ArticleThe oncologist2015
A Time-Trend Economic Analysis of Cancer Drug Trials.
Article in The oncologist, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Challenges and Opportunities in Interdisciplinary Research and Real-World Data for Treatment Sequences in Health Technology Assessments.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Review
- Quantifying societal burden of radiation-induced small bowel toxicity in patients with rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Clinical and cost outcomes following genomics-informed treatment for advanced cancers.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- The dark side of immunotherapy.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Review
- Comparing Manufacturer Submitted and Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review Reanalysed Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios for Novel Oncology Drugs.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2021Article
- How aging of the global population is changing oncology.Ecancermedicalscience · 2021Article
- Barriers to conducting cancer trials in Canada: an analysis of key informant interviews.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2020Article
- Potential Life-Years Lost: The Impact of the Cancer Drug Regulatory and Funding Process in Canada.The oncologist · 2020Article
- MiR-34b inhibits the proliferation and promotes apoptosis in colon cancer cells by targeting Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway.Bioscience reports · 2019Article
- Public perspectives on disinvestments in drug funding: results from a Canadian deliberative public engagement event on cancer drugs.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Real-world costing analysis for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in British Columbia.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2019Article
- Addressing the affordability of cancer drugs: using deliberative public engagement to inform health policy.Health research policy and systems · 2019Article
- Article
- Trade-offs, fairness, and funding for cancer drugs: key findings from a deliberative public engagement event in British Columbia, Canada.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Financial toxicity and implications for cancer care in the era of molecular and immune therapies.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Review
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of ribociclib versus palbociclib in the first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer in Spain.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2018Article
- Access to new cancer medicines in Australia: dispelling the myths and informing a public debate.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2016Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScientific advances have led to the discovery of novel treatments with high prices. The cost to publicly fund high-cost drugs may threaten the sustainability of drug budgets in different health care systems. In oncology, there are concerns that health-benefit gains are diminishing over time and that the economic evidence to support funding decisions is too limited.
methodsTo assess the additional costs and benefits gained from oncology drugs over time, we used treatment protocols and efficacy results from U.S. Food and Drug Administration records to calculate cost-effectiveness ratios for drugs approved to treat first- and second-line metastatic or advanced breast, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancer during the years 1994-2013. We assessed reimbursement recommendations reached by health technology assessment agencies in the U.K., Australia, and Canada.
resultsCost-effectiveness ratios were calculated for 50 drugs approved by the U.S. regulator. The more recent approvals were often based on surrogate efficacy outcomes and had extremely high costs, often triple the costs of drugs approved in previous years. Over time, the effectiveness gains have increased for some cancer indications; however, for other indications (non-small cell lung and second-line colorectal cancer), the magnitude of gains in effectiveness decreased. Reimbursement recommendations for drugs with the highest cost-effectiveness ratios were the most inconsistent.
conclusionEvaluation of the clinical benefits that oncology drugs offer as a function of their cost has become highly complex, and for some clinical indications, health benefits are diminishing over time. There is an urgent need for better economic evidence from oncology drug trials and systematic processes to inform funding decisions. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: High-cost oncology drugs may threaten the ability of health care systems to provide access to promising new drugs for patients. In order to make better drug-funding decisions and enable equitable access to breakthrough treatments, discussions in the oncology community should include economic evidence. This study summarizes the extra benefits and costs of newly approved drugs from pivotal trials during the postgenomic era of drug discovery. The reader will gain an appreciation of the need for economic evidence to make better drug-reimbursement decisions and the dynamics at play in today's oncology drug market.
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.