OBJECTIVES: Identify and describe the acceptability of cure models hypothesis in the cost-effectiveness evaluation submitted to the Commission for Economic and Public Health Evaluation (CEESP), committee of the French Health Technology Assessment (HTA) body, for assessment in France, between 2012 and 2024.

METHODS: Data were extracted from the efficiency assessments published on the Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) website and then categorized by therapeutic areas, types of cure models hypothesis, Improvement of Medical Service Provided (ASMR), Medical Service Provided (SMR), and the time horizon of the analyses.

RESULTS: A review of 221 assessments issued by the CEESP on its official website was conducted, with a particular focus on the 13 assessments using cure models. Solid oncology accounted for 54% of the opinions, while onco-hematology represented 46%. Partitioned survival models were the most frequent (54%), followed by Markov models (31%) and AUC models (15%). The validity of cure models hypothesis was approved in 62% of cases. The reported time horizons were as follows: ≤ 10 years in 31% of opinions, ≤ 5 years in 23%, lifetime in 15%, and other durations in the remaining evaluations.

CONCLUSIONS: The strong methodological acceptability of cure models in CEESP evaluations can be attributed to their relevance in pathologies like oncology and adjuvant stages, where natural progression to cures is common. Additionally, the frequent use of extended time horizons in evaluations highlights the recognition of long-term treatment benefits. The high rate of ‘Significant’ SMR (92%) ratings further underscores the clinical significance and effectiveness of the evaluated therapies. This study highlights the acceptability of cure models hypothesis in CEESP evaluations, noting that only a few methodological concerns have been raised, indicating a certain level of acceptance for these methods.