Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24924625›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2014

Social value of a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in Spain: the point of view of oncologists.

C Camps-Herrero, L Paz-Ares, M Codes, R López-López, A Antón-Torres, P Gascón-Vilaplana, V Guillem-Porta, A Carrato, J J Cruz-Hernández, C Caballero-Díaz and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

13 authors.

C Camps-HerreroPresidente Fundación ECO, Departamento de Medicina, Universitat de Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
L Paz-Ares
M Codes
R López-López
A Antón-Torres
P Gascón-Vilaplana
V Guillem-Porta
A Carrato
J J Cruz-Hernández
C Caballero-Díaz
A Blasco-Cordellat
J A Moreno-Nogueira
E Díaz-Rubio

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe economic situation showed that the resources devoted to health spending are limited, making rationalisation of their consumption necessary. The relevance of pharmacoeconomic analyses is becoming crucial. The ECO Foundation, promoting the quality of oncology care, set out to analyse the consensus on the new therapeutic targets inclusion and the integration of pharmacoeconomics when evaluating their effectiveness.

methodsStudy about pharmacoeconomic estimations was performed during the first ECO-Seminar (2010). It was developed using a modified Delphi method, in four stages: (1) committee coordinator establishment, (2) expert-panel selection, (3) preparation and submission of survey (1 question) by email, and (4) analysis of the degree of consensus reached.

resultsResults were obtained from surveys completed by 35 experts. Regarding the tolerable annual cost for the approval of new drugs, 68.8 % of the respondents considered a cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained between €30,000 and 100,000 acceptable (34.4 % €30,000-60,000; 34.4 % €60,000-100,000), 21.9 % of the respondents found costs between €100,000-150,000/QALY and 9.3 % of the respondents found costs above €150,000/QALY acceptable.

conclusionsThe costs of new drugs are higher than traditional treatments, making it a priority to identify subgroups of patients with specific molecular profiles as candidates for higher-efficiency-targeted therapies. The allocation of the available resources to the most effective interventions, to achieve the best clinical outcomes with lower costs and best subjective profile possible, allows expenditure to be rationalised. Pharmacoeconomic studies are a basic tool for obtaining better health outcomes according to the available resources, while also considering the other needs of the population.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelDrug CostsMedical OncologyQuality-Adjusted Life YearsCost-Benefit AnalysisDelphi TechniqueDrug DiscoveryEconomics, PharmaceuticalHumansNeoplasmsSocial ValuesSpain

Identifiers

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.