ISSUE: With high healthcare costs in the USA, it may appear that HTA could be a solution, particularly for increasing drug costs. However, there are several differences in USA’s healthcare system compared to other systems where HTA has been formally implemented, including reimbursement structures, stakeholder incentives, and a pluralistic payer system. Structural changes, or a different type of HTA, may be necessary. The panel will discuss what kind of formal HTA would be feasible in the USA, and which stakeholders would benefit from these changes.

Wrik Ghosh will moderate and provide an overview of the current situation. Dan Ollendorf will provide an HTA perspective, comparing the efforts made by ICER in the USA to those abroad, highlighting feasible options. Thomas Butt will provide an international perspective, discussing whether the USA can learn from countries that have successfully implemented HTA or whether there are higher priorities for USA’s healthcare system. Sarah Breen will provide a manufacturer perspective – formal HTA could present a threat to profits, changing manufacturer incentives, but may also provide opportunities to demonstrate value and improve patient access. Discussion time will be included and audience participation encouraged throughout, with interactive voting used to gain audience input.

OVERVIEW: The USA has the highest healthcare costs per person in the world. HTA is often seen as a method for drug cost control, yet there is a noticeable absence of a national HTA body in the USA with a formal mandate and binding authority, in contrast to the situation in other countries where healthcare is more affordable. The rise in the number of institutions in the USA developing value frameworks for assessment of therapies could signal a greater willingness to accept formal HTA as part of reimbursement. Insights both domestically and abroad highlight that other changes may be required first to improve affordability.