Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies have recognized the importance of real-world evidence (RWE) to inform access decision-making and different HTA agencies establish distinct requirements for their local jurisdictions. The objective of this study is to understand the differences of RWE included in HTA reports and HTA agencies’ perception of RWE.

HTA reports from agencies in France, Germany, Spain, Italy, United Kingdom (UK), Canada, Australia and South Korea from January 2011 to November 2021, including original submissions, resubmissions, extensions of original indications and renewals were analyzed.

Across the eight countries, RWE has been used in nineteen percent of all HTA reports (N=2,960/15,561), with an exponential increase observed between 2019 and 2021. RWE on clinical effectiveness was mostly used in HTA submissions in the UK (twenty-two percent), with twenty-six percent perceived with full acceptance. In contrast, RWE on safety and epidemiology was reported widely in HTA reports in France and Germany (83% and 87%), respectively. Ninety-three percent of RWE received full acceptance in France, followed by forty-four percent in Germany. A mixed picture of the types of RWE included in HTA reports was observed in the other countries, with high variance of acceptance (between 5 to 37%).

France, Germany, and the UK are the top three countries with a large proportion of HTA reports where RWE was mentioned. The type of RWE used is related to a large extent to the local evidence requirements. For example, RWE around epidemiology was included widely in Germany due to the needs of providing local data for budget impact analyses required by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA); RWE on tolerability as reported in periodic safety update reports (PSURs) needs to be included in French HTA submissions. RWE on clinical effectiveness has been evaluated the most by the UK HTA bodies.