Academic Journal
Multiple criteria decision analysis for HTA across four EU member states: piloting the Advance Value Framework
| العنوان: | Multiple criteria decision analysis for HTA across four EU member states: piloting the Advance Value Framework |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Angelis, Aris, Linch, Mark, Montibeller, Gilberto, Molina Lopez, Maria Teresa, Zawada, Anna, Orzel, Kinga, Arickx, Francis, Espin, Jaime, Kanavos, Panos |
| سنة النشر: | 2020 |
| المجموعة: | The London School of Economics and Political Science: LSE Research Online |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | RM Therapeutics. Pharmacology, RC0254 Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology (including Cancer) |
| الوصف: | Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) has emerged as a methodology for Health Technology Assessment (HTA). However, limited empirical evidence is available on its use by decision-makers; where available, it only comes from single-setting exercises, while cross-country comparative studies are unavailable. This study applies the Advance Value Framework (AVF), an MCDA methodology for HTA based on multi-attribute value theory, through a series of case studies with decision-makers in four countries, to explore its feasibility and compare decision-makers' value preferences and results. The AVF was applied in the evaluation of three drugs for metastatic, castrate resistant, prostate cancer (abiraterone, cabazitaxel and enzalutamide) in the post-chemotherapy indication. Decision conferences were organised in four European countries in collaboration with their HTA or health insurance organisations by involving relevant assessors and experts: Sweden (TLV), Andalusia/Spain (AETSA), Poland (AOTMiT) and Belgium (INAMI-RIZIV). Participants' value preferences, including performance scoring and criteria weighting, were elicited through a facilitated decision-analysis modelling approach using the MACBETH technique. Between 6 and 11 criteria were included in each jurisdiction's value model, allocated across four criteria domains; Therapeutic Benefit criteria consistently ranked first in relative importance across all countries. Consistent drug rankings were observed in all settings, with enzalutamide generating the highest overall weighted preference value (WPV) score, followed by abiraterone and cabazitaxel. Dividing drugs' overall WPV scores by their costs produced the lowest “cost per unit of value” for enzalutamide, followed by abiraterone and cabazitaxel. These results come in contrast with the actual country HTA recommendations and pricing decisions. Overall, although some differences in value preferences were observed between countries, drug rankings remained the same. The MCDA methodology employed could act as a ... |
| نوع الوثيقة: | article in journal/newspaper |
| وصف الملف: | text |
| اللغة: | English |
| Relation: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102122/1/Multiple_criteria_decision_analysis.pdf; http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102122/3/1_s2.0_S0277953619305908_main.pdf; Angelis, Aris orcid:0000-0002-0261-4634 , Linch, Mark, Montibeller, Gilberto, Molina Lopez, Maria Teresa, Zawada, Anna, Orzel, Kinga, Arickx, Francis, Espin, Jaime and Kanavos, Panos orcid:0000-0001-9518-3089 (2020) Multiple criteria decision analysis for HTA across four EU member states: piloting the Advance Value Framework. Social Science & Medicine, 246. ISSN 0277-9536 |
| الاتاحة: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102122/ http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102122/1/Multiple_criteria_decision_analysis.pdf http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102122/3/1_s2.0_S0277953619305908_main.pdf https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/social-science-and-medicine |
| Rights: | cc_by_4 ; cc_by_nc_nd_4 |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsbas.F2F456A |
| قاعدة البيانات: | BASE |
| الوصف غير متاح. |