ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2016
Access to new cancer medicines in Australia: dispelling the myths and informing a public debate.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of First-Line Treatment With Pertuzumab and Trastuzumab in Advanced Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Breast Cancer in Routine Clinical Practice.World journal of oncology · 2024Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Siltuximab for Australian Public Investment in the Rare Condition Idiopathic Multicentric Castleman Disease.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
- Impact of Managed Entry Agreements on availability of and timely access to medicines: an ex-post evaluation of agreements implemented for oncology therapies in four countries.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of Trastuzumab for Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Breast Cancer in a Real-Life Setting: One Decade of Experience Under National Treatment Coverage Regulations.JCO global oncology · 2020Article
- A real world example of coverage with evidence development in Australia - ipilimumab for the treatment of metastatic melanoma.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2018Article
- Magic year for multiple myeloma therapeutics: Key takeaways from the ASH 2015 annual meeting.Oncotarget · 2017Review
- A human rights-based approach to the reimbursement of expensive medicines.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the high level of spending on cancer medicines in Australia, consumer organisations and the pharmaceutical industry often make claims of delayed or lack of access to new cancer medicines-claims that are frequently supported by prominent coverage in the Australian media. These claims, while morally and psychologically compelling, tend to ignore the complexity of medicines funding decisions. In this commentary we summarise the current situation regarding the registration and funding of cancer medicines in Australia, elucidate the main challenges associated with access to cancer medicines in the Australian context, and describe some of the steps that have been taken to address these challenges.
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.