DAMNED IF YOU ‘D’? EVIDENCE THE SELECTION OF THE APPRAISAL COMMITTEE MAY AFFECT NICE TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMET OUTCOMES

Author(s)

Macaulay R1, Roibu C1, McCann E1, Tripathi S2, Chauhan E2, Berardi A1
1PAREXEL International, London, UK, 2PAREXEL International, Chandigarh, India

OBJECTIVES: NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) makes recommendations on the public reimbursement of medicines based on their clinical- and cost-effectiveness. The recommendation is made by an Appraisal Committee (comprising a multi-disciplinary group of independent experts) as part of a technology appraisal. There are four Appraisal Committees (A,B,C,D); this research investigates whether appraisal outcomes vary by committee.

METHODS: All publically-available Final Appraisal Determinations from NICE Single Technology Appraisals (STA) were screened (01/10/2009-30/05/2017) and key data were extracted. Homogeneity in rates of acceptance or rejection across the committees was assessed using Chi-squared tests.

RESULTS: The Appraisal Committee was identified for 216 technologies, 59% (128/216) of which were ‘recommended’. The number of technologies assessed by each committee was similar (A:60, B:47, C:65, D:44). However, STAs conducted by Committee D were significantly less likely to receive ‘recommended’ outcomes (A:75% [45/60], B:70% [33/47], C:58% [38/65], D:27% [12/44]; =27.2, p<0.01). STAs for oncology indications had lower positive recommendation rates than those for non-oncology indications (70% vs. 90%). The lower ‘recommendation’ rates for committee D persisted across oncology (A:65%, B:80%, C: 52%, D: 27%; =11.0, p =0.01) and non-oncology indications (A:81%, B:63%, C:65%, D:28%; =20.0, p<0.01). However, STAs conducted by Committee D were significantly more likely to receive ‘optimised’ recommendations (A:10%, B:13%, C:26%, D: 43%; =19.4, p<0.01) and when considering the rates of ‘recommended’ and ‘optimised’ outcomes compared to ‘only in research’ and ‘not recommended’ outcomes, no significant differences were found (A:85%, B: 83%, C:85%, D:70%; =4.5,p=0.21). Over time, rates of non-recommendations decreased similarly across committees.

CONCLUSIONS: STAs undertaken by NICE Appraisal Committee D was associated with a significantly lower rate of 'recommended' outcomes but tended to an ‘optimised’ recommendation significantly more than the other committees. Further research is needed to determine if this reflects any deviation in uniform implementation of NICE methodology between Committees.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2017-11, ISPOR Europe 2017, Glasgow, Scotland

Value in Health, Vol. 20, No. 9 (October 2017)

Code

PHP79

Topic

Health Policy & Regulatory, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Health Technology Assessment

Topic Subcategory

Approval & Labeling, Decision & Deliberative Processes, Health Care Research, Health Disparities & Equity, Hospital and Clinical Practices, Reimbursement & Access Policy

Disease

Multiple Diseases

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×