EVALUATION OF SURROGATE ENDPOINTS IN REIMBURSEMENT DECISIONS IN THE NETHERLANDS AND THEIR ALIGNMENT WITH ISPOR GOOD PRACTICES
Author(s)
David Smalbrugge, MSc1, Maiwenn Al, Phd.2.
1Senior Consultant, GIPAM gmbh, Den Haag, Netherlands, 2Maiwenn Model Validation, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
1Senior Consultant, GIPAM gmbh, Den Haag, Netherlands, 2Maiwenn Model Validation, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
OBJECTIVES: Surrogate endpoints, used in place of final patient-relevant outcomes such as overall survival (OS) or health-related quality of life (HRQoL), increasingly inform reimbursement decisions and economic models, risking that a surrogate effect does not translate into patient benefit or that a cost-per-QALY estimate misstates value. The 2026 ISPOR Good Practices Task Force recommends evaluating surrogates across three evidence levels (biological plausibility, individual-level, trial-level) and integrating validation and related uncertainty with economic modelling. We assessed how far Dutch HTA practice (Zorginstituut Nederland, ZIN) currently reflects this.
METHODS: All clinical and economic dossiers from 2025 ZIN reimbursement assessments were reviewed. For each recommendation it was recorded whether it rested on a final outcome or not, and if not, whether the surrogacy of the outcome was evaluated and to what extent.
RESULTS: For 2025, 62 clinical dossiers and 18 economic dossiers were identified. In clinical assessments only 11 recommendations relied on a final endpoint (10 OS, 1 OS and HRQOL). Of the rest, only 7 evaluated surrogacy, while 38 relied on outcomes deemed patient-relevant without assessing how they related to OS or HRQOL. 6 assessments were excluded as they had issues around appropriateness of evidence source. In the economic dossiers, 11 models relied on modelling of final OS from the trial. In 3 other models, OS was informed by a surrogate endpoint, but surrogacy was only evaluated in 2 of these. In the remaining 5, incremental QALYs arose from time in higher-utility health states rather than OS gains. In none of these, surrogacy between intermediate outcomes and HRQoL was evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS: Dutch HTA practice in 2025 was not yet aligned with ISPOR good-practice recommendations: surrogates frequently informed decisions without trial-level validation, were assessed inconsistently, and were rarely integrated into economic modelling. Substantial changes in reporting will be needed to align with ISPOR good practices recommendations.
METHODS: All clinical and economic dossiers from 2025 ZIN reimbursement assessments were reviewed. For each recommendation it was recorded whether it rested on a final outcome or not, and if not, whether the surrogacy of the outcome was evaluated and to what extent.
RESULTS: For 2025, 62 clinical dossiers and 18 economic dossiers were identified. In clinical assessments only 11 recommendations relied on a final endpoint (10 OS, 1 OS and HRQOL). Of the rest, only 7 evaluated surrogacy, while 38 relied on outcomes deemed patient-relevant without assessing how they related to OS or HRQOL. 6 assessments were excluded as they had issues around appropriateness of evidence source. In the economic dossiers, 11 models relied on modelling of final OS from the trial. In 3 other models, OS was informed by a surrogate endpoint, but surrogacy was only evaluated in 2 of these. In the remaining 5, incremental QALYs arose from time in higher-utility health states rather than OS gains. In none of these, surrogacy between intermediate outcomes and HRQoL was evaluated.
CONCLUSIONS: Dutch HTA practice in 2025 was not yet aligned with ISPOR good-practice recommendations: surrogates frequently informed decisions without trial-level validation, were assessed inconsistently, and were rarely integrated into economic modelling. Substantial changes in reporting will be needed to align with ISPOR good practices recommendations.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
CO94
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Health Technology Assessment
Topic Subcategory
Relating Intermediate to Long-term Outcomes
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas