OP65 Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation Of Orphan Drugs: Impact Of Extra Criteria?

Abstract

IntroductionThere is ongoing debate as to whether conventional pharmacoeconomic evaluation (PE) methods are appropriate for orphan medicinal products (OMPs). The National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics (NCPE) in Ireland has a well-defined process for conducting pharmacoeconomic evaluations of pharmaceuticals, which is the same for OMPs and non-OMPs. The objective of this study was to identify whether supplementary criteria considered in the pharmacoeconomic evaluation of OMPs would affect final reimbursement recommendations.MethodsA literature search was conducted to identify criteria. Orphan drug pharmacoeconomic evaluations completed by the NCPE between January 2015 and December 2017 were identified and supplementary criteria, where feasible, were applied.ResultsFourteen pharmacoeconomic evaluations were included in the study. Three criteria that could feasibly be applied to the NCPE evaluation process were identified, all three of which essentially broadened the economic perspective of the pharmacoeconomic evaluation. Higher cost-effectiveness threshold: Despite being arbitrarily raised from EUR 45,000/QALY to EUR 100,000/QALY, only one orphan drug demonstrated cost-effectiveness at this higher threshold. Weighted QALY gain: here, a weighted gain of between one and three is applied to drugs demonstrating QALY gains between 10 and 30, respectively. No OMPs included in the study showed a QALY gain of more than 10. Thirteen demonstrated QALY gains less than 10 and one could not be evaluated. Societal perspective: six submissions incorporated societal perspective as a scenario analysis. Despite incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) being reduced between 4 percent and 58 percent, only two OMPs demonstrated cost-effectiveness at the higher threshold (EUR 100,000/QALY).ConclusionsApplication of supplementary criteria to the pharmacoeconomic evaluation of OMPs had a minor effect on three products assessed. However, for the majority, the final cost-effectiveness outcomes remained the same. The study highlights that other criteria are being considered in the decision to reimburse.