Do France, Germany, and Italy agree on the added therapeutic value of medicines?

ObjectivesThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of medicines is performed separately at the country level with some differences, but Italy, France, and Germany have implemented price and reimbursement systems strongly focused on the Added Therapeutic Value (ATV). This study investigates the level of agreement on ATV assessments by Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA), Haute Autorite de Sante (HAS), and Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss (G-BA). MethodsA database was created collecting all information about drugs with innovativeness status requests in Italy from July 2017 to December 2022 and populated with the corresponding HAS and G-BA ATV assessments. The primary comparative analysis was conducted by grouping the ATV ratings into higher added value and lower or no added value, while a secondary analysis considered the Italian innovativeness status as a criterion to include the quality of evidence assessment. The concordance between ATV assessments was investigated through percentage agreement and unweighted Cohen k-value. Results189 medicines/indications were included. The greatest agreement was found when comparing G-BA versus HAS (82 percent; k = 0.61, substantial agreement). Lower levels of agreements were observed for AIFA versus HAS and AIFA versus G-BA (respectively 52 percent; k = 0.17 and 57 percent; k = 0.25). The secondary analysis led to a reconciliation to moderate agreement for AIFA versus HAS (72 percent; k = 0.45) and AIFA versus G-BA (74 percent; k = 0.47). ConclusionsA high degree of concordance between HTA organizations is reached when considering jointly ATV and quality of evidence, suggesting that the system is extensively mature to make a Joint Clinical Assessment, avoiding duplications and reducing access inequalities.

Automated summary

There is a high degree of concordance between the HTA organizations in Italy, France, and Germany when considering both the Added Therapeutic Value (ATV) and the quality of evidence. This suggests that a Joint Clinical Assessment could be made to reduce duplications and access inequalities.