A comparative analysis of international health technology assessments for novel gene silencing therapies: patisiran and inotersen.

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sergio Iannazzo
{"title":"A comparative analysis of international health technology assessments for novel gene silencing therapies: patisiran and inotersen.","authors":"Sergio Iannazzo","doi":"10.33393/grhta.2021.2193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Using the case study of patisiran and inotersen, we conducted a narrative comparative analysis of the health technology assessment (HTA) agency appraisals of these two first-in-class transthyretin gene silencers, which represent exceptional advances in the treatment of hereditary transthyretin-mediated (hATTR) amyloidosis, a rare and multisystemic disease. Despite the impact of each product on the treatment landscape, the majority of HTAs are only considered standard of care as a comparator, resulting in a void of information and limited comprehension of the clinical and pharmacoeconomic differences between the two treatments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was conducted internationally for HTA reports, and only instances where assessment decisions for both treatments were publicly available were included in the present analysis. The HTA reports were analyzed broadly for the assessment of clinical and pharmacoeconomic evidence. Only economic models considering both patisiran and inotersen were included in this analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of nine agencies with public assessment reports for both treatments were identified. HTA agency assessments for both treatments were essentially positive; however, differences were noted in the final recommendations, place in treatment or reimbursed indications, and in the narrative of the evaluations. Only the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) assessment for patisiran evaluated an economic model comparing the two treatments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The differences summarized in this comparative analysis may provide a more comprehensive overview of the two treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":12627,"journal":{"name":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/3c/92/grhta-8-14.PMC9616187.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/grhta.2021.2193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Using the case study of patisiran and inotersen, we conducted a narrative comparative analysis of the health technology assessment (HTA) agency appraisals of these two first-in-class transthyretin gene silencers, which represent exceptional advances in the treatment of hereditary transthyretin-mediated (hATTR) amyloidosis, a rare and multisystemic disease. Despite the impact of each product on the treatment landscape, the majority of HTAs are only considered standard of care as a comparator, resulting in a void of information and limited comprehension of the clinical and pharmacoeconomic differences between the two treatments.

Methods: A search was conducted internationally for HTA reports, and only instances where assessment decisions for both treatments were publicly available were included in the present analysis. The HTA reports were analyzed broadly for the assessment of clinical and pharmacoeconomic evidence. Only economic models considering both patisiran and inotersen were included in this analysis.

Results: A total of nine agencies with public assessment reports for both treatments were identified. HTA agency assessments for both treatments were essentially positive; however, differences were noted in the final recommendations, place in treatment or reimbursed indications, and in the narrative of the evaluations. Only the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) assessment for patisiran evaluated an economic model comparing the two treatments.

Conclusions: The differences summarized in this comparative analysis may provide a more comprehensive overview of the two treatments.

新型基因沉默疗法的国际卫生技术评估的比较分析:patisiran和intertersen。
目的:通过对patisiran和intertersen的案例研究,我们对这两种一流的转甲状腺素基因沉默剂的卫生技术评估(HTA)机构评估进行了叙述比较分析,这两种沉默剂代表了遗传性转甲状腺素介导(hATTR)淀粉样变性(一种罕见的多系统疾病)治疗的特殊进展。尽管每种产品对治疗前景都有影响,但大多数hta仅被认为是作为比较标准的护理,导致信息的缺失和对两种治疗之间临床和药物经济学差异的有限理解。方法:对国际上的HTA报告进行了搜索,只有两种治疗的评估决定都是公开的,才包括在本分析中。对HTA报告进行了广泛的分析,以评估临床和药物经济学证据。只有同时考虑了参与性和参与性的经济模型才被纳入本分析。结果:共有9家机构对两种治疗方法都有公开评估报告。HTA机构对两种治疗的评估基本上都是积极的;然而,在最终建议、治疗或报销适应症的位置以及评价的叙述中注意到差异。只有加拿大药物和健康技术机构(CADTH)对patisiran的评估评估了比较两种治疗方法的经济模型。结论:本比较分析中总结的差异可能为两种治疗提供更全面的概述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment (GRHTA) is a peer-reviewed, open access journal which aims to promote health technology assessment and economic evaluation, enabling choices among alternative therapeutical paths or procedures with different clinical and economic outcomes. GRHTA is a unique journal having three different editorial boards who focus on their respective geographical expertise.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信