欧盟联合卫生技术评估中的疫苗评估指导原则》:为欧盟疫苗 HTA 法规做准备。

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Value in Health Pub Date : 2024-07-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.011
Nathalie Largeron, Paolo D'Agostino, Ruth Chapman, David Danko, Juhani Eskola, Philippe Godfroid, Gyorgyi Feldmajer, Riona Hanley, Gerard de Pouvourville, Maarten Postma, Joan Puig-Barberà, Kassandra Schaible, Ugne Sabale, Joe Schmitt, Chiara de Waure, Anna Vicere, Ekkehard Beck
{"title":"欧盟联合卫生技术评估中的疫苗评估指导原则》:为欧盟疫苗 HTA 法规做准备。","authors":"Nathalie Largeron, Paolo D'Agostino, Ruth Chapman, David Danko, Juhani Eskola, Philippe Godfroid, Gyorgyi Feldmajer, Riona Hanley, Gerard de Pouvourville, Maarten Postma, Joan Puig-Barberà, Kassandra Schaible, Ugne Sabale, Joe Schmitt, Chiara de Waure, Anna Vicere, Ekkehard Beck","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The appraisal of vaccines in the European Union (EU) currently involves many different decision-making bodies and processes. The objective of this study was to help inform the development of standardized methodology and vaccine-specific processes for use in the EU Regulation on health technology assessment (HTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Literature reviews and expert consultation were conducted to identify current practices and gaps related to vaccine appraisals and to develop guiding principles for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that significant variation exists across the EU Member States in the decision-making processes when clinically evaluating vaccines. Three guiding principles consisting of 13 recommendations were developed to help inform the development of decision-making frameworks for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines in the EU: (1) Support the creation of appropriate terminology and measurements for clinical appraisals of vaccines; (2) Develop inclusive, timely, and transparent vaccine appraisal processes to support stronger evidence generation for vaccine decision-making and appraisal; and (3) Improve the collection and interoperability of real-world data, including robust surveillance, to foster evidence generation and support the standardization of vaccine clinical appraisals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given the significance of vaccines for public health, there is an urgency to develop standardized and vaccine-specific methodologies and processes for use in the EU joint HTA framework. The proposed guiding principles could support the effective implementation of the EU Regulation on HTA for vaccines and have the potential to ensure consistent, transparent, and timely access to new vaccines in the EU.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guiding Principles for Evaluating Vaccines in Joint Health Technology Assessment in the European Union: Preparing for the EU's Regulation on HTA for Vaccines.\",\"authors\":\"Nathalie Largeron, Paolo D'Agostino, Ruth Chapman, David Danko, Juhani Eskola, Philippe Godfroid, Gyorgyi Feldmajer, Riona Hanley, Gerard de Pouvourville, Maarten Postma, Joan Puig-Barberà, Kassandra Schaible, Ugne Sabale, Joe Schmitt, Chiara de Waure, Anna Vicere, Ekkehard Beck\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The appraisal of vaccines in the European Union (EU) currently involves many different decision-making bodies and processes. The objective of this study was to help inform the development of standardized methodology and vaccine-specific processes for use in the EU Regulation on health technology assessment (HTA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Literature reviews and expert consultation were conducted to identify current practices and gaps related to vaccine appraisals and to develop guiding principles for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found that significant variation exists across the EU Member States in the decision-making processes when clinically evaluating vaccines. Three guiding principles consisting of 13 recommendations were developed to help inform the development of decision-making frameworks for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines in the EU: (1) Support the creation of appropriate terminology and measurements for clinical appraisals of vaccines; (2) Develop inclusive, timely, and transparent vaccine appraisal processes to support stronger evidence generation for vaccine decision-making and appraisal; and (3) Improve the collection and interoperability of real-world data, including robust surveillance, to foster evidence generation and support the standardization of vaccine clinical appraisals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Given the significance of vaccines for public health, there is an urgency to develop standardized and vaccine-specific methodologies and processes for use in the EU joint HTA framework. The proposed guiding principles could support the effective implementation of the EU Regulation on HTA for vaccines and have the potential to ensure consistent, transparent, and timely access to new vaccines in the EU.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.011\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.06.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:欧盟(EU)目前对疫苗的评估涉及许多不同的决策机构和流程。本研究的目的是为欧盟卫生技术评估 (HTA) 法规中使用的标准化方法和疫苗特定流程的开发提供信息:方法:进行文献综述和专家咨询,以确定与疫苗评估相关的现行做法和差距,并制定疫苗联合临床评估的指导原则:结果:我们发现欧盟各成员国在疫苗临床评估的决策过程中存在很大差异。为帮助欧盟制定疫苗联合临床评估的决策框架,我们制定了由 13 项建议组成的三项指导原则:(1)支持为疫苗临床评估创建适当的术语和衡量标准;(2)制定包容、及时和透明的疫苗评估流程,为疫苗决策和评估提供更有力的证据支持;以及(3)改善真实世界数据的收集和互操作性,包括强有力的监测,以促进证据的生成并支持疫苗临床评估的标准化:鉴于疫苗对公共卫生的重要性,迫切需要制定标准化的疫苗专用方法和流程,供欧盟联合 HTA 框架使用。建议的指导原则可支持欧盟《疫苗 HTA 法规》的有效实施,并有可能确保欧盟对新疫苗的一致、透明和及时使用。
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
Guiding Principles for Evaluating Vaccines in Joint Health Technology Assessment in the European Union: Preparing for the EU's Regulation on HTA for Vaccines.

Objectives: The appraisal of vaccines in the European Union (EU) currently involves many different decision-making bodies and processes. The objective of this study was to help inform the development of standardized methodology and vaccine-specific processes for use in the EU Regulation on health technology assessment (HTA).

Methods: Literature reviews and expert consultation were conducted to identify current practices and gaps related to vaccine appraisals and to develop guiding principles for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines.

Results: We found that significant variation exists across the EU Member States in the decision-making processes when clinically evaluating vaccines. Three guiding principles consisting of 13 recommendations were developed to help inform the development of decision-making frameworks for the joint clinical assessment of vaccines in the EU: (1) Support the creation of appropriate terminology and measurements for clinical appraisals of vaccines; (2) Develop inclusive, timely, and transparent vaccine appraisal processes to support stronger evidence generation for vaccine decision-making and appraisal; and (3) Improve the collection and interoperability of real-world data, including robust surveillance, to foster evidence generation and support the standardization of vaccine clinical appraisals.

Conclusions: Given the significance of vaccines for public health, there is an urgency to develop standardized and vaccine-specific methodologies and processes for use in the EU joint HTA framework. The proposed guiding principles could support the effective implementation of the EU Regulation on HTA for vaccines and have the potential to ensure consistent, transparent, and timely access to new vaccines in the EU.

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
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
期刊最新文献
Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials with External Controls from Real-World Data: a Systematic Literature Review and Comparison to European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice. Author Reply to "Cost-of/Burden-of-Illness Studies: Steps Backward?" Author Reply. Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
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