Comparing harmonization in medicines regulation and health technology assessment in Europe: lessons for the EU HTA regulation.

IF 3 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Francine Brinkhuis, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse, Hubert G M Leufkens, Kirti Narsai, Wim G Goettsch, Hendrika A van den Ham
{"title":"Comparing harmonization in medicines regulation and health technology assessment in Europe: lessons for the EU HTA regulation.","authors":"Francine Brinkhuis, Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse, Hubert G M Leufkens, Kirti Narsai, Wim G Goettsch, Hendrika A van den Ham","doi":"10.1017/S0266462326104267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The European Union (EU) has long pursued harmonization in medicines regulation and, more recently, in health technology assessment (HTA). The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the EU HTA Regulation (EU HTAR) represent key milestones in these respective trajectories. This study compares the harmonization trajectories of EU medicines regulation and EU HTA to identify lessons relevant for EU HTAR implementation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used a multi-method qualitative approach combining a narrative literature review with online focus groups involving eighteen regulatory and policy experts. The review explored the historical development of harmonization in both policy areas. The focus-group analysis examined perspectives on collaboration, harmonization dynamics, and implementation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both policy areas moved from national arrangements and voluntary cooperation toward more formal EU-level structures. Medicines regulation developed earlier and resulted in more centralized procedures and binding EU-wide authorization decisions. EU HTA retains greater national responsibility for value judgments, pricing, and reimbursement. The two areas also differ in the scope and standardization of assessments. In both trajectories, harmonization was shaped by trust, willingness to collaborate, capacity differences, and legal and procedural contexts. Participants emphasized the importance of stepwise implementation, work sharing, and sustained dialogue, while anticipating variation in national JCA uptake and impact.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Experience from EU medicines regulation highlights the importance of building trust and adapting collaboration to differences in national maturity and priorities. Harmonization should develop gradually through learning and refinement across diverse legal and procedural contexts. These lessons may support EU HTAR implementation and further development.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":"42 1","pages":"e91"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462326104267","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The European Union (EU) has long pursued harmonization in medicines regulation and, more recently, in health technology assessment (HTA). The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the EU HTA Regulation (EU HTAR) represent key milestones in these respective trajectories. This study compares the harmonization trajectories of EU medicines regulation and EU HTA to identify lessons relevant for EU HTAR implementation.

Methods: We used a multi-method qualitative approach combining a narrative literature review with online focus groups involving eighteen regulatory and policy experts. The review explored the historical development of harmonization in both policy areas. The focus-group analysis examined perspectives on collaboration, harmonization dynamics, and implementation.

Results: Both policy areas moved from national arrangements and voluntary cooperation toward more formal EU-level structures. Medicines regulation developed earlier and resulted in more centralized procedures and binding EU-wide authorization decisions. EU HTA retains greater national responsibility for value judgments, pricing, and reimbursement. The two areas also differ in the scope and standardization of assessments. In both trajectories, harmonization was shaped by trust, willingness to collaborate, capacity differences, and legal and procedural contexts. Participants emphasized the importance of stepwise implementation, work sharing, and sustained dialogue, while anticipating variation in national JCA uptake and impact.

Conclusions: Experience from EU medicines regulation highlights the importance of building trust and adapting collaboration to differences in national maturity and priorities. Harmonization should develop gradually through learning and refinement across diverse legal and procedural contexts. These lessons may support EU HTAR implementation and further development.

比较欧洲药品监管和卫生技术评估的协调:对欧盟HTA监管的教训。
目标:欧洲联盟(欧盟)长期以来一直追求药品监管的统一,最近也追求卫生技术评估(HTA)的统一。欧洲药品管理局(EMA)和欧盟HTA法规(EU HTAR)代表了这些各自发展轨迹中的关键里程碑。本研究比较了欧盟药品监管和欧盟卫生政策的协调轨迹,以确定与欧盟卫生政策实施相关的经验教训。方法:我们采用了一种多方法的定性方法,结合叙述文献综述和涉及18位监管和政策专家的在线焦点小组。该审查探讨了这两个政策领域协调的历史发展。焦点小组分析考察了协作、协调动态和实施方面的观点。结果:这两个政策领域都从国家安排和自愿合作转向更正式的欧盟级别结构。药品监管发展较早,导致更集中的程序和具有约束力的欧盟范围内的授权决定。EU HTA在价值判断、定价和报销方面保留了更大的国家责任。这两个领域在评估的范围和标准化方面也有所不同。在这两种轨迹中,和谐都是由信任、合作意愿、能力差异以及法律和程序环境决定的。与会者强调了逐步实施、工作分享和持续对话的重要性,同时预测各国对《共同行动纲领》的吸收和影响的变化。结论:欧盟药品监管的经验强调了建立信任和调整合作以适应国家成熟度和优先事项差异的重要性。协调应通过各种法律和程序背景的学习和完善逐步发展。这些经验教训可能有助于欧盟HTAR的实施和进一步发展。
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
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.60%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care serves as a forum for the wide range of health policy makers and professionals interested in the economic, social, ethical, medical and public health implications of health technology. It covers the development, evaluation, diffusion and use of health technology, as well as its impact on the organization and management of health care systems and public health. In addition to general essays and research reports, regular columns on technology assessment reports and thematic sections are published.
×
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