Mixed treatment comparison to confirm value proposition and market access strategy

Systematic literature review and mixed treatment comparison to build evidence in support of market access strategy and value communication

 

The challenge

In the face of increasing competition in a crowded marketplace, our client needed to understand the comparative effectiveness of their product in relation to its competitors (which were recommended by NICE clinical guidelines) in the absence of head-to-head data. This would inform internal understanding and external communication of the value of their product.

The solution

We designed and conducted a systematic literature review consistent with the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) ‘Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care’. Data from studies meeting the PICOS criteria were extracted and assessed for bias. Our analytics team then performed a mixed treatment comparison (MTC, also known as network meta-analysis) to assess 13 clinical endpoints.

To ensure the results would be applicable globally, we used both Frequentist and Bayesian methods (as different markets had different attitudes to each approach). Although design, patient population and outcomes reported were fairly consistent across the studies included within the MTC, a meta regression analysis was conducted in order to identify any aspect of heterogeneity that may have affected the results.

Key results

We delivered the results of the systematic literature review and MTC in a written report accompanied by a slide deck to facilitate internal communication. We also presented the results to a range of internal client stakeholders which provided an opportunity to contextualise the results and discuss recommendations for next steps.

The client gained a robust understanding of how their product ranked against its competitors across a range of key efficacy and safety outcomes. The findings confirmed the client’s existing hypotheses.

Value to the client

The results enabled our client to make informed decisions on next steps for product development. Additional evidence requirements were also identified to support the value proposition, communication strategy and reimbursement of their product.

Related categories

Case Studies