ESSEC Business School, Cergy-Pontoise, France.
ESSEC Business School, Cergy-Pontoise, France.
Value Health. 2023 Apr;26(4S):3-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2023.01.009. Epub 2023 Jan 26.
This study aimed to describe the role of real-world data (RWD) and real-world evidence (RWE) in health technology assessment (HTA) in 5 European countries and to identify the hurdles to the acceptance of RWE and suggest directions toward its more effective use.
Authors from France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden used a common template to extract evidence. For England, the Cancer Drugs Fund was described and analyzed as a particular model for the use of RWD to provide evidence for coverage decisions and managed entry agreements.
In all countries except Germany, HTA bodies acknowledged the relevance of RWD/RWE to address postlaunch uncertainties. In Germany, evidence from randomized controlled trials remains the gold standard, and evidence based on RWD is generally rejected. Multiple sources of RWD exist, but the quality, the immediate relevance of existing sources, and their interoperability limit their adaptation to the specifics of a given drug. This leads to skepticism about the validity of the evidence. Timing is also a key issue: the production of evidence may not be synchronized with the HTA and pricing bodies' agendas. The Cancer Drugs Fund case emphasizes that a strong partnership among all stakeholders and a pragmatic use of existing data, alongside clinical evidence provided by companies, are key success factors.
A continuous investment in national health information systems is a key issue for providing valid RWE. Processes and aids to guide the acceptability and usage of RWE derived from pairing between sources and questions are essential.
本研究旨在描述现实世界数据(RWD)和真实世界证据(RWE)在 5 个欧洲国家的卫生技术评估(HTA)中的作用,并确定接受 RWE 的障碍,并提出更有效地利用 RWE 的方向。
来自法国、德国、意大利和瑞典的作者使用通用模板提取证据。对于英国,描述并分析了癌症药物基金,作为利用 RWD 提供覆盖决策和管理准入协议证据的特定模式。
除德国外,所有国家的 HTA 机构都承认 RWD/RWE 对于解决上市后不确定性的相关性。在德国,随机对照试验的证据仍然是金标准,基于 RWD 的证据通常被拒绝。存在多种 RWD 来源,但质量、现有来源的直接相关性及其互操作性限制了它们对特定药物的适应。这导致对证据有效性的怀疑。时间也是一个关键问题:证据的产生可能与 HTA 和定价机构的议程不同步。癌症药物基金案例强调,所有利益相关者之间的强有力合作以及对现有数据的务实利用,以及公司提供的临床证据,是成功的关键因素。
对国家卫生信息系统的持续投资是提供有效 RWE 的关键问题。对于从配对源和问题中得出的 RWE 的可接受性和使用,过程和辅助工具是必不可少的。