Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: An emerging alternative for assessing the value of orphan medicinal products

Regulatory Rapporteur

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 12-15

  Irwin, John ^a   Peacock, Sophie ^b  

^a NPS Pharmaceuticals Inc   (United Kingdom)

^b Ogilvy Healthworld Market Access ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Access; Affordability; Conflicting criteria; Cost; Health technology assessment (HTA); Multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA); Multiple criteria decisionmaking (MCDM); Orphan medicinal products (OMPs); Orphan medicines; Orphan status; Rare diseases; Value

Indexed keywords

ORPHAN DRUG;

ALGORITHM; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ETHICAL DECISION MAKING; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MULTI CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84918791673     PISSN: 17428955     EISSN: None     Source Type: Trade Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. EU Regulation (EC) No 141/2000. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2000:018:0001:0005:en:PDF (accessed 28 October 2014).
2. European Commission. Orphan Medical products. Available at http:// ec.europa.eu/health/human-use/orphan-medicines/index_en.htm (accessed 28 October 2014).
3. R Baltussen, L Niessen. 'Priority setting of health interventions; the need for multi-criteria decision analysis', Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2006, 4:14.
4. J Dodgson, M Spackman, A Pearman, L Phillips. 'Multi Criteria Analysis: A Manual', Department for Communities and Local Government, London, 2009. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads /system/uploads/ attachment_data /file/7612/1132618.pdf (accessed 28 October 2014).
5. P Kavanos, A Angelis. 'Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for Value Based Assessment of New Medical Technologies: A Conceptual Framework', LSE Health Working Paper, 33/2013.
6. J Sussex, P Rollet, M Garau et al. 'Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Value Orphan Medicines', OHE Research Paper 13/03, 2013.
7. W Hughes-Wilson, A Palma, A Schuurman, S Simoens. 'Paying for the Orphan Drug System: break or bend? Is it time for a new evaluation system for payers in Europe to take account of new rare disease treatments?' Orphanet Journal of Rare Disease, 7:74, 2012.
8. European Medicines Agency. Benefit-Risk Methodology Project, 2009.
9. European Medicines Agency. Benefit-risk Methodology Project Work Package 4 Report: Benefit-risk tools and processes, 2012. Available at http:// www.ema.europa.eu/docs /en_GB/document_library/Report/2012/03/ WC500123819.pdf (accessed 28 October 2014).
10. M Drummond, JFP Bridges, A Muhlbacher, MJ Ijzerman. 'Identification, weighting and prioritisation of multiple endpoints for comparative effectiveness research - what have we learned from Germany?' ISPOR Panel, 2011.
11. College voor Zorgverzekeringen. Kosteneffectivteit in de zorg, CVZ 2013.
12. D Husereau, M Boucher, H Noorani. 'Priority setting for health technology assessment at CADTH', Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH), 2010.
13. National Health Service. 'Decision-making framework for making recommendations on national commissioning', NHS Specialised Services, 2010.
14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). 'Interim Process and Methods of the Highly Specialised Technologies Programme', NICE, 2013. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/About/what-we-do/ NICE-guidance/NICE-highly-specialised-technologies-guidance/Highly- Specialised-Technologies-Interim-methods-and-process-statements.pdf (accessed 28 October 2014).
15. Press release inaugural meeting of the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (EMEA/COMP/5/00): Status report on the implementation of the European Parliament legislation on Orphan Medicinal Products (EMEA/738/01/EN).