Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 21, 2026

Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (Propensity Score) using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Real medical benefit assessed by indirect comparison
Bruno Falissard1, Myriam Zylberman, Michel Cucherat
1INSERM, U669, Paris, France - Université Paris-Sud et Université Paris Descartes, UMR-S0669, Paris, France - AP-HP, Hôpital Paul Brousse, Département de Santé Publique, Villejuif, France. falissard_b@wanadoo.fr
Abstract:
Frequently, in data packages submitted for Marketing Approval to the CHMP, there is a lack of relevant head-to-head comparisons of medicinal products that could enable national authorities responsible for the approval of reimbursement to assess the Added Therapeutic Value (ASMR) of new clinical entities or line extensions of existing therapies.Indirect or mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) are methods stemming from the field of meta-analysis that have been designed to tackle this problem. Adjusted indirect comparisons, meta-regressions, mixed models, Bayesian network analyses pool results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), enabling a quantitative synthesis.The REAL procedure, recently developed by the HAS (French National Authority for Health), is a mixture of an MTC and effect model based on expert opinions. It is intended to translate the efficacy observed in the trials into effectiveness expected in day-to-day clinical practice in France.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Bioequivalence of Drugs: Drugs with Multiple Indications
Relative Risk
Bioequivalence Data: Statistical Interpretation
Measurement of Bioavailability: Pharmacodynamic Methods
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial evaluating a...