Financial considerations in expanded access policy for gene therapies: A tough nut to crack?

Unveiling the Future of Cardiac Care: A Review of Gene Therapy in Cardiomyopathies

For years, the treatment of many cardiomyopathies has been solely focused on symptom management. However, cardiomyopathies have a genetic substrate, and directing therapy towards the pathophysiology rather than the epiphenomenon of the disease may be a winning strategy. Gene therapy involves the insertion of genes or the modification of existing ones and their regulatory elements through strategies like gene replacement and gene editing. Recently, gene therapy for cardiac amyloidosis and Duchenne muscular dystrophy has received approval, and important clinical trials are currently evaluating gene therapy methods for rare heart diseases like Friedreich's Ataxia, Danon disease, Fabry disease, and Pompe Disease. Furthermore, favorable results have been noted in animal studies receiving gene therapy for hypertrophic, dilated, and arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy. This review discusses gene therapy methods, ongoing clinical trials, and future goals in this area.

Real-world data from expanded access programmes in health technology assessments: a review of NICE technology appraisals

OBJECTIVES

To quantify and characterise the usage of expanded access (EA) data in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisals (TAs). EA offers patients who are ineligible for clinical trials or registered treatment options, access to investigational therapies. Although EA programmes are increasingly used to collect real-world data, it is unknown if and how these date are used in NICE health technology assessments.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study of NICE appraisals (2010-2020). We automatically downloaded and screened all available appraisal documentation on NICE website (over 8500 documents), searching for EA-related terms. Two reviewers independently labelled the EA usage by disease area, and whether it was used to inform safety, efficacy and/or resource use. We qualitatively describe the five appraisals with the most occurrences of EA-related terms.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Number of TAs that used EA data to inform safety, efficacy and/or resource use analyses.

RESULTS

In 54.2% (206/380 appraisals), at least one reference to EA was made. 21.1% (80/380) of the TAs used EA data to inform safety (n=43), efficacy (n=47) and/or resource use (n=52). The number of TAs that use EA data remained stable over time, and the extent of EA data utilisation varied by disease area (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

NICE uses EA data in over one in five appraisals. In synthesis with evidence from well-controlled trials, data collected from EA programmes may meaningfully inform cost-effectiveness modelling.