Kaltenthaler Eva, Carroll Christopher, Hill-McManus Daniel, Scope Alison, Holmes Michael, Rice Stephen, Rose Micah, Tappenden Paul, Woolacott Nerys
School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
Centre for Health Economics and Medicines Evaluation (CHEME), Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Pharmacoecon Open. 2017 Jun;1(2):99-108. doi: 10.1007/s41669-016-0001-4.
Evidence Review Groups (ERGs) critically appraise company submissions as part of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Single Technology Appraisal (STA) process. As part of their critique of the evidence submitted by companies, the ERGs undertake exploratory analyses to explore uncertainties in the company's model. The aim of this study was to explore pre-defined factors that might influence or predict the extent of ERG exploratory analyses.
The aim of this study was to explore predefined factors that might influence or predict the extent of ERG exploratory analyses.
We undertook content analysis of over 400 documents, including ERG reports and related documentation for the 100 most recent STAs (2009-2014) for which guidance has been published. Relevant data were extracted from the documents and narrative synthesis was used to summarise the extracted data. All data were extracted and checked by two researchers.
Forty different companies submitted documents as part of the NICE STA process. The most common disease area covered by the STAs was cancer (44%), and most ERG reports (n = 93) contained at least one exploratory analysis. The incidence and frequency of ERG exploratory analyses does not appear to be related to any developments in the appraisal process, the disease area covered by the STA, or the company's base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). However, there does appear to be a pattern in the mean number of analyses conducted by particular ERGs, but the reasons for this are unclear and potentially complex.
No clear patterns were identified regarding the presence or frequency of exploratory analyses, apart from the mean number conducted by individual ERGs. More research is needed to understand this relationship.
作为英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)单一技术评估(STA)流程的一部分,证据审查小组(ERG)会严格评估公司提交的材料。作为对公司提交证据进行批评的一部分,ERG会进行探索性分析,以探究公司模型中的不确定性。本研究的目的是探究可能影响或预测ERG探索性分析程度的预定义因素。
本研究的目的是探究可能影响或预测ERG探索性分析程度的预定义因素。
我们对400多份文件进行了内容分析,包括ERG报告以及已发布指南的100项最新STA(2009 - 2014年)的相关文档。从这些文件中提取相关数据,并采用叙述性综合分析来总结提取的数据。所有数据均由两名研究人员提取并核对。
40家不同的公司作为NICE STA流程的一部分提交了文件。STA涵盖的最常见疾病领域是癌症(44%),并且大多数ERG报告(n = 93)至少包含一项探索性分析。ERG探索性分析的发生率和频率似乎与评估流程中的任何进展、STA涵盖的疾病领域或公司的基础案例增量成本效益比(ICER)均无关。然而,特定ERG进行的分析平均数似乎存在一种模式,但原因尚不清楚且可能很复杂。
除了个别ERG进行的分析平均数外,未发现探索性分析的存在或频率有明显模式。需要更多研究来理解这种关系。