ArticleBMC cancer2016
Scenario drafting for early technology assessment of next generation sequencing in clinical oncology.
Article in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Value-based health care frameworks for the health technology assessments of "omics" technologies: an international survey.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- A scenario-drafting study to explore potential future implementation pathways of circulating tumor DNA testing in oncology.Molecular oncology · 2024Article
- Determinants of targeted cancer therapy use in community oncology practice: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework and Rummler-Brache process mapping.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Real-World Data and Budget Impact Analysis (BIA): Evaluation of a Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Diagnostic Approach in Two Orthopedic Rare Diseases.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Emerging genetic biomarkers in lung adenocarcinoma.SAGE open medicine · 2022Review
- Whole genome sequencing in oncology: using scenario drafting to explore future developments.BMC cancer · 2021Review
- A Scoping Review of Different Methods of Assessing the Impact of New Medical Technologies at Early Stages of Development.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2021Article
- Evaluating different adoption scenarios for TIL-therapy and the influence on its (early) cost-effectiveness.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Risk factors of distant metastasis after surgery among different breast cancer subtypes: a hospital-based study in Indonesia.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Observational
- A Web-Based Communication Platform to Improve Home Care Services in Norway (DigiHelse): Pilot Study.JMIR formative research · 2020Article
- Implementation of Novel Molecular Biomarkers for Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in the Netherlands: How to Deal With Increasing Complexity.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
- Methodological Issues in Assessing the Economic Value of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests: Many Challenges and Not Enough Solutions.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2018Review
- Targeted next generation sequencing identifies somatic mutations and gene fusions in papillary thyroid carcinoma.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Emerging Use of Early Health Technology Assessment in Medical Product Development: A Scoping Review of the Literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Innovations that reach the patient: early health technology assessment and improving the chances of coverage and implementation.Ecancermedicalscience · 2016Article
- Next-generation sequencing in NSCLC and melanoma patients: a cost and budget impact analysis.Ecancermedicalscience · 2016Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNext Generation Sequencing (NGS) is expected to lift molecular diagnostics in clinical oncology to the next level. It enables simultaneous identification of mutations in a patient tumor, after which targeted therapy may be assigned. This approach could improve patient survival and/or assist in controlling healthcare costs by offering expensive treatment to only those likely to benefit. However, NGS has yet to make its way into the clinic. Health Technology Assessment can support the adoption and implementation of a novel technology, but at this early stage many of the required variables are still unknown.
methodsScenario drafting and expert elicitation via a questionnaire were used to identify factors that may act as a barrier or facilitate adoption of NGS-based molecular diagnostics. Attention was paid to predominantly elicit quantitative answers, allowing their use in future modelling of cost-effectiveness.
resultsAdequately informing patients and physicians, the latters' opinion on clinical utility and underlying evidence as well as presenting sequencing results within a relevant timeframe may act as pivotal facilitators. Reimbursement for NGS-based testing and accompanying therapies (both general and in case of off-label prescription) was found to be a potential barrier. Competition on the market and demonstrating clinical utility may also be challenging. Importantly, numerous quantitative values for variables related to each of these potential barriers/facilitators, such as such as desired panel characteristics, willingness to pay or the expected number of targets identified per person, were also elicited.
conclusionsWe have identified several factors that may either pose a barrier or facilitate the adoption of NGS in the clinic. We believe acting upon these findings, for instance by organizing educational events, advocating new ways of evidence generation and steering towards the most cost-effective solution, will accelerate the route from bench-to-bedside. Moreover, due to the methodology of expert elicitation, this study provides parameters that can be incorporated in future cost-effectiveness modeling to steer the development of NGS gene panels towards the most optimal direction.
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.