The Implementation of NICE Severity Modifier in the Single Technology Appraisal of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine: External Assessment Group Perspective.

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Ahmed Abdelsabour, Jemma Perks, Charlotte Kelman, Sophie Robinson, Caroline Farmer, Dawn Lee
{"title":"The Implementation of NICE Severity Modifier in the Single Technology Appraisal of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine: External Assessment Group Perspective.","authors":"Ahmed Abdelsabour, Jemma Perks, Charlotte Kelman, Sophie Robinson, Caroline Farmer, Dawn Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2026.08.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>NICE's severity modifier uses absolute and proportional QALY shortfalls to determine whether higher cost-effectiveness thresholds should apply. We use the appraisal of mirvetuximab soravtansine in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to show how modelling choices can affect the severity weight and to draw out practical recommendations for future appraisals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We reviewed the company and EAG approaches to estimating QALY shortfalls, focusing on utility values, starting age and standard-care overall survival extrapolation. We considered how these assumptions changed expected QALYs under standard care, the resulting QALY shortfalls and the severity weight applied.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The severity weight was sensitive to all three assumptions. The EAG's preferred utility values increased expected QALYs under standard care and reduced the severity weight from 1.7 to 1.2 in the EAG base case. Starting age was also influential, with older ages making the higher severity threshold less likely to be met. Survival extrapolation affected expected QALYs under standard care; longer-tailed curves reduced absolute and proportional QALY shortfalls, whereas shorter-tailed curves made the higher severity weight more likely.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Severity-modifier decisions can change under plausible modelling assumptions, particularly when estimates are close to the threshold between weights. When severity weights are used, appraisals should include a standard sensitivity analysis reporting the absolute QALY shortfall, proportional QALY shortfall and resulting severity weight under alternative assumptions. Clearer reporting of these calculations would make the basis for severity-weight decisions easier to scrutinise across appraisals.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2026.08.009","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: NICE's severity modifier uses absolute and proportional QALY shortfalls to determine whether higher cost-effectiveness thresholds should apply. We use the appraisal of mirvetuximab soravtansine in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to show how modelling choices can affect the severity weight and to draw out practical recommendations for future appraisals.

Methods: We reviewed the company and EAG approaches to estimating QALY shortfalls, focusing on utility values, starting age and standard-care overall survival extrapolation. We considered how these assumptions changed expected QALYs under standard care, the resulting QALY shortfalls and the severity weight applied.

Results: The severity weight was sensitive to all three assumptions. The EAG's preferred utility values increased expected QALYs under standard care and reduced the severity weight from 1.7 to 1.2 in the EAG base case. Starting age was also influential, with older ages making the higher severity threshold less likely to be met. Survival extrapolation affected expected QALYs under standard care; longer-tailed curves reduced absolute and proportional QALY shortfalls, whereas shorter-tailed curves made the higher severity weight more likely.

Conclusion: Severity-modifier decisions can change under plausible modelling assumptions, particularly when estimates are close to the threshold between weights. When severity weights are used, appraisals should include a standard sensitivity analysis reporting the absolute QALY shortfall, proportional QALY shortfall and resulting severity weight under alternative assumptions. Clearer reporting of these calculations would make the basis for severity-weight decisions easier to scrutinise across appraisals.

NICE严重度调节剂在Mirvetuximab Soravtansine单一技术评价中的应用:外部评价组视角。
目的:NICE的严重性修正器使用绝对和比例QALY缺陷来确定是否应该采用更高的成本效益阈值。我们使用mirvetuximab soravtansine在铂耐药卵巢癌中的评估来显示建模选择如何影响严重性权重,并为未来的评估提出实用的建议。方法:我们回顾了公司和EAG估计QALY不足的方法,重点是效用值,起始年龄和标准护理总生存期外推。我们考虑了这些假设如何改变标准护理下的预期质量aly、由此导致的质量aly不足和应用的严重程度权重。结果:严重性权重对三种假设均敏感。EAG的首选效用值增加了标准护理下的预期qaly,并将EAG基础病例的严重程度权重从1.7降低到1.2。起始年龄也有影响,年龄越大,越不可能达到较高的严重程度阈值。生存外推影响标准治疗下的预期质量;长尾曲线减少了绝对和比例的QALY不足,而短尾曲线更有可能产生更高的严重性权重。结论:在合理的建模假设下,严重程度修正器的决策可能会发生变化,特别是当估计接近权重之间的阈值时。当使用严重性权重时,评估应包括标准敏感性分析,报告绝对质量质量缺陷、比例质量质量缺陷和在可选假设下产生的严重性权重。更清晰地报告这些计算结果,将使严重程度权重决定的基础更容易在评估过程中被仔细审查。
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
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书