CE scrutiny in immunology is not the same as CE scrutiny in rare disease. The evidence standard is category-specific — not universal. Click a card to expand.
${[
{name:'Oncology',n:28,pct:'64%',pctColor:'amber',badges:[{t:'64% funded',c:'badge-amber'},{t:'Indirectness = rejection',c:'badge-red'}],signal:'⚠ Zero equity signals — highest unmet need gap',detail:'All 7 indirectness rejections are NOT_RECOMMENDED — 100% reject rate. Three decisions deferred awaiting OS data. CE concern in only 2 decisions — oncology rejections are driven by evidence quality, not cost.'},
{name:'Rare Disease',n:12,pct:'83%',pctColor:'green',badges:[{t:'83% funded',c:'badge-green'},{t:'Low CE scrutiny',c:'badge-blue'}],signal:'',detail:'Absent evidence accepted when unmet need is established. PHARMAC applies a need-based standard — CE models are not outcome-determinative. The one rejection (deflazacort) was on comparative effectiveness grounds.'},
{name:'Immunology & Rheumatology',n:19,pct:'79%',pctColor:'green',badges:[{t:'79% funded',c:'badge-green'},{t:'21% CE concern',c:'badge-red'}],signal:'',detail:'Highest CE challenge rate of any major therapy area. Adalimumab biosimilar restructured category pricing — all subsequent biologic submissions measured against biosimilar reference price.'},
{name:'Neurology',n:13,pct:'92%',pctColor:'green',badges:[{t:'92% funded',c:'badge-green'},{t:'31% conditional',c:'badge-amber'}],signal:'',detail:'Highest funding rate of any major therapy area. MS criteria-gating is the dominant pattern — high funding rate, heavily restricted access. CE concern in 31% of decisions.'},
{name:'Diabetes & Metabolic',n:8,pct:'62%',pctColor:'amber',badges:[{t:'62% funded',c:'badge-amber'},{t:'★ Equity signals',c:'badge-amber'}],signal:'★ Only therapy area with equity evidence — liraglutide landmark',detail:'The liraglutide BMI threshold decision is the corpus landmark for equity-adjusted access criteria — Māori/Pacific-specific threshold recognising differential cardiometabolic risk. Zero CE concerns despite high drug costs.'},
{name:'Respiratory',n:9,pct:'78%',pctColor:'green',badges:[{t:'78% funded',c:'badge-green'},{t:'NZ applicability gap',c:'badge-blue'}],signal:'⚠ Highest asthma rates in Māori/Pacific — zero equity submissions',detail:'Global evidence without NZ population relevance drives rejections. Both rejections (fluticasone furoate/vilanterol, macitentan) on CE and NZ applicability grounds.'},
{name:'Mental Health',n:3,pct:'0%',pctColor:'red',badges:[{t:'0% funded',c:'badge-red'},{t:'Esketamine ×3',c:'badge-red'}],signal:'⚠ 100% rejection — same strategy, same outcome across 4 years',detail:'Esketamine reviewed three times across 2020 and 2024. Same CE uncertainty and RWE gaps in each review. No equity argument advanced. The only therapy area with zero funded medicines over five years.'},
{name:'Cardiovascular',n:4,pct:'100%',pctColor:'green',badges:[{t:'100% funded',c:'badge-green'},{t:'50% CE concern',c:'badge-amber'}],signal:'',detail:'All 4 decisions funded but 2 conditional. Polypill (Trinomia) conditional twice — budget impact uncertainty from breadth of secondary prevention eligibility. CE managed through criteria.'},
].map(ta => `
${ta.name}
${ta.n} decisions
${ta.badges.map(b => `${b.t}`).join('')}
${ta.signal ? `
${ta.signal}
` : ''}
${ta.detail}
`).join('')}