ReviewInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2024
How do we respond to the threat of multidrug-resistant bacteria? Comparison of antibiotic appraisals from 2016 to 2020 of the French, English, and German HTA agencies.
Review in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Designing eligibility and evaluation criteria for antibacterial pull incentives: a comparative review of implemented and emerging initiatives.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Connecting minds and catalyzing collaboration: the interest groups of health technology assessment international.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Review
- The impact of metagenomic analysis on the discovery of novel endolysins.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become a worldwide growing concern over the past decades. Thus, encouraging manufacturers to develop new antibiotics is needed. We hypothesised that transparency on the regulatory appraisals of antibiotics would provide an incentive to pharmaceutical development. We thus aimed at reporting the French health technology assessment (HTA) opinions and reimbursement decision on antibiotics to those German (G-BA) and English (NICE) HTA bodies.A qualitative analysis of the Transparency Committee of the French National Authority for Health (TC-HAS) opinions regarding antibiotics assessment between 2016 and 2020 was performed. Decisions of reimbursement by TC-HAS were compared to those from G-BA and NICE when available. TC-HAS recognized a clinical benefit (CB) for 15/15 evaluated indications, a clinical added value for 9/15, and a public health interest for 8/15. Among the valued antibiotics by HAS, 5 were recommended for restricted use as a "reserve" to protect against the risk of resistance emergence. A comparison of HTA opinions was possible across HTA for only 8 antibiotics. The G-BA granted a reserve status for 4 drugs and NICE a reserve with restricted use for 5 antibiotics. Three of these antibiotics were positioned similarly by the English, German, and French HTA bodies. This qualitative analysis of HTA opinions between different European HTA bodies shows a consistent reimbursement decision of antibiotics against MDR bacteria and tuberculosis besides the differences in the applied assessment methods. This work also shows how HTA bodies could recognize a clinical added value in a context of the emergence of antibiotic resistance.
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.