The use of national reimbursement reports to support formulary decisions of the hospital's Drug and Therapeutics Committee: a comparative analysis.

Background New therapies that do not reach patients in need, have not achieved their goal. Drug and Therapeutics Committees in hospitals ensure access to patients by compiling a formulary on rational grounds. An evolving landscape of innovative molecules challenges timely formulary adaptation after national reimbursement. Aim To integrate national reimbursement reports in the hospital's appraisal, thereby promoting access for patients without delay. Method For 2019, the rationale for new molecules at Ghent University Hospital, Belgium, was compared with the public assessment report of the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance, assessing a medicine in a specific indication following a reimbursement request by the manufacturer. Decision criteria (therapeutic value and cost) between matching medicines in both databases (national & hospital) were retrospectively compared [no (%), mean (SD)]. Results Two-hundred public reports and 30 formulary decisions were analysed (with antineoplastic & immunomodulating as most prevalent class: 41.0% resp. 36.7%). National decision often concerned hospital-only medicines (89; 44.5%) without patient co-payment (101; 50.5%). Of 13 matched medicines (same indication), time delay between national decision and formulary admission was on average 3.1 (SD 2.3) months. Comparative analysis showed that assessment in both committees was mostly based on the efficacy endpoints of Randomised Controlled Trials. Literature used in hospital appraisals was of more recent publication date: + 0.78 (SD 2.2) years. Using public reports as a horizon scan could enable quick identification of new indications. Conclusion To speed up patient access, the scientific evidence of national reimbursement reports can be used for the purpose of hospital formulary decisions.