Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28125371›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2017

Comparing the Approval and Coverage Decisions of New Oncology Drugs in the United States and Other Selected Countries.

Yuting Zhang, Hana Chantel Hueser, Inmaculada Hernandez

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Improving quality, affordability, and equity of multiple sclerosis care.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. The validation of the Italian version of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yuting Zhang1 Department of Health Policy and Management, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Hana Chantel Hueser2 Department of Biological Sciences, Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Inmaculada Hernandez3 Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, School of Pharmacy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal pharmaceutical sales for anticancer drugs were $74.4 billion in 2014, ranking first for drugs by therapeutic class. Countries may differ substantially in the approval and coverage decisions for anticancer drugs.

objectiveTo compare the approval and coverage decisions for new anticancer drugs between the United States and 4 other countries: the United Kingdom, France, Australia, and Canada.

methodsWe identified all new anticancer drug indications approved by the FDA between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013. For each country, we reviewed the organizations, processes, criteria, and special considerations used to make approval and coverage decisions for the drug indications approved. We further quantified and compared the variations across the 5 countries in the approval and coverage decisions as of June 30, 2014, for new anticancer drug indications.

results"Of 45 anticancer drug indications approved in the United States between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2013, 67% (30) were approved by the European Medicines Agency, and 53% (24) were approved in Canada and Australia before December 31, 2013. The U.S. Medicare program covered all 45 drug indications, and as of June 30, 2014, the United Kingdom covered 87% (26) of those approved in Europe- 58% (26) of the drug indications covered by Medicare. France, Canada, and Australia covered 42% (19), 29% (13), and 24% (11) of the drug indications covered by Medicare, respectively". [corrected].

conclusionsApproval and reimbursement decisions vary substantially by country. The United States had the fewest access restrictions, and Australia was the most restrictive of the 5 countries that were examined. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study, and the authors report no conflicts of interest. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by Zhang, along with Hernandez and Hueser. All authors participated in data collection, and data interpretation was performed by Zhang and Hernandez, along with Hueser. The manuscript was written and revised by Zhang and Hernandez, along with Hueser.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug ApprovalGlobal HealthHumansInsurance CoverageMedicareUnited StatesAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID28125371
PMCPMC10401695

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.