Value-based decision-making for orphan drugs with multiple criteria decision analysis: burosumab for the treatment of X-linked hypophosphatemia

References

• Fuente R, Gil-Peña H, Claramunt-Taberner D, et al. X-linked hypophosphatemia and growth. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2017;18(1):107–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavone V, Testa G, Gioitta Iachino S, et al. Hypophosphatemic rickets: etiology, clinical features and treatment. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2015;25(2):221–226.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carpenter TO, Imel EA, Holm IA, et al. A clinician's guide to X-linked hypophosphatemia. J Bone Miner Res. 2011;26(7):1381–1388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruppe MD. X-linked hypophosphatemia, Gene Reviews. Seattle (WA): University of Washington; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Petersen DJ, Boniface AM, Schranck FW, et al. X-linked hypophosphatemic rickets: a study (with literature review) of linear growth response to calcitriol and phosphate therapy. J Bone Miner Res. 1992;7(6):583–597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodyer PR, Kronick JB, Jequier S, et al. Nephrocalcinosis and its relationship to treatment of hereditary rickets. J Pediatr. 1987;111(5):700–704.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reusz GS, Hoyer PF, Lucas M, et al. X linked hypophosphataemia: treatment, height gain, and nephrocalcinosis. Arch Dis Child. 1990;65(10):1125–1128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor A, Sherman NH, Norman ME. Nephrocalcinosis in X-linked hypophosphatemia: effect of treatment versus disease. Pediatr Nephrol. 1995;9(2):173–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verge CF, Lam A, Simpson JM, et al. Effects of therapy in X-linked hypophosphatemic rickets. N Engl J Med. 1991;325(26):1843–1848.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Highly specialised technologies guidance - Burosumab for treating X-linked hypophosphataemia in children and young people. [cited August 11, 2019]. Available from: www.nice.org.uk/guidance/hst8.
   Google Scholar
• Imel EA, White KE. Pharmacological management of X-linked hypophosphataemia. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85(6):1188–1198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyowa Kirin. Crysvita (burosumab), Summary of product characteristics. Available from: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/product-information/crysvita-epar-product-information_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zamora B, Maignen F, O'Neill P, et al. Comparing access to orphan medicinal products in Europe. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Malinowski KP, Kawalec P, Trąbka W, et al. Reimbursement legislations and decision making for orphan drugs in Central and Eastern European Countries. Front Pharmacol. 2019;10:487–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelis A, Lange A, Kanavos P. Using health technology assessment to assess the value of new medicines: results of a systematic review and expert consultation across eight European countries. Eur J Health Econ. 2018;19(1):123–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicod E, Kanavos P. Scientific and social value judgments for orphan drugs in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016;32(4):218–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sussex J, Towse A, Devlin N. Operationalizing value-based pricing of medicines: a taxonomy of approaches. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(1):1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baran-Kooiker A, Czech M, Kooiker C. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) models in health technology assessment of orphan drugs-a systematic literature review. next steps in methodology development? Front Public Health. Front Public Health, 2018;6:287.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh K, Lanitis T, Neasham D, et al. Assessing the value of healthcare interventions using multi-criteria decision analysis: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;32(4):345–365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pavan M, Todeschini R. Multicriteria decision-making methods. In: Comprehensive chemometrics [Recurso electrónico]: chemical and biochemical data analysis. Vol. 1. Elsevier; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Santos M, Oliveira A, Vandewalle B, et al. A multi-criteria decision analysis assessment of teduglutide in the treatment of adults with short bowel syndrome and intestinal failure in Portugal. In: XXXVIII Congresso da Sociedade Portuguesa de Cirurgia. Lisbon; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Orme B. Getting started with conjoint analysis: strategies for product design and pricing research. Vol. 3. Manhattan Beach (CA): Research Publishers; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson RM. Adaptive Conjoint Analysis. in Sawtooth Software Conference on Perceptual Mapping, Conjoint Analysis, and Computer Interviewing. 1987.
   Google Scholar
• The ACA/Web v6.0 Technical Paper. Technical Paper Series 2007;Available from: https://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/support/technical-papers/aca-related-papers/aca-technical-paper-2007.
   Google Scholar
• Vaisbich MH, Koch VH. Hypophosphatemic rickets: results of a long-term follow-up. Pediatr Nephrol. 2006;21(2):230–234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angelis A, Kanavos P. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework. Soc Sci Med. 2017;188:137–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schey C, Krabbe PFM, Postma MJ, et al. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA): testing a proposed MCDA framework for orphan drugs. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017;12(1):10–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sussex J, Rollet P, Garau M, et al. A pilot study of multicriteria decision analysis for valuing orphan medicines. Value Health. 2013;16(8):1163–1169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iskrov G, Miteva-Katrandzhieva T, Stefanov R. Multi-criteria decision analysis for assessment and appraisal of orphan drugs. Front Public Health. 2016;4:214–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guarga L, Badia X, Obach M, et al. Implementing reflective multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) to assess orphan drugs value in the Catalan Health Service (CatSalut). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019;14(1):157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagner M, Khoury H, Willet J, et al. Can the EVIDEM framework tackle issues raised by evaluating treatments for rare diseases: analysis of issues and policies, and context-specific adaptation. Pharmacoeconomics. 2016;34(3):285–301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Working Group on Mechanism of Coordinated Access to Orphan Medicinal Products (MoCA-OMP). Transparent Value Framework. 2014. [cited August 11, 2019]. Available from: http://download2.eurordis.org.s3.amazonaws.com/moca/history/WG%20MoCA-OMP%20Transparent%20Value%20Framework.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Annemans L, Aymé S, Le Cam Y, et al. Recommendations from the European Working Group for Value Assessment and Funding Processes in Rare Diseases (ORPH-VAL). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017;12(1):50.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ho M, Saha A, McCleary KK, Medical Device Innovation Consortium’s Patient Centered Benefit-Risk Steering Committee, et al. A framework for incorporating patient preferences regarding benefits and risks into regulatory assessment of medical technologies. Value Health. 2016;19(6):746–750.,
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marsh K, IJzerman M, Thokala P, ISPOR Task Force, et al. Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making-emerging good practices: report 2 of the ISPOR MCDA emerging good practices task force. Value Health. 2016;19(2):125–137.,
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikou S, Mezei J, Sarlin P. A process view to evaluate and understand preference elicitation. J Multi-Crit Decis Anal. 2015;22(5-6):305–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Til J, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, Lieferink M, et al. Does technique matter;a pilot study exploring weighting techniques for a multi-criteria decision support framework. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2014;12(1):22.,
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Final Evaluation Document: Burosumab for treating X-linked hypophosphataemia in children and young people. 2018. [cited August 11, 2019]; Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/hst8/evidence.
   Google Scholar