve outcomes and efficiency. However, the evaluation of these innovations poses challenges for clinicians, regulators, and procurement stakeholders, particularly within the complex European healthcare landscape. This review aims to explore the current state of health technology assessment (HTA) for cardiology-related medical devices in Europe, offering a clinical perspective. Material and Methods: Three independent scoping reviews were conducted following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Keywords included “innovation”, “health technology assessment”, and “cardiology”. The search was supplemented by the relevant literature on European HTA policies, regulatory directives, and emerging technologies. Results: The review identified three central themes: (1) the evolving role of clinicians in HTA processes, (2) the integration of innovative technologies such as digital tools and artificial intelligence within HTA frameworks, and (3) the considerable variation in HTA practices and policies across EU member states. Conclusions: HTA in Europe is undergoing a transformation, with increasing emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and frameworks that support innovation. While the goal of harmonization across the EU remains a work in progress, new regulatory efforts, such as the HTA Regulation (HTAR), offer promising avenues for aligning clinical practice with evidence-based assessment and reimbursement decisions. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1306 KiB  
Opinion
Enhancing Patient Engagement in HTA: Using Consensus Research to Overcome PICO Scoping Challenges Under the EU HTAR
by Emanuele Arcà, Adele Barlassina, Adaeze Eze and Valentina Strammiello
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 27; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020027 - 2 Jun 2025
Viewed by 575
Abstract
The evolving landscape of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in Europe, shaped by the implementation of the new EU HTA Regulation (HTAR), places an emphasis on engaging all stakeholders, including patients, in collaborative evidence generation. Yet integrating patients’ perspectives into critical processes like PICO [...] Read more.
The evolving landscape of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in Europe, shaped by the implementation of the new EU HTA Regulation (HTAR), places an emphasis on engaging all stakeholders, including patients, in collaborative evidence generation. Yet integrating patients’ perspectives into critical processes like PICO scoping remains a challenge, with concerns around subjectivity, representativeness, and methodological robustness. This opinion paper examines the complexities of patient engagement in HTA, highlighting both the opportunities for patients to make meaningful contributions and the barriers that stand in the way. We propose a framework that employes the Delphi panel methodology to (1) foster scientific validity and increase transparency in patient contributions, (2) establish a structured and consistent patient engagement framework, and (3) and understand European patients’ perspectives while promoting collaboration among EU countries. By facilitating iterative feedback and fostering agreement among diverse groups of patients and caregivers contributing with their expertise, consensus methods like Delphi panels can help refine PICO criteria, align diverse stakeholders’ expectations, and increase the relevance of HTA outcomes. A study is now underway to evaluate the feasibility and value of using the modified Delphi panel methodology for patient engagement in PICO scoping. The authors propose that embracing patient engagement through carefully designed consensus frameworks could enhance the legitimacy and completeness of HTA processes, driving more patient-centered decision making across Europe. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

5 pages, 165 KiB  
Editorial
The Art of Bridge Building: A Look at the European-Level Cooperation in HTA (EU-HTA)
by Rui Santos Ivo, Tiago Rodrigues, Sara Couto and Mariane Cossito
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 26; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020026 - 28 May 2025
Viewed by 394
Abstract
Health technology assessment (HTA) is a methodological and a scientific evidence-based process that allows competent authorities to determine the relative effectiveness of new or existing health technologies and to inform real-world decisions [...] Full article
9 pages, 186 KiB  
Perspective
Towards a Unified European View of Clinical Evidence: What ‘Health Technology Assessment Organizations’ Can Learn from Regulatory Experience
by Karl Broich and Wiebke Löbker
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 19; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020019 - 28 Apr 2025
Viewed by 422
Abstract
The harmonization of pharmaceutical regulations within the European Union has been a crucial step towards ensuring high safety standards and efficient access to innovative medicines. The evolution from fragmented national regulations to a unified legal framework has streamlined the marketing authorization process, fostered [...] Read more.
The harmonization of pharmaceutical regulations within the European Union has been a crucial step towards ensuring high safety standards and efficient access to innovative medicines. The evolution from fragmented national regulations to a unified legal framework has streamlined the marketing authorization process, fostered scientific collaboration, and reduced administrative burdens. The establishment of the centralized marketing authorization procedure and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has played a pivotal role in coordinating regulatory efforts across member states. This article examines the historical developments, regulatory milestones, and the impact of harmonization on pharmaceutical assessments. Furthermore, it explores key lessons learned—including the value of centralized coordination, standardization, capacity and knowledge-sharing, transparency and trust—from the regulatory landscape that could inform the evolving Health Technology Assessment (HTA) framework in the EU. Full article
5 pages, 182 KiB  
Editorial
A New Health Networking Infrastructure on Cancer Is Taking Shape in Europe: A Not-to-Miss Opportunity for the EU Regulatory System
by Paolo Giovanni Casali and Stefano Capri
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 18; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020018 - 28 Apr 2025
Viewed by 313
Abstract
At the inaugural EAA convention in Copenhagen (Europe’s Evolving HTA Regulation and Its Relevance for ‘Beating Cancer’, in May 2022), it was suggested that, in the future, the pillars necessary to fully address the problem of cancer should be communicated (i [...] Full article
14 pages, 1840 KiB  
Opinion
Strengthening the EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation: Integrating National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups for Comprehensive Vaccine Assessments
by Jasmijn Beekman, Adrianne de Roo, Sharon Wolters, Ramesh Marapin, Gabriel Gurgel do Amaral, Evgeni Dvortsin, Sibilia Quilici, Chiara de Waure, Elena Petelos, Maarten Postma and Anna Viceré
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 16; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020016 - 18 Apr 2025
Viewed by 761
Abstract
Background: Given their crucial role in vaccine assessment, National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) should be considered in the Regulation on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR) to maximize the benefits of the EU HTAR for vaccines. This review and perspective piece identifies the [...] Read more.
Background: Given their crucial role in vaccine assessment, National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs) should be considered in the Regulation on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR) to maximize the benefits of the EU HTAR for vaccines. This review and perspective piece identifies the gaps arising from NITAGs potential lack of involvement and proposes strategies for involving them. Methods: A targeted literature and guideline review was conducted to evaluate NITAGs’ current and future role in relation to the EU HTAR. The impact of the EU HTAR on diverse national HTA frameworks was explored in a three-country case study. Recommendations were developed to leverage strengths and address weaknesses to ensure consistent and cohesive vaccine assessments. Results: The case study revealed potential overlaps between NITAGs and the EU HTAR, particularly regarding horizon scanning and joint scientific consultations. The involvement of NITAGs in national assessments varies, influencing how well joint clinical assessment reports will ultimately align with and be applicable to individual Member States. Conclusions: Stronger consideration of vaccines within the EU HTAR and NITAG involvement can streamline assessments, reduce duplication, and improve alignment between European and national processes. Strategic actions, including capacity building and collaborations between NITAGs, are key in facilitating this process. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 195 KiB  
Article
ARM’s Perspective on the First Joint Clinical Assessments for ATMPs: Challenges and Opportunities on the Path Ahead
by Paolo Morgese, Stephen Majors and Dilip Patel
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(2), 14; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13020014 - 3 Apr 2025
Viewed by 564
Abstract
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) are revolutionising modern medicine. By addressing the root cause rather than the symptoms of disease, ATMPs hold the promise of long-lasting benefits or even cures for severe, genetic, and rare diseases—including rare cancers—for patients with few or no [...] Read more.
Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) are revolutionising modern medicine. By addressing the root cause rather than the symptoms of disease, ATMPs hold the promise of long-lasting benefits or even cures for severe, genetic, and rare diseases—including rare cancers—for patients with few or no viable treatment options. At the same time, the inherent complexities of ATMPs pose challenges to traditional HTA frameworks. Unlike conventional treatments, ATMPs are often one-time therapies with a high magnitude of effect. However, their long-term durability remains uncertain at launch. The Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA), under the EU’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Regulation, represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to consolidate the strengths of national HTA processes into a unified framework that accounts for the specificities of ATMPs and streamlines decision-making, cementing Europe’s position as a pioneer in innovative HTA approaches. While concerns remain regarding the suitability of current JCA methodologies for ATMPs, the HTA Regulation continues to bring the HTA ecosystem closer together, with numerous benefits already emerging from EU-wide collaboration on JCAs. This article outlines the HTA challenges posed for and by ATMPs, and ARM’s perspective on the JCA’s implementation. A ‘fit for purpose’ JCA holds the promise to unlocking these therapies’ benefits for individuals across Europe. Full article
5 pages, 159 KiB  
Opinion
Public Health Decision-Maker Perspective on Joint Clinical Assessments in Central European EU Member States
by Gergő Merész, Dávid Dankó and Márk Péter Molnár
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(1), 10; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010010 - 4 Mar 2025
Viewed by 533
Abstract
The HTA R introduces provisions that may benefit member states, in particular the opportunity to share national or regional assessment reports, cooperate outside of clinical domains, or use the methodological guidelines on a local level for technologies that are not subject to joint [...] Read more.
The HTA R introduces provisions that may benefit member states, in particular the opportunity to share national or regional assessment reports, cooperate outside of clinical domains, or use the methodological guidelines on a local level for technologies that are not subject to joint assessment. Challenges related to the timelines, differences between assessment scopes, and diverging guidance may jeopardize the full potential of the HTA R in Central European EU member states. However, these are more likely to be related to the commitment and vigilance of local competent authorities. We attempt to address these opportunities and mark some challenges imposed by the application of the HTA R by taking the perspective of public health decision-makers in Central European EU member states. We conclude that the foundations for capitalizing on the opportunities offered by the HTA R are already laid in the region, and we foresee policymakers and payers sharing the responsibility of acting as drivers of change in health policy to reduce the duplication (or multiplication) of efforts by HTDs, as well as to increase the efficient use of HTA bodies’ resources. Full article
12 pages, 763 KiB  
Article
Ensuring the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Joint Clinical Assessment in National HTA Decision-Making: Insights from the 2024 CIRS Multi-Stakeholder Workshop
by Ting Wang and Neil McAuslane
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(1), 9; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010009 - 3 Mar 2025
Viewed by 734
Abstract
Background: This study explored the readiness and strategic considerations of companies and key stakeholders for the implementation of the Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under the European Health Technology Assessment Regulation (HTAR). It examined the implications of the JCA process for jurisdictional submission strategies, [...] Read more.
Background: This study explored the readiness and strategic considerations of companies and key stakeholders for the implementation of the Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) under the European Health Technology Assessment Regulation (HTAR). It examined the implications of the JCA process for jurisdictional submission strategies, and decision-making across Europe. The study aimed at identifying key measures for an efficient and effective JCA process to enable national rollout. Methods: A survey was conducted with international pharmaceutical companies, followed by a multi-stakeholder workshop that expanded on the findings. The survey and workshop focused on key areas such as time to market, submission strategies, and the role of JCA in national decision-making processes. Descriptive and qualitative analyses were performed to identify recommendations for measuring and improving the JCA process. Results: 13 companies responded to the survey, respondents were generally prepared for the JCA process (readiness rated 6–7/10), but concerns persist about timeline uncertainties and timely JCA report delivery. In the short term, success for the HTAR from the company perspective is measured by positive recommendations across EU jurisdictions. Long term, the focus shifts to aligning HTA methodologies and evidence requirements across the EU. Establishing metrics to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the JCA is a key step in the HTAR’s ongoing learning journey. To enhance the efficiency of the JCA process, a list of metrics is recommended for continuous improvement, as well as establishing training programs to strengthen member states’ capabilities, fostering open dialog for sharing technology-specific insights, and creating open-source tools to support companies. Additionally, research should be conducted to understand agencies’ expectations of the JCA and how they will use its reports, grouping agencies by archetype to identify trends. A key recommendation is the development of a product-based scorecard to evaluate JCA submissions and reviews from various perspectives, ensuring the process meets stakeholders’ needs and can be effectively utilized in national decision-making. Conclusions: The JCA process offers a significant opportunity to streamline HTA decision-making across Europe. This study highlights several key measures and consideration for its successful rollout, including the need for clearer communication about the role of JCA in national decisions, measurement of rollout time components, and the development of quality evaluation frameworks. A collaborative, iterative approach, where stakeholders continually refine the system, will be essential for its effectiveness. Addressing these challenges will enable the JCA to enhance efficiency, consistency, and ultimately improve access to treatments for patients. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 1547 KiB  
Article
Avoiding Error and Finding the Right Balance in European Health Technology Assessments: Insights Generated by the European Access Academy
by Elaine Julian, Tom Belleman, Maria João Garcia, Maureen Rutten-van Mölken, Robin Doeswijk, Rosa Giuliani, Bernhard J. Wörmann, Daniel Widmer, Patrick Tilleul, Ruben Casado Arroyo, Valentina Strammiello, Kate Morgan, Marcus Guardian, Michael Ermisch, Renato Bernardini, Fabrizio Gianfrate, Stefano Capri, Carin A. Uyl-de Groot, Mira Pavlovic and Jörg Ruof
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010006 - 10 Feb 2025
Viewed by 933
Abstract
Background: We examined four potential challenges for the implementation of the European Union (EU) Regulation 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR): interaction with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), expert input, the interface of European health technology assessment (EU HTA) joint procedures with [...] Read more.
Background: We examined four potential challenges for the implementation of the European Union (EU) Regulation 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR): interaction with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), expert input, the interface of European health technology assessment (EU HTA) joint procedures with those within Member States, and the management of conflict of interest. This research aims to explore how to address these challenges in a balanced manner and prioritise key actions for effective collaboration in the context of the EU HTA. Methods: The methodology included a pre-convention survey among relevant stakeholders as well as working groups and the plenary ranking of discussion outcomes at the European Access Academy (EAA) Spring Convention 2024. Results: In the survey, 65.5% of respondents indicated that experts are currently not sufficiently included in the upcoming joint scientific consultations and clinical assessments; only 37.9% suggested that the EU HTA joint procedures would accelerate national appraisal decision-making, and 58.6% believed that the principles of ‘transparency’ and ‘competency’ are balanced in the EU HTA position on conflict of interest. The top priority action points identified in the working groups were the involvement of the best available expertise, the early and inclusive involvement of experts, strengthened early scientific dialogue, and the fostering of the political willingness/financial support of EU Member States to increase capacities. Conclusions: The key topics identified were an approach to conflict of interest that balances transparency obligations and the need for expertise, strengthens the involvement of clinical and patient experts, intensifies early interaction between the EMA and EU HTA, and increases the involvement of the EU Member States. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

3 pages, 656 KiB  
Editorial
Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA): Developments and Strategy in a Transitioning European HTA Landscape
by Robert Nisticò
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(1), 5; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010005 - 5 Feb 2025
Viewed by 1013
Abstract
The Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA) is the national public body that regulates medicines for human use in Italy [...] Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

6 pages, 537 KiB  
Opinion
The EU Health Technology Assessment Regulation Halo Effect: Are Cross-Functional Teams Ready?
by Sian Tanner, Rebecca Coady, Ana Lisica, Edel Falla and Anke van Engen
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2025, 13(1), 3; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010003 - 30 Jan 2025
Viewed by 1266
Abstract
The focus of manufacturers preparing for implementation of the EU HTA Regulation (HTAR) in 2025 has understandably been on their market access teams, and how they can be best equipped to adapt to this significant change. Considering the critical nature of market access [...] Read more.
The focus of manufacturers preparing for implementation of the EU HTA Regulation (HTAR) in 2025 has understandably been on their market access teams, and how they can be best equipped to adapt to this significant change. Considering the critical nature of market access in ensuring innovation reaches patients, it should be no surprise that the EU HTAR will have impacts far beyond this function. Here, we utilize published EU HTAR guidance, a pragmatic literature review, internal analysis, and insights from engagements with manufacturers, to outline some of the key cross-functional considerations arising from JSC and JCA, and how manufacturers should account for these in their EU HTAR readiness plans. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

2024

Jump to: 2025

9 pages, 237 KiB  
Opinion
Technology Assessment vs. Technology Appraisal—How to Strengthen the Science/Value Dichotomy with EU HTA?
by Sandro Gsteiger, Heiner C. Bucher, James Ryan and Jörg Ruof
J. Mark. Access Health Policy 2024, 12(4), 369-377; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp12040028 - 18 Nov 2024
Viewed by 1701
Abstract
Many countries around the world use health technology assessment (HTA) to inform reimbursement and pricing decisions. HTA is often split into two steps, called assessment and appraisal. While the term HTA itself has been defined by international consortia, there is heterogeneity in the [...] Read more.
Many countries around the world use health technology assessment (HTA) to inform reimbursement and pricing decisions. HTA is often split into two steps, called assessment and appraisal. While the term HTA itself has been defined by international consortia, there is heterogeneity in the way different stakeholders use the terms assessment and appraisal. This creates ambiguity regarding which activities are included in technology assessment. With the new EU HTA Regulation, the HTA community should urgently seek to clarify the distinction between assessment and appraisal, as the regulation aims to centralize the clinical part of technology assessment at the European level. Failure to clarify this terminology will put the ambition of the regulation such as increased efficiency and reduction in duplication at risk. In this article, we argue that the distinction between assessment and appraisal should be seen as a science/value dichotomy. We discuss the transition from centralized assessment activities to country-level appraisal, which should culminate in a categorization of the overall added benefit in a local context. Finally, we touch on the important dimension of uncertainty always present in medical decision making. Full article
Back to TopTop