The association between European Medicines Agency approval and Health Technology Assessment recommendations Iga Lipska 1,2, Anke Hövels 2, Neil McAuslane.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Pricing and paying for medicines Ad Antonisse AstraZeneca BV April 2005.
Advertisements

Prioritisation workshop: how can we meet the Strategy to 2020 target and what does it mean for individual review groups? DAVID TOVEY, RUTH FOXLEE AND SERA.
Drug appraisal organisations: A comparison of SMC and NICE John Ford, University of Aberdeen Norman Waugh, Warwick Evidence Pawana Sharma, University of.
Merton V. Smith, Ph.D., J.D. Director International Programs Center for Veterinary Medicine U.S. Food and Drug Administration Governance of Veterinary.
Portugal Economic Evaluation Applied to Decision Making Isaura Vieira INFARMED, I.P. – National Authority for Medicines and Health Products I Pan-American.
© Safeguarding public health Innovation; issues for regulators, society and industry. Overview of Conference topics Alasdair Breckenridge Medicines and.
The evolving role of real-world evidence to support policy and practice CADTH 2015.
ABPI Scotland: Medicines in Scotland. Membership body of the Pharmaceutical Industry – statutory negotiating body Represents majority of research based.
Reimbursement & Pricing in Turkey
What does it take to make online deliberation happen? -A comparative analysis of 28 online discussion forums Martin Karlsson PhD Student in.
Michelle Boudreau, Vice President, Private Markets, March 11, 2015 Presentation to CADA.
Biopharmaceutical Regulatory Requirements 40. Marketing Authorization for New Chemical Entities Health Canada’s (HC) Therapeutic Products Directorate.
INTRODUCTION TO RA.
Benchmarking Canadian HTA Agency and Provincial Payer Decision-Making Allen N. 1,2, Liberti L. 2, Salek M.S. 1 1 Centre for socioeconomic research, School.
The competition between innovative and generic pharmaceutical companies intensified in the last decades. The models created by innovative pharmaceutical.
ISPOR POLAND CHAPTER Polish Society of Pharmacoeconomics (PTFe )
International Pharmaceutical Regulation and Compliance Comparisons and Contrasts Lester M. Crawford, PhD.
Results The final report was presented to NICE and published by NICE and WHO. See
Artur Mierzecki 1 ODHIN Optimizing Delivery of Health care INterventions ODHIN Study baseline results of screening and brief interventions for alcohol.
Best Archival Practice in the Regulation of Medicines: Work on the Guidelines for Agencies for Medicinal Products Ph.D. Arian Rajh Agency for Medicinal.
Current Challenges and Future Developments in HTA in the UK Frances Macdonald, 23 rd September 2008 (A personal, Industry View)
‘Linkage’ & other TRIPS+ provisions: a public health perspective Karin Timmermans World Health Organization Seminar “Data exclusivity and patent Bangkok.
The Geography of HIV in Harris County, Texas,
WHO Workshop on Assessment of Bioequivalence Data Addis Ababa, 31. August – 3. September 2010 Selection of comparators Compiled by Jan Welink WHO Workshop.
The Dilemma of Diclofenac Injection for the Iranian Health System Authors: Shalviri G, Cheraghali M, Gholami K, Kamali E, Daryabari N Institution: Ministry.
GLOBAL MARKET TRENDS The view from Pharma By Peter Knauer Executive Partner, Alliance Partnership.
Process mapping of registration to reimbursement for new pharmaceuticals in UK.
European Patients’ Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Aspects of pharmacovigilance: Post-Authorisation Efficacy Studies (PAES)
1 PRIORITY MEDICINES FOR EUROPE AND THE WORLD Barriers to Pharmaceutical Innovation Richard Laing EDM/PAR WHO.
                 HTA: political and ethical perspectives Presentation to Forum on Pharmaceutical Policy in the Enlarged Europe at 7 th.
An agency of the European Union Principles for the assessment and authorisation of antimicrobials in the EU VICH Outreach Forum, October 2015 Presented.
Compassionate use programs and the European regulatory system Filip Josephson M.D., Ph.D. Clinical Assessor.
Slide 1 The contribution of a world-class regulatory environment to the future of the industry in Ireland Pat O’Mahony Chief Executive, Irish Medicines.
A capacity building programme for patient representatives
MEP Interest Group on Brain, Mind and Pain
EudraVigilance.
Evaluating Different Physician’s Prescribing Preference Based Instrumental Variables in the Study of Beta2-Agonist Use and the Risk of Acute Myocardial.
Figure 3. BLA and NME Drugs Sponsored by US companies ( )
Circulating Melanoma Cells (CMCs) in Mucosal and Uveal Melanomas
The percentage of NASs approved by CDER
9/17/2018 Meeting local HTA requirements Challenges for the Pharma HTA Statistician Marie-Ange PAGET Project Statistician – Lilly France EFSPI meeting.
Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. doi: /nrclinonc
NASs approval time by therapeutic area:
Median 25th and 75th percentile
Median approval time for new active substances approved by ICH agencies by approval year Methodology For each new active substance (NAS) approved between.
Comparing HTA recommendations
خشنه اتره اهورهه مزدا شيوۀ ارائه مقاله 17/10/1388.
Median Box : 25th and 75th percentiles
Percentage Key Message
Median submission gap, median approval time and percentage approved as expedited for new active substances (NASs) approved by six authorities:
Median time to internationalisation
New active substance median approval time for six regulatory authorities in Key messages The last decade, , saw a continuation.
Comparison of median approval time of NASs by year of submission vs
New active substances approved by EMA and FDA over 10 years
EMA: The European Medicines Agency
Building quality in HTA process and decision making
Rollout time breakdown: 24 common NASs in 7 jurisdictions
INTERNATIONALISATION – FOCUS ON EMA AND FDA
Median, Box : 25th and 75th percentiles
Assessment routes and timelines in Australia (2011)
Comparison of median approval time of NASs by year of submission vs
Эмийн гаж нөлөөг бүртгэн мэдээлэх, ач холбогдол
Are agencies interested in adaptive licensing?
Out of the 52 NASs approved by all six authorities during :
Median times to submission and licensing for 70 new active substances approved in five markets from 1997 to 2010 Note: EMA approval.
2019 CIRS survey: Methodologies to improve decision-making documentation during medicines development and review – gap analysis Do you think your current.
Research programmes funded by organisations in Africa in 2015.
Process mapping of registration to reimbursement for new pharmaceuticals in UK Description: A systematic methodology was developed in order to create the.
Assessment routes and timelines
Interconnection of good practices: from development to distribution
Presentation transcript:

The association between European Medicines Agency approval and Health Technology Assessment recommendations Iga Lipska 1,2, Anke Hövels 2, Neil McAuslane 1 1 Center for Innovation in Regulatory Science, London, UK 2 Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Division Pharmacoepidemiology & Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht, The Netherlands Abstract Objective To find the association between duration of the process of marketing authorization (MA) approval at European Medicines Agency (EMA) and health technology assessment (HTA) recommendations in European Union (EU) countries Methods EMA MA timing for new active substances (NASs) during were analyzed based on publicly available information. HTA recommendations (positive, positive with restrictions, negative, not assessed) issued for the same medications in 6 EU countries (SMC, Scotland; AOTM Poland; CVZ, The Netherlands; HAS, France; NICE, UK; INFARMED, Portugal) were also analyzed based on public information. Hypothesizing that EMA approval process timing might be an indicator of complexity and potential issues in the dossier, the potential for longer EMA approval times being associated with less beneficial HTA recommendation was investigated. Analyses were performed per country as EMA decisions are centralized but HTA recommendations are taken independently by member states Results 86 NAS were approved by EMA in ; mean time of approval was 460 days (median 423 days). In total, we expected 516 HTA recommendations (86 drugs assessed by 6 organizations). We found in total 138 positive, 77 positive with restrictions, 67 negative recommendations. 234 expected recommendations for 6 HTA included in this study were not assessed (45,3% of all expected recommendations) (Figure 1). The association between HTA recommendation and approval time (in days) was analyzed using Spearman’s rho rank correlation (Table 1). There was statistically significant negative correlation between approval time and HTA recommendation in the Netherlands (Table 2, Figure 2). More time needed for EMA approval was associated with less beneficial HTA recommendations. Correlations in other countries were not statistically significant. Conclusions Our research indicates that a longer EMA approval process is associated with a less beneficial HTA recommendation in the Netherlands. Further research is required to determine whether this indicates that the same issues that cause delays at EMA are also problematic at HTA authorities Conclusions Our research indicates that a longer EMA approval process is associated with a less beneficial HTA recommendation in the Netherlands. Further research is required to determine whether this indicates that the same issues that cause delays at EMA are also problematic at HTA authorities Figure 1: HTA recommendations of NASs approved by EMA in Figure 2: HTA recommendations in the Netherlands rhop-valuen Scotland Poland Netherlands * France England Portugal Total-0.124* Table 1: Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients between EMA approval time and HTA recommendations. rho – Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient; p – value – statistical significance; n – number of drugs assessed HTA recommendations in the Netherlands Approval time/days negativepositive with restrictionspositive %133,3%266,7% %240,0%360,0% %444,4%555,6% ,4%538,5%646,2% %480,0%120,0% ,3% ,3%228,6%457,1% ,0%125,0% %150,0% ,0%00%0 Table 2: HTA recommendations in the Netherlands Center for Innovation in Regulatory Science