Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22548009›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology practice2012

Variation and consternation: access to unfunded cancer drugs in Canada.

Scott R Berry, William K Evans, Elizabeth L Strevel, Chaim M Bell

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology practice, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Disparity in public funding of systemic therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Canada.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Disparity in public funding of therapies for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer across Canadian provinces.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Scott R BerrySunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre; University of Toronto; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital; Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto; McMaster University; Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton; and Peel Regional Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.
William K Evans
Elizabeth L Strevel
Chaim M Bell
St. Michael's Hospital · CAHamilton Health Sciences · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNew anticancer drugs are improving outcomes for patients with cancer but at significant cost, and some publically funded health care systems have chosen not to fund these medications. Accessing these unfunded drugs concerns patients, challenges their physicians, and raises important policy and legal issues. We assessed Canadian medical oncologists' access to and attitudes toward accessing unfunded intravenous cancer drugs.

methodsTwo hundred twenty-two Canadian medical oncologists outside of Québec were surveyed.

resultsResponse rate was 62% (138 of 222). Respondents could access unfunded cancer drugs (49% at their government-funded hospitals; 70% at nongovernment-funded private infusion clinics), but access varied across the country. A majority of respondents (52% to 67%) were comfortable with accessing unfunded drugs in their own institutions and uncomfortable with accessing these drugs in private clinics in Canada or the United States (52% to 61%), but substantial minorities had opposing opinions. The majority of respondents felt all methods of accessing unfunded intravenous cancer drugs should be available (76% in their own center; 60% in private clinics) and used these methods to access these medications (81% in their own institution; 62% in private clinics).

conclusionAccess to effective but unfunded cancer drugs varies across Canada. Policymakers need to consider whether this is consistent with articulated values of the system and whether currently planned processes address these inconsistencies. Key stakeholders need to consider the merits of the different means of accessing these drugs to appropriately and fairly integrate access into publically funded health care systems like that of Canada and other systems like that of the United States, which could face similar limits in the future.

Identifiers

PMID22548009
PMCPMC3266314
OpenAlexW2138469052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.