Health Technology Assessment Landscape for COVID-19 Treatment across the US, Canada, and EU-5 - an Insight into Recommendation Drivers
Author(s)
Ghosh S1, Paul T2, Chatterjee M3
1IQVIA, New Delhi, DL, India, 2IQVIA, Gurgaon, India, 3IQVIA, Gurgaon, HR, India
Objectives: Most health technology assessment (HTA) bodies prioritised COVID-19 management and prophylaxis, considering its impact on access to healthcare innovations. This research aimed to understand the trends in COVID-19 HTA decisions in the US, Canada and EU-5. Methods: A review of recent HTA agency decisions in the US, EU-5 [namely UK , France, Italy, Spain and Germany] and Canada was done using IQVIA™ ’s proprietary platform ‘HTA Accelerator’ from 01/Jan/2020 to 31/Dec/2021. A thorough hand-searching of the decisions were made thereafter to understand the patterns of HTA decision rationale. Results: Of all the appraisals made in the above timeframe, only 15 submissions underwent HTA process: 2 ongoing (Remdesivir [NICE] + Sotrovimab [HAS]); 1 planned (multidrug [ICER]) and 12 published. No HTAs were found for CADTH. Among the 12 published HTAs, 5 received positive recommendations from HAS (3 dexamethasone; 1 casirivimab + imedvimab; 1 tixagevimab + cilgavimab), 5 received positive recommendation with restrictions (4 remdesivir [HAS, INESS, G-BA, AEMPS]; 1 casirivimab + imedvimab [HAS]), 1 received negative recommendation by HAS (molnupiravir), and 1 received no recommendation from IQWiG (remdesivir). G-BA, HAS, AEMPS and INESS received positive recommendations majorly on basis of clinical benefit and high unmet need, while tixagevimab + cilgavimab received recommendation based on its innovative nature. G-BA, HAS, and INESS restricted the appraisal of the drugs based on subgroups and patient characteristics; whereby the decision was conditional based on further data availability. No appraisals included evidence for cost-effectiveness, while budget impact analyses were considered for remdesivir by G-BA, IQWiG and INESS. Placebo-controlled randomised studies were the major clinical evidence supporting the appraisals. Real-world evidence (RWE) supported remdesivir submissions to G-BA, IQWiG and HAS. Conclusions: The prime HTA decision drivers were based on clinical benefit and high unmet need over economic benefit.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2022-05, ISPOR 2022, Washington, DC, USA
Value in Health, Volume 25, Issue 6, S1 (June 2022)
Code
HTA71
Topic
Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Decision & Deliberative Processes
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas