» Articles » PMID: 32762984

Health Preference Research in Europe: A Review of Its Use in Marketing Authorization, Reimbursement, and Pricing Decisions-Report of the ISPOR Stated Preference Research Special Interest Group

Abstract

Objective: This study examines European decision makers' consideration and use of quantitative preference data.

Methods: The study reviewed quantitative preference data usage in 31 European countries to support marketing authorization, reimbursement, or pricing decisions. Use was defined as: agency guidance on preference data use, sponsor submission of preference data, or decision-maker collection of preference data. The data could be collected from any stakeholder using any method that generated quantitative estimates of preferences. Data were collected through: (1) documentary evidence identified through a literature and regulatory websites review, and via key opinion leader outreach; and (2) a survey of staff working for agencies that support or make healthcare technology decisions.

Results: Preference data utilization was identified in 22 countries and at a European level. The most prevalent use (19 countries) was citizen preferences, collected using time-trade off or standard gamble methods to inform health state utility estimation. Preference data was also used to: (1) value other impact on patients, (2) incorporate non-health factors into reimbursement decisions, and (3) estimate opportunity cost. Pilot projects were identified (6 countries and at a European level), with a focus on multi-criteria decision analysis methods and choice-based methods to elicit patient preferences.

Conclusion: While quantitative preference data support reimbursement and pricing decisions in most European countries, there was no utilization evidence in European-level marketing authorization decisions. While there are commonalities, a diversity of usage was identified between jurisdictions. Pilots suggest the potential for greater use of preference data, and for alignment between decision makers.

Citing Articles

Do We Understand Unmet Need? A Proposal to Use Length-Of-Life Equivalent (LOLE) as a Patient-Centric Measure of Unmet Need.

Marsh K, Reynolds R, Nelsen L, Watt S, Escontrias O, Hauber B Pharmacoecon Open. 2025; .

PMID: 39961985 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-025-00560-8.


A genuine need or nice to have? Understanding HTA representatives' perspectives on the use of patient preference data.

Germeni E, Fifer S, Hiligsmann M, Stein B, Tonkinson M, Joshi M Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2024; 40(1):e60.

PMID: 39562326 PMC: 11579672. DOI: 10.1017/S026646232400463X.


Exploration of preferences among people with COPD to inform resource allocation: a discrete choice experiment study.

Ettinger J, Patel A, Ohrnberger J, Moore C, Bhudiya M, Smith W BMJ Open Respir Res. 2024; 11(1).

PMID: 39384337 PMC: 11474863. DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001914.


HTA community perspectives on the use of patient preference information: lessons learned from a survey with members of HTA bodies.

Hiligsmann M, Liden B, Beaudart C, Germeni E, Hanna A, Joshi M Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2024; 40(1):e17.

PMID: 38439624 PMC: 11569952. DOI: 10.1017/S0266462324000138.


Using Patient Preferences in Health Technology Assessment: Evaluating Quality-Adjusted Survival Equivalents (QASE) for the Quantification of Non-health Benefits.

Marsh K, Collacott H, Thomson J, Mauer J, Watt S, Shah K Patient. 2024; 17(3):229-237.

PMID: 38421583 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-024-00676-9.