Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41908816›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2026

Addressing clinical uncertainties in ATMP reimbursement: a review of methodological guidelines and European practice.

Lotte Delemarre, Isabelle Huys, Walter Van Dyck, Steven Simoens

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lotte DelemarreKU Leuven Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Leuven, Belgium.
Isabelle HuysKU Leuven Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Leuven, Belgium.
Walter Van DyckHealthcare Management Centre, Vlerick Business School, Ghent, Belgium.
Steven SimoensKU Leuven Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, Leuven, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) often present substantial clinical uncertainties at the time of reimbursement evaluation, particularly due to the lack of appropriate comparators and the absence of long-term clinical endpoints. This study primarily examined two methodological areas relevant to these challenges: indirect treatment comparisons (ITCs) and surrogate endpoints. In addition, the review was supplemented with an assessment of innovative trial designs to explore how emerging approaches may contribute to evidence generation for ATMPs. Methods: A structured literature review was conducted using PubMed and Embase, combining keywords such as "Health Technology Assessment," "ATMP," "Indirect Treatment Comparison," and "Surrogate Endpoint," supplemented with grey literature searches. European pharmacoeconomic guidelines were analyzed using the ISPOR database and referenced national documents. Results: By April 2025, 27 ATMPs had received European Medicines Agency approval; 20 relied on single-arm trials, and 19 used surrogate endpoints. Single-arm trials limit direct comparative effectiveness assessment, requiring alternative approaches such as ITCs. Conventional ITCs need a common comparator, which is unavailable in single-arm evidence, while population-adjusted indirect comparisons (PAICs) offer a potential solution but depend on strong assumptions and are sensitive to unmeasured confounding. Guidelines generally accept the use of ITCs when direct comparative evidence is unavailable. However, they provide limited guidance on the separate question of when RCTs should be considered infeasible. Surrogate endpoints are widely used due to curative aims of ATMPs, but their validation typically requires RCT evidence and is highly context-specific. Guideline acceptance criteria for surrogate endpoints vary. Some require robust validation demonstrating a causal relationship, while others allow correlation-based or context-specific justification, particularly when direct evidence is limited or the technology addresses rare or serious conditions. Innovative trial designs may help generate more robust evidence in these challenging contexts. Discussion: The study highlights the need to refine methods for handling single-arm trials, projecting long-term outcomes, and using surrogate endpoints in ATMP evaluations. While some clinical uncertainty is inevitable, healthcare systems must manage it effectively to ensure timely, equitable access without creating additional barriers.

Indexed as

advanced therapy medicinal productshealth technology assessmentindirect treatment comparisonreimbursementsurrogate endpoint

Identifiers

PMID41908816
PMCPMC13017254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.