PP09 Use Of Real-World Evidence For Managing Health Technologies Throughout The Life Cycle Of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Interventions. (23rd December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: de Verteuil, Danielle; Azzi, Leila; Lambert, Laurie; Boothroyd, Lucy; Duranceau, Marie-France; Pagé, Élisabeth; Truchon, Catherine
• Is Part Of: International journal of technology assessment in health care. Volume 38(2022)Supplement 1
• Page Start: S42
• Page End: S42
• Publication Date: 2022-12-23
• Subjects: Medical technology -- Periodicals; Technology assessment -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1017/S0266462322001544
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0266-4623

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: A Cardiology Evaluation Unit was established in 2004 within Québec's Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) with a novel mandate to collect real-world evidence (RWE) to complement literature-based health technology assessment. In 2010 following publication of the seminal PARTNER trial, INESSS was mandated by the health ministry to review the evidence on transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) for patients with aortic stenosis. Herein we show how RWE was used to evaluate health system performance throughout the technology's life cycle and inform organizational and clinical decisions. Methods: Various products were diffused by INESSS over the years: a guidance (2012), an updated literature review (2017) and provincial standards (2017), in parallel with RWE reports covering TAVI use from 2013-2015, from 2013-2018, and a 2021 RWE report combined with administrative data covering transcatheter and surgical treatment of aortic stenosis from 2013-2019. Results: Based on the guidance's review of evidence, TAVI was initially recommended for patients considered at too high risk for the surgical approach, under the condition of continued evidence generation to address uncertainty. The subsequent literature review update highlighted that the indication for TAVI had been extended to patients at moderate surgical risk. INESSS produced standards in collaboration with clinical experts to optimize and harmonize the use of TAVI in designated centers. Evaluation of structures, processes and outcomes by INESSS continued until 2019, showing a continuous increase in the use of TAVI, improved short-term survival, and careful patient selection via a multidisciplinary process. RWE also highlighted the impact of TAVI on the overall organization of care for patients with aortic stenosis, as selection criteria further expanded to patients at lower surgical risk, raising important issues regarding patient selection processes, wait times, and longer-term outcomes. Conclusions: TAVI clinical practice is constantly evolving and leads to changes in the management of aortic stenosis. RWE provided essential organizational and clinical input to inform clinical guidance and decision-making by Québec policy-makers, clinicians and patients.