IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v6y2022i5d10.1007_s41669-022-00350-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How are Companion Diagnostics Considered in Economic Evaluations of Oncology Treatments? A Review of Health Technology Assessments

Author

Listed:
  • Melissa Gomez Montero

    (Ingress-Health)

  • Houcine El Alili

    (Ingress-Health)

  • Mahmoud Hashim

    (Ingress-Health
    Janssen Global Services Inc)

  • Peter Wigfield

    (Ingress-Health)

  • Mariya Dimova

    (Janssen Global Services Inc)

  • Ralph Riley

    (Janssen Global Services Inc)

  • Katie Pascoe

    (Global Commercial Strategy Organization)

Abstract

Background Companion diagnostic (CDx) testing is increasingly used to identify eligible patients for targeted treatments. Guidance on how CDx testing should be incorporated into cost-effectiveness models (CEM) is limited. This review evaluated how health technology assessment bodies and research organizations considered CDx in CEMs of targeted therapies in oncology and whether this ultimately impacted their decisions or time from regulatory approval to recommendations. Methods An exhaustive list of approved CDx tests in oncology was compiled. For corresponding indications and treatments, NICE appraisals published between 2016 and 2019 were identified. Then, assessments for the same treatments issued from 11 other agencies were reviewed. Data extracted included background and CDx information, CDx's role in the CEM, and recommendations. Results Twenty-seven NICE appraisals were identified; 15 considered CDx testing in the CEM, while 12 did not, mainly because testing had already been established for the comparators within the same class or in clinical practice from a prior treatment line. Both testing costs and mutation prevalence drove CDx testing costs per patient. The cross-comparison of assessments showed that CDx test characteristics were inconsistently reported. Time from regulatory approval to recommendations was not impacted by CDx cost inclusion in CEMs. Conclusion CDx testing was included in cost-effectiveness models whenever mutation testing was required solely for patients receiving targeted treatment; cost per patient was based on test costs and mutation prevalence. It is unclear if expanded reliance on CDx testing will impact future assessments of targeted therapies. A future update is warranted to track trends over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Melissa Gomez Montero & Houcine El Alili & Mahmoud Hashim & Peter Wigfield & Mariya Dimova & Ralph Riley & Katie Pascoe, 2022. "How are Companion Diagnostics Considered in Economic Evaluations of Oncology Treatments? A Review of Health Technology Assessments," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 6(5), pages 637-646, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:6:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s41669-022-00350-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-022-00350-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-022-00350-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-022-00350-6?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
    ---><---

    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:pharmo:v:6:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s41669-022-00350-6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.