Search Results (9)

Background: While the HTA community appears well-equipped to assess preventive and diagnostic technologies, certain limitations persist in evaluating technologies designed for rare diseases, including those based on Artificial Intelligence (AI). In Europe, the EUnetHTA Core Model^® serves as a reference for assessing preventive and diagnostic technologies. This study aims to identify key ethical, legal, and social issues related to AI-based technologies for the prevention and diagnosis of rare diseases, proposing enhancements to the Core Model. Methods: An exploratory sequential mixed methods approach was used, integrating a PICO-guided literature review and a focus group. The review analyzed six peer-reviewed articles and compared the findings with a prior study on childhood melanoma published in this journal (Healthcare), retaining only newly identified issues. A focus group composed of experts in ethical, legal, and social domains provided qualitative insights. Results: Thirteen additional issues and their corresponding questions were identified. Ethical concerns related to rare diseases included insufficient disease history knowledge, lack of robust clinical data, absence of validated efficacy tools, overdiagnosis/underdiagnosis risks, and unknown ICER thresholds. Defensive medicine was identified as a legal issue. For AI-based technologies, concerns included discriminatory outcomes, explicability, and environmental impact (ethical); accountability and reimbursement (legal); and patient involvement and job losses (social). Conclusions: Integrating these findings into the Core Model enables a comprehensive HTA of AI-based rare disease technologies. Beyond the Core Model, these issues may inform broader assessment frameworks, ensuring rigorous and ethically responsible evaluations. Full article

The vision of a unified European HTA is by no means a new endeavor. At its core are the publicly declared ambitions to harmonize assessments of clinical data within the EU and avoid the duplication of efforts. Not surprisingly, these ambitions are publicly announced to be motivating the new 2022 EU HTA regulation. However, industry experts typically see more of a risk for additional bureaucracy resulting in delays, further scrutiny, and one additional EU (clinical) dossier to submit on top of all national HTA dossiers, which could be considered a duplication of effort and therefore counterproductive. Regardless of how the details of the process will be defined and how the entire process will work in practice, we can be sure that EU officials will refer to the EU HTA and Joint Clinical Assessment (JCA) in particular as a learning system. The purpose of this article is to take a closer look at the new EU HTA regulation and analyze threats and opportunities for manufacturers and what the resulting opportunities and threats will be at the affiliate level throughout the EU. Full article

Chronic RhinoSinusitis with Nasal Polyps (CRSwNP) represents a condition mainly caused by the type 2 inflammation presence and marked by the existence of polyps within the nasal and paranasal sinuses. The standard of care includes intranasal steroids, additional burst of systemic steroids, if needed, and surgery. However, recurrence is common, especially among patients with comorbid type 2 inflammatory diseases. Recently, biological drugs, addressing the underlying cause of the disease, have been approved in Italy (dupilumab, omalizumab, and mepolizumab). A Health Technology Assessment was conducted to define multidimensional impact, assuming Italian NHS perspective and a 12-month time horizon. The EUnetHTA Core Model was deployed, using the following methods to analyze the domains: (i) literature evidence; (ii) administration of semi-structured questionnaires to 17 healthcare professionals; (iii) health economics tools to define the economic sustainability for the system. Evidence from NMA and ITC showed a more favorable safety profile and better efficacy for dupilumab compared with alternative biologics. All the analyses, synthesizing cost and efficacy measures, showed that dupilumab is the preferable alternative. Specifically, the cost per responder analysis for dupilumab, exhibiting a 67.0% response rate at Week 52, is notably economical at 14,209EUR per responder. This presents a more economical profile compared with the cost per responder for omalizumab (36.2% response rate) at 24,999EUR and mepolizumab (28.5% response rate) at 31,863EUR. These results underscore dupilumab’s potential, not merely in terms of clinical outcomes, but also in terms of economic rationality, thereby solidifying its status as a valid and preferrable alternative in the management of CRSwNP, in the context of the Italian NHS. Full article

Objectives: Stakeholder involvement has long been considered a success factor for a joint European health technology assessment (HTA) process, and its relevance is now anchored in the EU HTA Regulation’s (EU HTAR) legislative wording. Therefore, we aimed to explore the roles, challenges, and most important activities to increase the level of involvement per stakeholder group. Methods: At the 2022 Fall Convention of the European Access Academy (EAA), working groups addressed the involvement of patients, clinicians, regulators, health technology developers (HTD), and national HTA bodies and payers within the EU HTA process. Each working group revisited the pre-convention survey results, determined key role characteristics for each stakeholder, and agreed on the most important activities to fulfill the role profile. Finally, the activities suggested per group were prioritized by plenary group. Results: The prioritized actions for patients included training and capacity building, the establishment of a patient involvement committee, and the establishment of a patient unit at the EC secretariat. For clinicians, it included alignment on evidence assessment from a clinical vs. HTA point of view, capacity building, and standardization of processes. The most important actions for regulators are to develop joint regulatory-HTA guidance documents, align processes and interfaces under the regulation, and share discussions on post-licensing evidence generation. HTDs prioritized scientific advice capacity and the review of the scoping process, and further development of the scope of the assessment report fact checks. The top three actions for national HTA bodies and payers included clarification on the early HTD dialogue process, political support and commitment, and clarification on financial support. Conclusions: Addressing the activities identified as the most important for stakeholders/collaborators in the EU HTA process (e.g., in the implementation of the EU HTA Stakeholder Network and of the guidance documents developed by the EUnetHTA 21 consortium) will be key to starting an “inclusive civil society dialogue”, as suggested by the European Commission’s Pharmaceutical Strategy. Full article

Background: Neurological disorders are the leading cause of disability and the second leading cause of death worldwide. Teleneurology (TN) allows neurology to be applied when the doctor and patient are not present in the same place, and sometimes not at the same time. In February 2021, the Spanish Ministry of Health requested a health technology assessment report on the implementation of TN as a complement to face-to-face neurological care. Methods: A scoping review was conducted to answer the question on the ethical, legal, social, organisational, patient (ELSI) and environmental impact of TN. The assessment of these aspects was carried out by adapting the EUnetHTA Core Model 3.0 framework, the criteria established by the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies and the analysis criteria of the European Validate (VALues In Doing Assessments of healthcare TEchnologies) project. Key stakeholders were invited to discuss their concerns about TN in an online meeting. Subsequently, the following electronic databases were consulted from 2016 to 10 June 2021: MEDLINE and EMBASE. Results: 79 studies met the inclusion criteria. This scoping review includes 37 studies related to acceptability and equity, 15 studies developed during COVID and 1 study on environmental aspects. Overall, the reported results reaffirm the necessary complementarity of TN with the usual face-to-face care. Conclusions: This need for complementarity relates to factors such as acceptability, feasibility, risk of dehumanisation and aspects related to privacy and the confidentiality of sensitive data. Full article

This evaluation shows the main advantages related to the introduction of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in Italian clinical practice for the management of incisions in vascular surgery in patients suffering from peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and at risk of postoperative complications, compared to treatment with traditional dressings. A health technology assessment (HTA) activity was conducted assuming the hospital perspective, within a 12-month time horizon. The nine EUnetHTA Core Model dimensions were deeply explored, using scientific evidence on the topic, real-life data, and healthcare professionals’ perceptions. The evaluation shows that the use of NPWT has had a positive impact in terms of higher clinical effectiveness and safety profile. The process mapping highlights how NPWT allows a reduction of 2.5 hospitalization days compared with standard dressing, with the consequent benefits considering economic, organizational, and social aspects. A significant economic saving per patient emerged, with an overall optimization of the patient’s clinical pathway, impacting positively on the hospital’s capacity. The budget impact analysis shows that the higher number of patients treated with NPWT, the higher the economic advantages. Furthermore, assuming the patient’s perspective, it would generate an overall reduction in social costs of 28%. In conclusion, the results of this study provide helpful evidence-based information to policymakers through examinations of the relative values of intervention, thus supporting the overall hospital and institutional decision-making process to define appropriate areas of investments, leading to the achievement of not only higher clinical outcomes, but also important social, economic, and organizational advantages. Full article

The open method of coordination (OMC)—a tool which was formalized in the early 2000s—has generated the interest of both the researchers and practitioners in the context of the new EU governance. This article is examining the literature of both network governance and OMC, with the focus particularly on one main question: is OMC a useful instrument in health policies in order to achieve concrete results by outlining norms and legislation where EU exercise limited power? Analyzing a field in which the EU competence is limited—given the budgetary implications of medicines reimbursement—from the results of the existing collaboration within EUnetHTA, we will observe the added value in this particular case of the OMC application, and the possible consequences in shaping the supranational competences. Given that the EU, with some exceptions provided by the Treaties, may only exercise actions to support, coordinate or complement the action of the Member States in the health policy, the OMC proves to be a useful tool, both from the perspective of the Member States but especially of the supranational level. Full article

Background: This paper presents a generic Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) model for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) decision-making, which can be applied to a wide range of HTA studies, regardless of the healthcare technology type under consideration. Methods: The HTA Core Model^® of EUnetHTA was chosen as a basis for the development of the MCDA model because of its common acceptance among European Union countries. Validation of MCDA4HTA was carried out by an application with the HTA study group of the Turkish Ministry of Health. The commitment of the decision-making group is completed via an online application of 10 different questionnaires. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used to determine the weights. Scores of the criteria in MCDA4HTA are gathered directly from the HTA report. The performance matrix in this application is run with fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), fuzzy Vise Kriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR), and goal programming MCDA techniques. Results: Results for fuzzy VIKOR, fuzzy TOPSIS, and goal programming are 0.018, 0.309, and 0.191 for peritoneal dialysis and 0.978, 0.677, and 0.327 for hemodialysis, respectively. Conclusions: Peritoneal dialysis is found to be the best choice under the given circumstances, despite its higher costs to society. As an integrated decision-making model for HTA, MCDA4HTA supports both evidence-based decision policy and the transparent commitment of multi-disciplinary stakeholders. Full article

In Europe, there were almost twice as many patents granted for medical technology (13,795) compared to pharmaceuticals (7441) in 2018. It is important to ask how to integrate such an amount of innovations into routine clinical practice and how to measure the value it brings to the healthcare system. Given the novelty of digital health interventions (DHI), one can even question whether the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) approach developed for pharmaceuticals can be used or whether we need to develop a new DHI’s value assessment framework. We conducted a systematic literature review of published DHIs’ assessment guidelines. Each publication was analyzed with a 12-items checklist based on a EUnetHTA core model enriched with additional criteria such as usability, interoperability, and data security. In total, 11 value assessment guidelines were identified. The review revealed that safety, clinical effectiveness, usability, economic aspects, and interoperability were most often discussed (seven out of 11). More than half of the guidelines addressed organizational impact, data security, choice of comparator, and technical considerations (six out of 11). The unmet medical needs (three out of 11), along with the ethical (two out of 11) and legal aspects (one out of 11), were given the least attention. No author provided an analytical framework for the calculation of clinical and economic outcomes. We elicited five recommendations for the choice of DHI’s value criteria and a methodological suggestion for the pricing and reimbursement framework. Our conclusions lead to the need for a new DHI’s value assessment framework instead of a QALY approach. Full article