Program

In-person AND virtual! – We are pioneering a new conference format that will connect in-person and virtual audiences to create a unique experience. Matching the innovation that comes through our members’ work, ISPOR is pushing the boundaries of innovation to design an event that works in today’s quickly changing environment. 

In-person registration included the full virtual experience, and virtual-only attendees will be able to tune into live in-person sessions and/or watch captured in-person sessions on-demand in addition to having a variety of virtual-only sessions to attend.

Characterizing Evidentiary Criteria in HTA Assessments of CAR-T Therapies

Speaker(s)

OBrien M1, Fernandez P1, Freilich J2, Thorel A1, Chawla A3
1Parexel, London, UK, 2PAREXEL International, Stockholm, AB, Sweden, 3Parexel, BILLERICA, MA, USA

OBJECTIVES: CAR-T therapies are one-time administration cell-based therapies with high upfront costs, resulting in growing payer scrutiny of associated evidence packages. In this research, we aimed to characterize the clinical and economic evidence of CAR-T therapies that maximally impact reimbursement decisions across key HTA agencies.

METHODS: HTA websites for NICE, CADTH, HAS, and the G-BA were searched for CAR-T HTA reports published up to 31 December 2021. Key outcomes were extracted and mapped for clinical and cost effectiveness markets.

RESULTS: A total of 20 reports were extracted for 4 drugs (Kymriah, Yescarta, Tecartus and Abecma) across 5 oncology indications (DLBCL, PMBCL, ALL, MCL and MM). Only 20% received positive recommendations (all from HAS), with the remaining 80% receiving restricted reimbursement or were rejected.

All of the drugs reported only single-arm phase I/II trials, often accompanied by Real World Evidence (RWE) including external comparator studies and Indirect Treatment Comparisons, typically with a sample size of N<200. Primary endpoint was overall response rate and remission rate for 75% and 20% of all reviewed trials, respectively. Median follow-up time was in 11.3 – 28.6 months range.

For cost-effectiveness markets, limited data resulted in uncertainty of the exact size of the benefit of each drug compared with salvage chemotherapy. Where conclusions could be drawn, treatments were mostly not considered cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS: Despite suboptimal evidence, most HTAs provided restricted reimbursement for CAR-T therapies due to lack of standard of care and on the condition of additional evidence generation, such as longer follow-up trial results, generation of comparative evidence through RWE observational studies and the use of appropriate indirect comparators and endpoints.

Overall, for novel CAR-T products with limited clinical data at launch, payers are increasingly employing RWE to minimize uncertainty in evidence and cost consequence estimates as reimbursement decision drivers, even as their evidentiary thresholds continue to evolve.

Code

HTA38

Topic

Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Technology Assessment, Study Approaches

Topic Subcategory

Clinical Trials, Decision & Deliberative Processes, Meta-Analysis & Indirect Comparisons, Reimbursement & Access Policy

Disease

Genetic, Regenerative and Curative Therapies, Oncology, Personalized and Precision Medicine, Rare and Orphan Diseases