Vásquez Paola, Hall Lisa, Merlo Gregory
Centre for Health Services Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Value Health Reg Issues. 2024 Nov;44:101026. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101026. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
This systematic literature review aimed to explore experiences worldwide of societal preferences integration into health technology assessments (HTAs) for rare diseases (RDs) and orphan drugs (ODs) through the implementation of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA), discrete choice experiments (DCEs), and person trade-off (PTO) methods, among others.
A systematic search of the literature was conducted in April 2021 using PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach was used for the review phases. Finally, the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework was used to discuss the implementation of these instruments in the RD context.
A total of 33 articles met the inclusion criteria. The studies measured societal preferences for RD and OD as part of HTA using MCDA (n = 17), DCE (n = 8), and PTO (n = 4), among other methods (n = 4). These found that patients and clinicians do not prioritize funding based on rarity. The public is willing to allocate funds only if the OD demonstrates effectiveness and improves the quality of life, considering as relevant factors disease severity, unmet health needs, and quality of life. Conversely, HTA agency experts preferred their current approach, placing more weight on cost-effectiveness and evidence quality, even though they expressed concern about the fairness of the drug review process.
MCDA, PTO, and DCE are helpful and transparent methods for assessing societal preferences in HTA for RD and OD. However, their methodological limitations, such as arbitrary criteria selection, subjective scoring methods, framing effects, weighting adaptation, and value measurement models, could make implementation challenging.
本系统文献综述旨在探讨全球范围内通过实施多标准决策分析(MCDA)、离散选择实验(DCE)和个人权衡(PTO)等方法,将社会偏好纳入罕见病(RD)和孤儿药(OD)卫生技术评估(HTA)的经验。
2021年4月,使用PubMed、Cochrane、Embase和Scopus数据库对文献进行系统检索。系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目方法用于综述阶段。最后,采用卫生服务研究实施促进行动框架来讨论这些工具在罕见病背景下的实施情况。
共有33篇文章符合纳入标准。这些研究使用MCDA(n = 17)、DCE(n = 8)、PTO(n = 4)等方法(n = 4),将对罕见病和孤儿药的社会偏好作为卫生技术评估的一部分进行了测量。研究发现,患者和临床医生不会根据罕见程度来确定资金的优先顺序。公众只有在孤儿药证明有效并改善生活质量时才愿意分配资金,同时将疾病严重程度、未满足的健康需求和生活质量等因素视为相关因素。相反,卫生技术评估机构的专家更喜欢他们目前的方法,更重视成本效益和证据质量,尽管他们对药物审查过程的公平性表示担忧。
MCDA、PTO和DCE是评估罕见病和孤儿药卫生技术评估中社会偏好的有用且透明的方法。然而,它们的方法学局限性,如任意标准选择、主观评分方法、框架效应、权重调整和价值测量模型,可能会使实施具有挑战性。