Exploring Heterogeneity in Histology-Independent Technologies and the Implications for Cost-Effectiveness

Peter Murphy, Lindsay Claxton, Robert Hodgson, David Glynn, Lucy Beresford, Matthew Walton, Alexis Llewellyn, Stephen Palmer and Sofia Dias
Additional contact information
Peter Murphy: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Lindsay Claxton: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Robert Hodgson: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
David Glynn: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Lucy Beresford: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Matthew Walton: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Alexis Llewellyn: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Stephen Palmer: Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK
Sofia Dias: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, Yorkshire, UK

Medical Decision Making, 2021, vol. 41, issue 2, 165-178

Abstract: Background The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and a number of international health technology assessment agencies have recently undertaken appraisals of histology-independent technologies (HITs). A strong and untested assumption inherent in the submissions included identical clinical response across all tumour histologies, including new histologies unrepresented in the trial. Challenging this assumption and exploring the potential for heterogeneity has the potential to impact upon cost-effectiveness. Method Using published response data for a HIT, a Bayesian hierarchical model (BHM) was used to identify heterogeneity in response and to estimate the probability of response for each histology included in single-arm studies, which informed the submission for the HIT, larotrectinib. The probability of response for a new histology was estimated. Results were inputted into a simplified response-based economic model using hypothetical parameters. Histology-independent and histology-specific incremental cost-effectiveness ratios accounting for heterogeneity were generated. Results The results of the BHM show considerable heterogeneity in response rates across histologies. The predicted probability of response estimated by the BHM is 60.9% (95% credible interval 16.0; 91.8%), lower than the naively pooled probability of 74.5%. A mean response probability of 56.9% (0.2; 99.9%) is predicted for an unrepresented histology. Based on the economic analysis, the probability of the hypothetical HIT being cost-effective under the assumption of identical response is 78%. Allowing for heterogeneity, the probability of various approval decisions being cost-effective ranges from 93% to 11%. Conclusions Central to the challenge of reimbursement of HITs is the potential for heterogeneity. This study illustrates how heterogeneity in clinical effectiveness can result in highly variable and uncertain estimates of cost-effectiveness. This analysis can help improve understanding of the consequences of histology-independent versus histology-specific decisions.

Keywords: bayesian hierarchical model; economic evaluation; heterogeneity; histology-independent (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20980327 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:41:y:2021:i:2:p:165-178

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20980327

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().