Recently Published: MCDA to Elicit Stakeholders’ Preferences: The Case of Obinutuzumab for Rituximab-Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
This paper uses MCDA to obtain preferences on decision criteria across three stakeholder groups (patients, clinicians and payers) in Italy and then uses these preferences to assess the value of obinutuzumab for rituximab-refractory iNHL. Recently published is a paper that…
This paper uses MCDA to obtain preferences on decision criteria across three stakeholder groups (patients, clinicians and payers) in Italy and then uses these preferences to assess the value of obinutuzumab for rituximab-refractory iNHL.
Recently published is a paper that derives the views and preferences of three stakeholder groups (patients, clinicians and payers) across decision criteria in Italy and uses these to assess the value of obinutuzumab for rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). The study was funded by Roche S.P.A.
This is the first time that a multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach has been used to inform reimbursement decisions in Italy at the national level.
The study shows that MCDA can be used to elicit the views of different stakeholder groups. It can help health technology assessment (HTA) bodies and decision makers understand what matters most to patients and other stakeholders; it can help stakeholders involved in the process know to what extent and how their input affects final decisions.
An MCDA framework (EVIDEM V3.0) was used to elicit stakeholders’ preferences about the relative importance of decision criteria (weights) and to assess the degree of achievement of obinutuzumab for rituximab-refractory iNHL in each criteria (scores) via an online survey and structured meetings with each stakeholder group.
The patients and clinicians both expressed a preference for interventions targeting severe conditions and ranked the economic criteria among the five least important criteria.
Payers expressed preference for treatments targeting populations in which there is currently little or no effective treatment, which are less expensive than the comparator, and which are underpinned by high quality evidence.
Obinutuzumab received high scores for the criteria “disease severity” and “type of therapeutic benefit” by all three groups. Against the economic-related criteria (“comparative cost consequences – cost of intervention” and “comparative cost consequences – other medical costs”) obinutuzumab obtained a negative score relative to its comparator bendamustine, whose patent has recently expired, according to all stakeholder groups.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
3rd Party Cookies
This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.
Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.
Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!