IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v21y2023i2d10.1007_s40258-022-00779-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Value of New: Consideration of Product Novelty in Health Technology Assessments of Pharmaceuticals

Author

Listed:
  • Patricia G. Synnott

    (Tufts Medical Center)

  • Dominic Voehler

    (Tufts Medical Center)

  • Daniel E. Enright

    (Tufts Medical Center)

  • Stacey Kowal

    (Genentech, Inc)

  • Daniel A. Ollendorf

    (Tufts Medical Center)

Abstract

Background Efforts to understand how treatments affect patients and society have broadened the criteria that health technology assessment (HTA) organizations apply to value assessments. We examined whether HTA agencies in eight countries consider treatment novelty in methods and deliberations. Methods We defined a novel pharmaceutical product to be one that offers a new approach to treatment (e.g., new mechanism of action), addresses an unmet need (e.g., targets a rare condition without effective treatments), or has a broader impact beyond what is typically measured in an HTA. We reviewed peer-reviewed publications and technical guidance materials from HTA organizations in Australia, Canada, England, France, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United States (US). In addition, we explored how HTA organizations integrated novelty considerations into deliberations and recommendations related to two newer therapies—voretigene neparvovec for an inherited retinal disorder and ocrelizumab for multiple sclerosis. Results None of the HTA organizations acknowledge treatment novelty as an explicit value criterion in their assessments of pharmaceutical products. However, drugs that have novel characteristics are given special consideration, particularly when they address an unmet need. Several organizations document a willingness to expend more resources and accept greater evidence uncertainty for such treatments. Qualitative deliberations about the additional unquantified potential benefits of treatment may also influence HTA recommendations. Conclusion Major HTA organizations do not recognize novelty as an explicit value criterion, although drugs with novel characteristics may receive special consideration. There is an opportunity for organizations to codify their approach to evaluating novelty in value assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Patricia G. Synnott & Dominic Voehler & Daniel E. Enright & Stacey Kowal & Daniel A. Ollendorf, 2023. "The Value of New: Consideration of Product Novelty in Health Technology Assessments of Pharmaceuticals," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 305-314, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:21:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00779-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00779-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-022-00779-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-022-00779-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sorenson, Corinna & Chalkidou, Kalipso, 2012. "Reflections on the evolution of health technology assessment in Europe," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 25-45, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klingler, Corinna & Shah, Sara M.B. & Barron, Anthony J.G. & Wright, John S.F., 2013. "Regulatory space and the contextual mediation of common functional pressures: Analyzing the factors that led to the German Efficiency Frontier approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 270-280.
    2. Kisser, Agnes & Tüchler, Heinz & Erdös, Judit & Wild, Claudia, 2016. "Factors influencing coverage decisions on medical devices: A retrospective analysis of 78 medical device appraisals for the Austrian hospital benefit catalogue 2008–2015," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(8), pages 903-912.
    3. Katharina Elisabeth Blankart & Tom Stargardt, 2020. "The impact of drug quality ratings from health technology assessments on the adoption of new drugs by physicians in Germany," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(S1), pages 63-82, October.
    4. Panos Kanavos & Olivier Wouters & John S. F. Wright & Anthony J. G. Barron & Sara M. B. Shah & Corinna Klingler, 2017. "Convergence, Divergence and Hybridity: A Regulatory Governance Perspective on Health Technology Assessment in England and Germany," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(s2), pages 69-75, March.
    5. Wang, Daniel & Vasconcelos, Natália Pires de & Poirier, Mathieu JP & Chieffi, Ana & Mônaco, Cauê & Sritharan, Lathika & Van Katwyk, Susan Rogers & Hoffman, Steven J, 2020. "Health technology assessment and judicial deference to priority-setting decisions in healthcare: Quasi-experimental analysis of right-to-health litigation in Brazil," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    6. Addo, Rebecca & Hall, Jane & Haas, Marion & Goodall, Stephen, 2020. "The knowledge and attitude of Ghanaian decision-makers and researchers towards health technology assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).
    7. Proksch, Dorian & Busch-Casler, Julia & Haberstroh, Marcus Max & Pinkwart, Andreas, 2019. "National health innovation systems: Clustering the OECD countries by innovative output in healthcare using a multi indicator approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 169-179.
    8. repec:bla:glopol:v:8:y:2017:i::p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Belfiore, Alessandra & Scaletti, Alessandro & Lavorato, Domenica & Cuccurullo, Corrado, 2023. "The long process by which HTA became a paradigm: A longitudinal conceptual structure analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 74-79.
    10. Barnish, Maxwell S. & Tan, Si Ying & Robinson, Sophie & Taeihagh, Araz & Melendez-Torres, G.J., 2023. "A realist synthesis to develop an explanatory model of how policy instruments impact child and maternal health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 339(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:21:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00779-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.