Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T13:40:26.931Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

PP61 Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products Germany: Drugs Or Methods Review?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 December 2019

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) comprise medicines for human use based on gene therapy, somatic cell therapy or bioprocessed tissue products. ATMPs are pharmaceutically manufactured drugs and mostly subject to central authorization requirements. In terms of social law, it is an ambiguous situation and more heterogeneously dealt with. ATMPs are assigned to method evaluation as well as to the Arzneimittelmarkt-Neuordnungsgesetz (AMNOG) procedure designated for drugs.

Methods

Guidelines from Gemeinsame Bundesausschuss (G-BA), Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) and respective legislation, consultation results and methods/medical devices (MDs) evaluations according to §137h and for drugs according to AMNOG were reviewed and analyzed. Decision criteria and reasoning, assessment outcomes and potential impact on price negotiations were the main aspects for comparison.

Results

ATMPs are subject to benefit assessment, with a decision at first on whether to be evaluated as a drug (e.g., Alofisel) or a method/device (e.g., Holoclar). By definition, an ATMP is classified as a treatment method, if the correct administration has at least the same significance for a successful therapy outcome as its mode of action. Depending on the respective decision, an evaluation as method follows or it must undergo the AMNOG process. According to G-BA's and IQWiG's point of view, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the “gold standard” for a benefit assessment of new therapies, including ATMPs. However, conduction of RCTs is not always possible for ATMPs which creates a disadvantage in the assessment right from the beginning. Otherwise no distinction is made between drugs and ATMPs in terms of reimbursement modalities. Outcomes based agreements could help overcoming inequalities and lead to quality-oriented reimbursement.

Conclusions

ATMPs represent a grey zone causing difficulties in classifying them either as method or drug. For individualized therapies evidence beyond RCTs and new reimbursement possibilities should be considered. Until new regulations are in place it is advisable to enter early into respective discussions with authorities.

Type
Poster Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019