Avoiding Error and Finding the Right Balance in European Health Technology Assessments: Insights Generated by the European Access Academy.

Q2 Medicine Journal of market access & health policy Pub Date : 2025-02-10 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.3390/jmahp13010006
Elaine Julian, Tom Belleman, Maria João Garcia, Maureen Rutten-van Mölken, Robin Doeswijk, Rosa Giuliani, Bernhard J Wörmann, Daniel Widmer, Patrick Tilleul, Ruben Casado Arroyo, Valentina Strammiello, Kate Morgan, Marcus Guardian, Michael Ermisch, Renato Bernardini, Fabrizio Gianfrate, Stefano Capri, Carin A Uyl-de Groot, Mira Pavlovic, Jörg Ruof
{"title":"Avoiding Error and Finding the Right Balance in European Health Technology Assessments: Insights Generated by the European Access Academy.","authors":"Elaine Julian, Tom Belleman, Maria João Garcia, Maureen Rutten-van Mölken, Robin Doeswijk, Rosa Giuliani, Bernhard J Wörmann, Daniel Widmer, Patrick Tilleul, Ruben Casado Arroyo, Valentina Strammiello, Kate Morgan, Marcus Guardian, Michael Ermisch, Renato Bernardini, Fabrizio Gianfrate, Stefano Capri, Carin A Uyl-de Groot, Mira Pavlovic, Jörg Ruof","doi":"10.3390/jmahp13010006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We examined four potential challenges for the implementation of the European Union (EU) Regulation 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR): interaction with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), expert input, the interface of European health technology assessment (EU HTA) joint procedures with those within Member States, and the management of conflict of interest. This research aims to explore how to address these challenges in a balanced manner and prioritise key actions for effective collaboration in the context of the EU HTA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The methodology included a pre-convention survey among relevant stakeholders as well as working groups and the plenary ranking of discussion outcomes at the European Access Academy (EAA) Spring Convention 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the survey, 65.5% of respondents indicated that experts are currently not sufficiently included in the upcoming joint scientific consultations and clinical assessments; only 37.9% suggested that the EU HTA joint procedures would accelerate national appraisal decision-making, and 58.6% believed that the principles of 'transparency' and 'competency' are balanced in the EU HTA position on conflict of interest. The top priority action points identified in the working groups were the involvement of the best available expertise, the early and inclusive involvement of experts, strengthened early scientific dialogue, and the fostering of the political willingness/financial support of EU Member States to increase capacities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The key topics identified were an approach to conflict of interest that balances transparency obligations and the need for expertise, strengthens the involvement of clinical and patient experts, intensifies early interaction between the EMA and EU HTA, and increases the involvement of the EU Member States.</p>","PeriodicalId":73811,"journal":{"name":"Journal of market access & health policy","volume":"13 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11843953/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of market access & health policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jmahp13010006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We examined four potential challenges for the implementation of the European Union (EU) Regulation 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (EU HTAR): interaction with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), expert input, the interface of European health technology assessment (EU HTA) joint procedures with those within Member States, and the management of conflict of interest. This research aims to explore how to address these challenges in a balanced manner and prioritise key actions for effective collaboration in the context of the EU HTA.

Methods: The methodology included a pre-convention survey among relevant stakeholders as well as working groups and the plenary ranking of discussion outcomes at the European Access Academy (EAA) Spring Convention 2024.

Results: In the survey, 65.5% of respondents indicated that experts are currently not sufficiently included in the upcoming joint scientific consultations and clinical assessments; only 37.9% suggested that the EU HTA joint procedures would accelerate national appraisal decision-making, and 58.6% believed that the principles of 'transparency' and 'competency' are balanced in the EU HTA position on conflict of interest. The top priority action points identified in the working groups were the involvement of the best available expertise, the early and inclusive involvement of experts, strengthened early scientific dialogue, and the fostering of the political willingness/financial support of EU Member States to increase capacities.

Conclusions: The key topics identified were an approach to conflict of interest that balances transparency obligations and the need for expertise, strengthens the involvement of clinical and patient experts, intensifies early interaction between the EMA and EU HTA, and increases the involvement of the EU Member States.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在欧洲卫生技术评估中避免错误并找到适当的平衡:由欧洲获取学院产生的见解。
背景:我们研究了实施欧盟(EU)卫生技术评估条例2021/2282 (EU HTAR)的四个潜在挑战:与欧洲药品管理局(EMA)的互动、专家意见、欧洲卫生技术评估(EU HTA)与成员国联合程序的接口,以及利益冲突的管理。本研究旨在探讨如何以平衡的方式应对这些挑战,并在欧盟卫生政策背景下优先考虑有效合作的关键行动。方法:该方法包括对相关利益相关者和工作组进行会前调查,并对欧洲接入学院(EAA) 2024年春季会议的讨论结果进行全体排名。结果:在调查中,65.5%的受访者表示目前专家没有充分参与即将到来的联合科学会诊和临床评估;只有37.9%的人认为欧盟HTA联合程序将加速国家评估决策,58.6%的人认为欧盟HTA在利益冲突问题上的立场是平衡“透明度”和“能力”原则的。工作组确定的最优先行动点是利用现有的最佳专门知识,专家的早期和包容性参与,加强早期科学对话,以及促进欧盟成员国的政治意愿/财政支持,以提高能力。结论:确定的关键主题是平衡透明度义务和专业知识需求的利益冲突方法,加强临床和患者专家的参与,加强EMA和EU HTA之间的早期互动,并增加欧盟成员国的参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Optimising Investment in Health Innovations in Europe. Adopting a Societal Perspective in Health-Economic Evaluation: Analysis of Nine HTA Methodological Guidelines on How to Integrate Societal Costs. Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Cancer: Unveiling Parallels in Epidemiology, Clinical Pathways, and Therapeutic Strategies. A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Sentio Bone Conduction Hearing Implant System in the Australian Healthcare Setting. Evaluating [18F]-DCFPyL for Detecting Prostate Cancer Recurrence: A Cost-Consequence Comparison with Alternative PET Radiotracers in Spain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1