IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v38y2020i12d10.1007_s40273-020-00953-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voretigene Neparvovec for Treating Inherited Retinal Dystrophies Caused by RPE65 Gene Mutations: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Highly Specialised Technology Appraisal

Author

Listed:
  • Caroline Farmer

    (University of Exeter)

  • Ash Bullement

    (University of Exeter
    Delta Hat, Ltd.)

  • David Packman

    (University of Exeter)

  • Linda Long

    (University of Exeter)

  • Sophie Robinson

    (University of Exeter)

  • Elham Nikram

    (University of Exeter)

  • Anthony J. Hatswell

    (University of Exeter
    Delta Hat, Ltd.)

  • G. J. Melendez-Torres

    (University of Exeter)

  • Louise Crathorne

    (University of Exeter)

Abstract

The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) considered evidence for voretigene neparvovec (VN; Luxturna®) for the treatment of RPE65-mediated inherited retinal dystrophies (IRD) within its highly specialised technology programme. This paper summarises the evidence provided by the company; the appraisal of the evidence by the Peninsula Technology Appraisal Group, who were commissioned to act as the independent evidence review group (ERG); and the development of the NICE guidance by the appraisal committee. The evidence presented by the company highlighted the significant lifelong burden of IRD for patients and carers. Evidence to support the effectiveness of VN was lacking, but the available evidence showed a modest, sustained improvement across a variety of vision-related outcomes. While patients would remain visually impaired, the committee considered that VN would prevent further deterioration in vision. The modelling approach used by the company had a number of limitations and relied heavily upon a large volume of clinical expert input to produce cost-effectiveness estimates with large uncertainty around long-term effectiveness. The ERG’s main concerns revolved around these long-term outcomes and the plausibility of utility values. The NICE committee were convinced that the clinical benefits of VN were important and an appropriate use of national health service resources within a specialised service. The committee concluded that a high unmet need existed in patients with RPE65-mediated IRD and that VN represents a step change in the management of this condition.

Suggested Citation

  • Caroline Farmer & Ash Bullement & David Packman & Linda Long & Sophie Robinson & Elham Nikram & Anthony J. Hatswell & G. J. Melendez-Torres & Louise Crathorne, 2020. "Voretigene Neparvovec for Treating Inherited Retinal Dystrophies Caused by RPE65 Gene Mutations: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Highly Specialised Technology Appraisal," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(12), pages 1309-1318, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00953-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00953-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00953-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-020-00953-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 30th November 2020
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2020-11-30 12:00:05

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:38:y:2020:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00953-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.