Assessing antibiotic value: Two papers on antibiotic-specific gaps in traditional Health Technology Assessments

Dear All:

Among various paradoxes that surround antibiotic development, the challenge for health technology assessment (HTA) is often implied but to my knowledge has as yet only infrequently been formally discussed.

As one step towards filling this gap, the London-based Office of Health Economics (OHE) released a paper a few days ago that provides a detailed look at this problem (the link to the paper and a key quote are below my signature). The value of this paper lies in their systematic survey of how the elements typically considered by HTA overlook the many values that an antibiotic has to society as a whole:
​​

Benefits typically included in traditional HTABenefits not typically included in traditional HTA
Health gainTransmission value
Unmet NeedInsurance value
Cost offsetsDiversity value
Productivity benefitsNovel action value
Enablement value
Spectrum value

From the OHE paper.

A further contribution to this area is coming from a team led by Ramanan Laxminaryan (DRIVE-AB and CDDEP). As yet out only in abstract form (see below), the work by Leporowski et al. analyzes gaps in HTA approaches based on case studies. As noted in their analysis of the HTA process for 5 recent antibiotics, “The health technology assessments are based on clinical trial data and simple economic models that focus primarily on the direct treatment benefit of the drugs to patients.”

The challenge highlighted by both of these papers, can be summarized by noting that antibiotics are like fire extinguishers in that their best use is often in their non-use. Based on my understanding of economics, the problem is technically one of failure to recognize the positive externalities of antibiotics – as with fire extinguishers, the very existence of antibiotics has value for you, even if you don’t ever personally need them.

I don’t yet know how we as a community are going to solve this problem, but simply being able to talk about it is a good step!

All best wishes,

–jr

John H. Rex, MD | Chief Medical Officer, F2G Ltd. | Chief Strategy Officer, CARB-X | Expert-in-Residence, Wellcome Trust
Follow me on Twitter: @JohnRex_NewAbx

Online OHE paper:

2016 abstract by Leporowski et al.: 16th Biennial European Conference, Society for Medical Decision-Making, June 12 – 14, 2016, London, UK

Link: https://smdm.confex.com/smdm/16BEC/webprogram/Paper9957.html

1C-5 REVIEW OF THE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PROCESS FOR ANTIBIOTICS IN SELECT EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
Monday, June 13, 2016: 12:15

Axel Leporowski1, Abigail Colson2, Alec Morton2 and Ramanan Laxminarayan3, (1)University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg, Germany, (2)University of Strathclyde, Department of Management Science, Glasgow, United Kingdom, (3)Center for Disease Dynamics, Economics & Policy, Washington, DC

Purpose: It has been claimed that health technology assessment agencies do not take into account the full range of values associated with antibiotics when making reimbursement and pricing recommendations. In this paper we seek to document the types of evidence and value considered by European health technology assessment agencies when making recommendations about antibiotics.

Method(s): We studied five antibiotics that have gone through a health technology assessment process in at least two European countries since 2010: fidaxomicin, aztreonam, ceftaroline fosamil, tigecycline, and colistimethate sodium. We selected the drugs to include a mix of new technologies and reformulations of older products. For each antibiotic, we identified every report from a health technology assessment body publicly available in English, Spanish, German, or Dutch. We systematically reviewed the reports to identify the evidence, sources of value, and other factors the agency considered in the health technology assessment. We supplemented this review by interviewing the pharmaceutical companies that developed the products to collect additional information about the health technology assessment process and its data and modelling requirements.

Result(s): We found health technology assessments from at least two agencies for each product. Fidaxomicin was the most widely studied product with reports. The health technology assessments are based on clinical trial data and simple economic models that focus primarily on the direct treatment benefit of the drugs to patients. The threat of antibiotic resistance was mentioned irregularly. The assessments did not consider the value of antibiotics in enabling surgeries and other procedures, the insurance value of having an approved antibiotic ready when a new resistant outbreak emerges, or the diversity value of having multiple drugs with different modes of action available for a given infection.

Conclusion(s): Current health technology assessment practices do not encapsulate the full value of antibiotics. Ignoring the types of value unique to antibiotics may result in their being undervalued, which could make it less attractive for pharmaceutical companies to invest in research and development of new antibiotic. There is a need for simple modelling frameworks that can better capture the true economic value of antibiotics

Share

Impact of PASTEUR: 9.9m lives saved, ROI of 125:1

Impact of PASTEUR: 9.9m lives saved, ROI of 125:1 Dear All (and with thanks to Kevin Outterson for being lead author on this newsletter), (wonkish alert on this one … refresh your coffee and dig in!) The Center for Global Development have released a blog post and a paper estimating the potential impact of the PASTEUR Act.

Five FDA RFPs! Antifungal animal models, MIC breakpoints, and more!

Dear All, I just today learned that FDA have posted their FY 2023 funding opportunities. All the details are on this webpage and I’m just going to reproduce the text below my signature for your reference. I’ll also add a few details in italics. Lots of good opportunities here! –jr John H. Rex, MD |

WAAW! Must-Read Article, A Quiz, A Video, A Call to Action

Notes: Newsflash … BARDA have opened their long-running BAA-18-100-SOL-00003 to include support for antifungal agents. Search for “antifungal” in the posted .pdf to find the text. The first deadline for proposals is 15 Dec 2022 and further deadlines will doubtless follow: as shown on page 9, this BAA has offered 4 deadlines/year since 2018!  Dear All, In

Fireside Chat with AMR Action Fund CIO Martin Heidecker

Dear All, Ahead of World Antimicrobial Awareness Week, I sat down with AMR Action Fund Chief Investment Officer Martin Heidecker for a Fireside Chat. It was a fabulous conversation that covered everything from how the Fund’s investment process works to what it’s looking for in portfolio companies to broader investment trends in the AMR space.  As

Scroll to Top