Comparison of post-authorisation measures from regulatory authorities with additional evidence requirements from the HTA body in Germany – are additional data requirements by the Federal Joint Committee justified?

Jörg Ruof (), Thomas Staab (), Charalabos-Markos Dintsios (), Jakob Schröter () and Friedrich Wilhelm Schwartz ()
Additional contact information
Jörg Ruof: Roche Pharma AG
Thomas Staab: Roche Pharma AG
Charalabos-Markos Dintsios: Heinrich Heine University
Jakob Schröter: Baden-Württemberg Cooperative State University
Friedrich Wilhelm Schwartz: Medical School of Hanover

Health Economics Review, 2016, vol. 6, issue 1, 1-11

Abstract: Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to compare post-authorisation measures (PAMs) from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) with data requests in fixed-termed conditional appraisals of early benefit assessments from the German Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). Methods Medicinal products with completed benefit assessments during an assessment period of 3.5 years were considered. PAMs extracted from European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) were compared with data requests issued by the G-BA in the context of conditional appraisals. Results Twenty conditional appraisals (19 products) and 34 EPARs containing PAMs (33 products) were identified. Data categories (efficacy, safety, etc.), data types (type of study required to address the request) and clarity of requests were determined. Conditional appraisals disproportionately focused on oncology products (13/19 products with conditional appraisals vs. 14/33 products with PAMs). No clear rationale for the G-BA issuing conditional appraisals could be identified in public sources. Both EMA and G-BA requested mainly efficacy and safety data (44/54 and 23/35 categories requested, respectively); however, 28/35 G-BA data requirements went beyond requests made by the EMA. Almost half of the G-BA requests (9/20), but no PAMs, were unclear, and no methodological guidance for fulfilling the data requirements was provided by the G-BA. Conclusions Better alignment between data requests from regulatory authorities and health technology assessment bodies is strongly recommended.

Keywords: Marketing authorisation; Post-authorisation measure; (Early) benefit assessment; Conditional appraisal; EMA; G-BA (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s13561-016-0124-4 Abstract (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:spr:hecrev:v:6:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1186_s13561-016-0124-4

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/journal/13561

DOI: 10.1186/s13561-016-0124-4

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics Review is currently edited by J. Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg

More articles in Health Economics Review from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().