美国食品和药物管理局批准的细胞和基因疗法成本效益证据回顾。

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY Human gene therapy Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-09 DOI:10.1089/hum.2023.186
Sumaya Abuloha, Shu Niu, Darlene Adirika, Benjamin P Harvey, Mikael Svensson
{"title":"美国食品和药物管理局批准的细胞和基因疗法成本效益证据回顾。","authors":"Sumaya Abuloha, Shu Niu, Darlene Adirika, Benjamin P Harvey, Mikael Svensson","doi":"10.1089/hum.2023.186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cell and gene therapy (CGT) innovations have provided several significant breakthroughs in recent years. However, CGTs often come with a high upfront cost, raising questions about patient access, affordability, and long-term value. This study reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies that have attempted to assess the long-term value of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CGTs. Two reviewers independently searched the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry to identify all studies for FDA-approved CGTs, per January 2023. A data extraction template was used to summarize the evidence in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and essential modeling assumptions, combined with a template to extract the adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The review identified 26 CEA studies for seven CGTs. Around half of the base-case cost-effectiveness results indicated that the cost per QALY was below $100,000-$150,000, often used as a threshold for reasonable cost-effectiveness in the United States. However, the results varied substantially across studies for the same treatment, ranging from being considered very cost-effective to far from cost-effective. Most models were based on data from single-arm trials with relatively short follow-ups, and different long-term extrapolations between studies caused large differences in the modeled cost-effectiveness results. In sum, this review showed that, despite the high upfront costs, many CGTs have cost-effectiveness evidence that can support long-term value. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty regarding long-term value exists because so much of the modeling results are driven by uncertain extrapolations beyond the clinical trial data.</p>","PeriodicalId":13007,"journal":{"name":"Human gene therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Evidence for FDA-Approved Cell and Gene Therapies.\",\"authors\":\"Sumaya Abuloha, Shu Niu, Darlene Adirika, Benjamin P Harvey, Mikael Svensson\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/hum.2023.186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cell and gene therapy (CGT) innovations have provided several significant breakthroughs in recent years. However, CGTs often come with a high upfront cost, raising questions about patient access, affordability, and long-term value. This study reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies that have attempted to assess the long-term value of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CGTs. Two reviewers independently searched the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry to identify all studies for FDA-approved CGTs, per January 2023. A data extraction template was used to summarize the evidence in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and essential modeling assumptions, combined with a template to extract the adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The review identified 26 CEA studies for seven CGTs. Around half of the base-case cost-effectiveness results indicated that the cost per QALY was below $100,000-$150,000, often used as a threshold for reasonable cost-effectiveness in the United States. However, the results varied substantially across studies for the same treatment, ranging from being considered very cost-effective to far from cost-effective. Most models were based on data from single-arm trials with relatively short follow-ups, and different long-term extrapolations between studies caused large differences in the modeled cost-effectiveness results. In sum, this review showed that, despite the high upfront costs, many CGTs have cost-effectiveness evidence that can support long-term value. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty regarding long-term value exists because so much of the modeling results are driven by uncertain extrapolations beyond the clinical trial data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13007,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human gene therapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human gene therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2023.186\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human gene therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/hum.2023.186","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,细胞和基因疗法创新取得了多项重大突破。然而,细胞和基因疗法往往需要高昂的前期费用,从而引发了有关患者使用、经济承受能力和长期价值的问题。本研究回顾了试图评估经 FDA 批准的细胞和基因疗法长期价值的成本效益分析研究。两名审查员独立检索了塔夫茨医学中心成本效益分析注册表,以确定 2023 年 1 月之前所有关于 FDA 批准的细胞和基因疗法的研究。采用数据提取模板,根据以每质量调整生命年(QALY)成本表示的增量成本效益比和基本建模假设总结证据,并结合模板提取是否符合《卫生经济评估综合报告标准》(CHEERS)检查表。审查确定了七种细胞和基因疗法的 26 项 CEA 研究。大约一半的基础案例成本效益结果表明,每QALY成本低于100,000-150,000美元,这在美国通常被用作合理成本效益的阈值。然而,对于同一治疗方法,不同研究的结果差异很大,有的认为非常具有成本效益,有的则认为远不具有成本效益。大多数模型都是基于随访时间相对较短的单臂试验数据,不同研究之间的长期推断不同,导致模型的成本效益结果差异很大。总之,本综述表明,尽管前期成本较高,但许多细胞和基因疗法的成本效益证据可以支持其长期价值。尽管如此,长期价值仍存在很大的不确定性,因为许多建模结果都是由临床试验数据之外的不确定推断所驱动的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A Review of the Cost-Effectiveness Evidence for FDA-Approved Cell and Gene Therapies.

Cell and gene therapy (CGT) innovations have provided several significant breakthroughs in recent years. However, CGTs often come with a high upfront cost, raising questions about patient access, affordability, and long-term value. This study reviewed cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies that have attempted to assess the long-term value of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CGTs. Two reviewers independently searched the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry to identify all studies for FDA-approved CGTs, per January 2023. A data extraction template was used to summarize the evidence in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and essential modeling assumptions, combined with a template to extract the adherence to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The review identified 26 CEA studies for seven CGTs. Around half of the base-case cost-effectiveness results indicated that the cost per QALY was below $100,000-$150,000, often used as a threshold for reasonable cost-effectiveness in the United States. However, the results varied substantially across studies for the same treatment, ranging from being considered very cost-effective to far from cost-effective. Most models were based on data from single-arm trials with relatively short follow-ups, and different long-term extrapolations between studies caused large differences in the modeled cost-effectiveness results. In sum, this review showed that, despite the high upfront costs, many CGTs have cost-effectiveness evidence that can support long-term value. Nonetheless, substantial uncertainty regarding long-term value exists because so much of the modeling results are driven by uncertain extrapolations beyond the clinical trial data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human gene therapy
Human gene therapy 医学-生物工程与应用微生物
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
131
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Gene Therapy is the premier, multidisciplinary journal covering all aspects of gene therapy. The Journal publishes in-depth coverage of DNA, RNA, and cell therapies by delivering the latest breakthroughs in research and technologies. Human Gene Therapy provides a central forum for scientific and clinical information, including ethical, legal, regulatory, social, and commercial issues, which enables the advancement and progress of therapeutic procedures leading to improved patient outcomes, and ultimately, to curing diseases.
期刊最新文献
Inhalation of SP-101 Followed by Inhaled Doxorubicin Results in Robust and Durable hCFTRΔR Transgene Expression in the Airways of Wild-Type and Cystic Fibrosis Ferrets. Unconstrained precision mitochondrial genome editing with αDdCBEs. SP-101, A Novel Adeno-Associated Virus Gene Therapy for the Treatment of Cystic Fibrosis, Mediates Functional Correction of Primary Human Airway Epithelia From Donors with Cystic Fibrosis. Lipid Nanoparticles for Nucleic Acid Delivery Beyond the Liver. Adeno-Associated Virus Vectors-a Target of Cellular and Humoral Immunity-are Expanding Their Reach Toward Hematopoietic Stem Cell Modification and Immunotherapies.
×
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:481959085
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