SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2023
HTA Barriers for Conditional Approval Drugs.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Market Access Delays on Time to Patient Access: Multi-Country Comparative Analysis Assessing the First Commercial Launch Indications for Five Oncology Medicines Across Europe and Canada.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Do conditional marketing authorisations actually accelerate patient access? Time-to-access of conditional vs. standard marketing authorisations in Italy, Spain, and Germany.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2026Article
- Unravelling the Association Between Uncertainties in Model-based Economic Analysis and Funding Recommendations of Medicines in Australia.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Article
- Evidence Following Conditional NICE Technology Appraisal Recommendations: A Critical Analysis of Methods, Quality and Risk of Bias.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- The Critical Intersect of Regulations, Health Technology Assessment, and Drug Safety Assessments.Drug safety · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConditional approval pathways facilitate accelerated marketing authorisation based on immature clinical evidence for drugs that address an unmet medical need in a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition. Lowering evidence requirements for marketing authorisation results in higher clinical uncertainty, which may present challenges for the health technology assessment (HTA) of these products.
objectivesThe objective of this study is to assess whether conditionally approved drugs face higher probabilities of HTA rejection or delays in HTA approval relative to drugs with standard marketing authorisation.
methodsThis paper adopts a mixed-methods approach to provide a meta-analysis of HTA outcomes across 80 drug-indication pairs in France, England, Scotland and Canada. Differences in the characteristics (i.e. disease rarity and clinical trial design) of conditionally approved drugs and drugs with standard marketing authorisation and drivers of HTA outcomes are assessed through logistics regressions. Delays in HTA approval are assessed through a survival analysis.
resultsRelative to standard approval drugs, conditionally approved drugs are less likely to include phase III trial designs, less likely to include clinical endpoints and less likely to include an active comparator. Uncertainties in clinical and economic evidence are raised more frequently by HTA agencies for conditionally approved drugs, which have a marginally lower probability of receiving HTA approval relative to drugs with standard approval. Conditionally approved drugs face moderate delays (an average of 6 months) in receiving HTA approval relative to standard approval drugs.
conclusionsOverall, conditionally approved drugs likely face increased barriers at the HTA level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.