ReviewTargeted oncology2014
Market access of cancer drugs in European countries: improving resource allocation.
Review in Targeted oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reimbursement decision-making system in Poland systematically compared to other countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Regional health inequalities of anticancer drug accessibility under the National Drug Price Negotiation in China: a decomposition analysis.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Utilization and Determinants of Anticancer Drugs Under China's National Drug Price Negotiation Policy.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Barriers and facilitators to guideline for the management of pediatric off-label use of drugs in China: a qualitative descriptive study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Scoping Review of International Experience of a Dedicated Fund to Support Patient Access to Cancer Drugs: Policy Implications for Thailand.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Uptake and availability of new outpatient cancer medicines in 2010-2021 in Nordic countries - survey of competent authorities.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Treatment patterns, adherence to international guidelines, and financial mechanisms of the market access of advanced breast cancer therapy in Bulgaria.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Understanding the global measurement of willingness to pay in health.Journal of market access & health policy · 2020Review
- What Does Society Value About Cancer Medicines? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the Belgian Population.Applied health economics and health policy · 2019Article
- Projecting Pharmaceutical Expenditure in EU5 to 2021: Adjusting for the Impact of Discounts and Rebates.Applied health economics and health policy · 2018Article
- Ethical Hurdles in the Prioritization of Oncology Care.Applied health economics and health policy · 2017Article
- Managed Entry Agreements for Oncology Drugs: Lessons from the European Experience to Inform the Future.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2017Article
- Industry Perspectives on Market Access of Innovative Drugs: The Relevance for Oncology Drugs.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2016Article
- Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review.Gynecological surgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Public health systems need to make well-founded choices in order to distribute their scarce resources in the most efficient way. Given the number of cancer patients, public/private investments in oncology research, the growing number of new anti-cancer agents and consequent budget impact of cancer care, market access of cancer drugs has become delicate over the last decade. Furthermore, decision makers are challenged by ethical objections and endeavour to provide fair and equal access to treatments for cancer patients. The aim of this study is to generate an overview of market access procedures for cancer drugs in eight European countries and formulate advice for improvement of resource allocation. Results are obtained through a literature review and a qualitative questionnaire and validated by experts with proven knowledge about procedures for price setting and reimbursement of drugs. Diverse measures are applied in the studied countries to optimize reimbursement of cancer drugs such as adjusted cost-effectiveness threshold, regulations for off-label use and new market access agreements. Additionally, innovative cancer drugs are excluded from explicit cost control measures such as payback of budget excess by pharmaceutical companies and lump-sum payments per diagnostic related groups (DRG) in the hospital. The results suggest that cancer is prioritized above other disease areas. Further research is necessary to address the question if society attaches higher value to cancer drugs than to treatments for other diseases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.