IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v2y2018i2d10.1007_s41669-017-0048-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying a Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Approach to Elicit Stakeholders’ Preferences in Italy: The Case of Obinutuzumab for Rituximab-Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (iNHL)

Author

Listed:
  • Martina Garau

    (Office of Health Economics)

  • Grace Hampson

    (Office of Health Economics)

  • Nancy Devlin

    (Office of Health Economics)

  • Nicola Amedeo Mazzanti

    (Roche S.P.A)

  • Antonio Profico

    (Roche S.P.A)

Abstract

Background Healthcare decision makers need to make trade-offs between different elements of value of new treatments. Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) provides a framework that can help decision makers to understand stakeholders’ preferences and be explicit about the trade-offs that are being made. Objective The objective of this study was to use MCDA to obtain preferences and views on decision criteria across three stakeholder groups (patients, clinicians and payers) in Italy and to use these to assess the performance of obinutuzumab for rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). Methods We used EVIDEM V3.0, an MCDA framework, and collected participants’ preferences via an online survey and structured meetings. Results Patients and clinicians expressed a preference for interventions targeting severe conditions. Payers expressed preference for treatments targeting areas with an unmet need, which are cheaper than the comparator, and with high-quality evidence. Obinutuzumab in combination with bendamustine, compared with bendamustine alone, received high positive scores for the criteria ‘disease severity’ and ‘type of therapeutic benefit’ by all three groups, and negative scores on the economic-related criteria, according to all stakeholder groups. Conclusions MCDA can be used to elicit the views of different stakeholder groups and has the potential to structure and inform reimbursement decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Martina Garau & Grace Hampson & Nancy Devlin & Nicola Amedeo Mazzanti & Antonio Profico, 2018. "Applying a Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) Approach to Elicit Stakeholders’ Preferences in Italy: The Case of Obinutuzumab for Rituximab-Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (iNHL)," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 153-163, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-017-0048-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-017-0048-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-017-0048-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-017-0048-x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Appleby, John & Devlin, Nancy & Parkin, David & Buxton, Martin & Chalkidou, Kalipso, 2009. "Searching for cost effectiveness thresholds in the NHS," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 239-245, August.
    2. Kevin Marsh & J. Jaime Caro & Alaa Hamed & Erica Zaiser, 2017. "Amplifying Each Patient’s Voice: A Systematic Review of Multi-criteria Decision Analyses Involving Patients," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 155-162, April.
    3. Nancy Devlin;Jon Sussex, 2011. "Incorporating Multiple Criteria in HTA: Methods and Processes," Monograph 000189, Office of Health Economics.
    4. Karlsberg Schaffer, Sarah & Sussex, Jon & Devlin, Nancy & Walker, Andrew, 2015. "Local health care expenditure plans and their opportunity costs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(9), pages 1237-1244.
    5. Jon Sussex & Adrian Towse & Nancy Devlin, 2013. "Operationalizing Value-Based Pricing of Medicines," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 1-10, January.
    6. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski, 2016. "Making Good Decisions in Healthcare with Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: The Use, Current Research and Future Development of MCDA," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 29-40, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ahumada-Canale, Antonio & Jeet, Varinder & Bilgrami, Anam & Seil, Elizabeth & Gu, Yuanyuan & Cutler, Henry, 2023. "Barriers and facilitators to implementing priority setting and resource allocation tools in hospital decisions: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    2. Helen Dakin & Nancy Devlin & Yan Feng & Nigel Rice & Phill O'Neill & David Parkin, 2015. "The Influence of Cost‐Effectiveness and Other Factors on Nice Decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(10), pages 1256-1271, October.
    3. Axel C. Mühlbacher & Anika Kaczynski, 2016. "Making Good Decisions in Healthcare with Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: The Use, Current Research and Future Development of MCDA," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 29-40, February.
    4. Jonathan Siverskog & Martin Henriksson, 2020. "Mutually Exclusive Interventions in the Cost-Effectiveness Bookshelf," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(3), pages 399-403, April.
    5. Kevin Marsh & Tereza Lanitis & David Neasham & Panagiotis Orfanos & Jaime Caro, 2014. "Assessing the Value of Healthcare Interventions Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Review of the Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 345-365, April.
    6. Levaggi, Laura & Levaggi, Rosella, 2024. "Competition, value-based prices and incentives to research personalised drugs," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Laura Catherine Edney & Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Terence Chai Cheng & Jonathan Karnon, 2018. "Estimating the Reference Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for the Australian Health System," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 239-252, February.
    8. Livio Garattini & Anna Padula, 2018. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis in Health Technology Assessment for Drugs: Just Another Illusion?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-4, February.
    9. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    10. Vincent T Janmaat & Marco J Bruno & Suzanne Polinder & Sylvie Lorenzen & Florian Lordick & Maikel P Peppelenbosch & Manon C W Spaander, 2016. "Cost-Effectiveness of Cetuximab for Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-10, April.
    11. Aidan Hollis, 2016. "Sustainable Financing of Innovative Therapies: A Review of Approaches," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(10), pages 971-980, October.
    12. Siverskog, Jonathan & Henriksson, Martin, 2022. "The health cost of reducing hospital bed capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    13. Joey Au & Andrew Coleman & Trudy Sullivan, 2015. "A Practical Approach to Well-being Based Policy Development: What Do New Zealanders Want from Their Retirement Income Policies?," Treasury Working Paper Series 15/14, New Zealand Treasury.
    14. Laura Levaggi & Rosella Levaggi, 2017. "Rationing in health care provision: a welfare approach," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 235-249, June.
    15. James Lomas & Jessica Ochalek & Rita Faria, 2022. "Avoiding Opportunity Cost Neglect in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Health Technology Assessment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 13-18, January.
    16. Nils Gutacker & Andrew Street, 2015. "Multidimensional performance assessment using dominance criteria," Working Papers 115cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    17. Nils Gutacker & Andrew Street, 2018. "Multidimensional performance assessment of public sector organisations using dominance criteria," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(2), pages 13-27, February.
    18. Powdthavee, Nattavudh & van den Berg, Bernard, 2011. "Putting different price tags on the same health condition: Re-evaluating the well-being valuation approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1032-1043.
    19. Morton, Alec, 2014. "Aversion to health inequalities in healthcare prioritisation: A multicriteria optimisation perspective," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 164-173.
    20. Andrew Briggs, 2016. "A View from the Bridge: Health Economic Evaluation — A Value‐Based Framework?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(12), pages 1499-1502, December.

    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:pharmo:v:2:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s41669-017-0048-x. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.