...
首页> 外文期刊>PharmacoEconomics >Using Real-World Data in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Practice: A Comparative Study of Five HTA Agencies
【24h】

Using Real-World Data in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Practice: A Comparative Study of Five HTA Agencies

机译:在健康技术评估(HTA)实践中使用现实世界数据:五个HTA机构的比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Abstract Background Reimbursement decisions are conventionally based on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which often have high internal validity but low external validity. Real-world data (RWD) may provide complimentary evidence for relative effectiveness assessments (REAs) and cost-effectiveness assessments (CEAs). This study examines whether RWD is incorporated in health technology assessment (HTA) of melanoma drugs by European HTA agencies, as well as differences in RWD use between agencies and across time. Methods HTA reports published between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016 were retrieved from websites of agencies representing five jurisdictions: England [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)], Scotland [Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC)], France [Haute Autorité de santé (HAS)], Germany [Institute for Quality and Efficacy in Healthcare (IQWiG)] and The Netherlands [Zorginstituut Nederland (ZIN)]. A standardized data extraction form was used to extract information on RWD inclusion for both REAs and CEAs. Results Overall, 52 reports were retrieved, all of which contained REAs; CEAs were present in 25 of the reports. RWD was included in 28 of the 52 REAs (54%), mainly to estimate melanoma prevalence, and in 22 of the 25 (88%) CEAs, mainly to extrapolate long-term effectiveness and/or identify drug-related costs. Differences emerged between agencies regarding RWD use in REAs; the ZIN and IQWiG cited RWD for evidence on prevalence, whereas the NICE, SMC and HAS additionally cited RWD use for drug effectiveness. No visible trend for RWD use in REAs and CEAs over time was observed. Conclusion In general, RWD inclusion was higher in CEAs than REAs, and was mostly used to estimate melanoma prevalence in REAs or to predict long-term effectiveness in CEAs. Differences emerged between agencies’ use of RWD; however, no visible trends for RWD use over time were observed.
机译:摘要背景偿还决策通常基于来自随机对照试验(RCT)的证据,这通常具有高内部有效性但外部有效性低。现实世界数据(RWD)可以为相对有效性评估(REAR)和成本效益评估(CEA)提供互补证据。本研究审查了欧洲HTA机构的黑色素瘤药物的健康技术评估(HTA)中是否纳入了RWD,以及机构之间的RWD使用差异。方法从代表五个司法管辖区的机构网站检索2011年1月1日至2016年12月31日的HTA报告德国德斯坦(拥有)] [医疗保健(IQWIG)的质量和疗效研究所]和荷兰[Zorginstituut Nederland(Zin)]。标准化的数据提取形式用于提取关于RWD夹杂物的信息,用于reas和cear。结果总体而言,检索了52个报告,所有这些报告都包含了reav; CEA是在25个报告中存在。 RWD被列入52 reas(54%)中的28个,主要是为了估算黑素瘤患病率,以及25个(88%)CEA的22个,主要是推断长期有效性和/或识别与毒品相关的成本。关于RWD在REAR中使用的代理商之间出现的差异; Zin和Iqwig引用了关于患病率的证据的RWD,而漂亮的,SMC并另外引用RWD用于药物效果。没有观察到RWD在RED和CEAS随时间使用的可见趋势。结论一般来说,CEAS的含量高于REAR,大多数用于估算黑色瘤在AREA中预测CEA的长期效果。代理商的使用情况差异出现了rwd;然而,观察到RWD随着时间的推移没有任何可见趋势。

著录项

  • 来源
    《PharmacoEconomics》 |2018年第3期|共10页
  • 作者单位

    The National Healthcare Institute (ZIN);

    Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical;

    The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE);

    The Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) Healthcare Improvement Scotland (HIS);

    La Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS);

    Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical;

    Department of Epidemiology University Medical Centre Groningen;

    Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical;

    The National Healthcare Institute (ZIN);

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 药学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号