Abstract

IntroductionAccess and funding for newly approved treatments for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are often dependent on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) involving cost-effectiveness analysis. Whilst methods used by HTA agencies share many similarities, final decisions may differ. This may be the result, not just of price considerations, but also of variation in value judgements by different agencies. The aim of this study was to review international HTA evaluations to identify determinants of value and access for NSCLC treatments.MethodsA targeted review and analysis was undertaken of published HTAs for NSCLC across HTA agencies in six countries (Australia, Canada, England, France, Ireland and Scotland). Analysis of extracted data consisted of three stages: descriptive analysis, bivariate analysis and multivariable analysis.ResultsThe analysis included 163 HTAs that assessed oncological treatments for NSCLC from 2003 to 2019. The majority of HTA decisions (67.5%) were positive. However, some evidence of heterogeneity in HTA decisions and the factors informing them were identified. The most influential factors included in the multivariate model related to the HTA agency conducting the appraisal, the year of market authorisation, treatment type and the line of treatment.ConclusionHeterogenous decision-making frameworks can present a challenge to developing HTA submissions. This research contributes to understanding decision-making factors and why countries make different decisions.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-021-00279-2.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call