EXPLORING PRE AND POST AGENZIA ITALIANA DEL FARMACO (AIFA) REIMBURSED ACCESS TO IMMUNOTHERAPY FOR THE TREATMENT OF SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA OF THE HEAD AND NECK (SCCHN)

Author(s)

Wellam H1, Pepper K1, Silvey M1, Middleton C2, Rider A1, Piercy J1
1Adelphi Real World, Bollington, UK, 2Adelphi Real World, Bollington, CHE, UK

OBJECTIVES: In Europe, centralised marketing authorisation applications are assessed by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Italy, a European member state, ratifies the approval and starts a national price and reimbursement process, regulated by AIFA. In this study, we assessed Italian access to immunotherapy for the treatment of SCCHN at a discrete period in their regulatory and reimbursement timeline.

METHODS: Marketing authorisation and AIFA reimbursement approval dates were obtained from the EMA and Italian Official Journal websites. Real-world data were gathered using the Adelphi Real World SCCHN ProgrammeTM (DSP) –a retrospective chart review combined with a cross-sectional survey conducted in Italy. Participating oncologists provided information on the perceived administrative controls on the use of Immunotherapy agents ranging from; 1) available within label, 2) available with restrictions other than label and 3) not available. The full DSP methodology has been published previously. The Access Index (AI), a composite scoring system, was developed to describe the level of availability (1=unrestricted to 0=excluded). Scores allocated per respondent as 1, 0.5, or 0 for unrestricted, restricted and excluded access respectively. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to explore differences in access between Immunotherapy A and B.

RESULTS: At the point of data collection; Immunotherapy A had EMA approval and AIFA reimbursed approval in SCCHN; Immunotherapy B had EMA approval and was not AIFA reviewed in SCCHN. 41 oncologists reported on perceived administrative controls, and results were converted into an AI score. Immunotherapy A (AI:0.68, SD:0.38) was more available than Immunotherapy B (AI:0.44, SD:0.39), p=0.001.

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates real-world evidence of variation in access to Immunotherapy drugs in the period prior and post national reimbursement. It is interesting to observe that Immunotherapy B benefited from a level of formulary access prior to receiving AIFA reimbursement in SCCHN, albeit lower than the reimbursed Immunotherapy A.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2019-11, ISPOR Europe 2019, Copenhagen, Denmark

Code

PCN278

Topic

Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care

Topic Subcategory

Formulary Development, Reimbursement & Access Policy

Disease

Oncology

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×