Informed decision‐making: Statistical methodology for surrogacy evaluation and its role in licensing and reimbursement assessments

Abstract

The desire, by patients and society, for faster access to therapies has driven a long tradition of the use of surrogate endpoints in the evaluation of pharmaceuticals and, more recently, biologics and other innovative medical technologies. The consequent need for statistical validation of potential surrogate outcome measures is a prime example on the theme of statistical support for decision-making in health technology assessment (HTA). Following the pioneering methodology based on hypothesis testing that Prentice presented in 1989, a host of further methods, both frequentist and Bayesian, have been developed to enable the value of a putative surrogate outcome to be determined. This rich methodological seam has generated practical methods for surrogate evaluation, the most recent of which are based on the principles of information theory and bring together ideas from the causal effects and causal association paradigms. Following our synopsis of statistical methods, we then consider how regulatory authorities (on licensing) and payer and HTA agencies (on reimbursement) use clinical trial evidence based on surrogate outcomes. We review existing HTA surrogate outcome evaluative frameworks.We conclude with recommendations for further steps: (1) prioritisation by regulators and payers of the application of formal surrogate outcome evaluative frameworks, (2) application of formal Bayesian decision-analytic methods to support reimbursement decisions, and (3) greater utilization of conditional surrogate-based licensing and reimbursement approvals, with subsequent reassessment of treatments in confirmatory trials based on final patientrelevant outcomes.

A framework for the definition and interpretation of the use of surrogate endpoints in interventional trials

“…8,18 Methods for the statistical validation of surrogates and examples of multidimensional frameworks evaluating the level of evidence for surrogate endpoint validity are described elsewhere. [19][20][21][22][23] In conclusion, our results have important implications for the future use of surrogate endpoints in the design, interpretation, and reporting of interventional trials. Determining what is (and what is not) a surrogate endpoint can be challenging and dependent on the framing within trials.…”

“… 8 , 18 Methods for the statistical validation of surrogates and examples of multidimensional frameworks evaluating the level of evidence for surrogate endpoint validity are described elsewhere. 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 …”