ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
Closing the first wave of drug innovativeness in italy: final evidence from 2017 to 2025.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study provides a comprehensive overview of the Italian framework for the appraisal of drug innovativeness, covering all 294 appraisals conducted by AIFA between 2017 and June 2025. It aims to describe the evolution and application of the 2017 criteria, explore the determinants of innovativeness recognition, and discuss the implications of the 2025 revision for value assessment and market access.
methodsAll AIFA innovativeness reports available up to June 2025 were systematically reviewed and coded across the three appraisal domains - therapeutic need, added therapeutic value, and quality of evidence - together with contextual and regulatory variables (orphan designation, study design, EMA approval type, accelerated assessment, and PRIME designation). Descriptive and multinomial regression analysis were performed to identify predictors of appraisal outcomes and to explore associations with European and national timelines.
resultsAmong 294 appraisals, 27% were fully innovative, 29% conditionally innovative, and 44% non-innovative. ATV and quality of evidence were the strongest determinants, while therapeutic need played a secondary role. Orphan designation, pediatric/mixed populations, and the availability of RCT-based evidence increased the likelihood of a positive outcome. Medicines with EMA accelerated assessment were more often granted full innovativeness but did not achieve shorter national reimbursement timelines (median 432 days). Fully innovative medicines followed shorter EMA pathways (median 330 vs. 448 days), though not necessarily implying faster national access.
conclusionsAIFA's framework proved internal coherence, with ATV as the main driver. The 2025 criteria may enhance methodological rigor but reduce flexibility, requiring continuous monitoring to ensure timely and equitable access.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42479353What 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.