ReviewAmerican health & drug benefits2017
Value Frameworks in Oncology: Comparative Analysis and Implications to the Pharmaceutical Industry.
Review in American health & drug benefits, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) Scores with Guideline Recommendations in Breast Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- A multiple criteria framework for value-based assessment of health care services applied to a radiology case.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Association between oral targeted cancer drug net health benefit, uptake, and spending.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- The implementation of value-based frameworks, clinical care pathways, and alternative payment models for cancer care in the United States.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Article
- Payer perceptions and use of value assessment tools in the United States.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Article
- Cancer treatments touch a wide range of values that count for patients and other stakeholders: What are the implications for decision-making?Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Application of the ASCO value framework to evaluate the clinical and economic value of enzalutamide and apalutamide in the early stages of prostate cancer in Colombia.Ecancermedicalscience · 2023Review
- Medical Affairs and Innovative Medicinal Product Strategy Development.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2022Review
- The value of anticancer drugs - a regulatory view.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2022Review
- Osimertinib versus platinum-pemetrexed in patients with previously treated EGFR T790M advanced non-small cell lung cancer: An updated AURA3 trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Verifying the value of existing frameworks for formulary review at a large academic health system: assessing inter-rater reliability.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2021Observational
- The Accuracy and Usefulness of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks Affordability Rating.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Article
- Critical Factors Shaping Strategy Development of an Innovative Medicine in Oncology.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2020Review
- EHA evaluation of the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (ESMO-MCBS v1.1) for haematological malignancies.ESMO open · 2020Article
- Understanding Payer Perspectives on Value in the Use of Pharmaceuticals in the United States.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2019Article
- A structured framework for optimizing high-intensity focused ultrasound ablative treatment in localized prostate cancer.Investigative and clinical urology · 2019Article
- Drug Treatment Value in a Changing Oncology Landscape: A Literature and Provider Perspective.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2019Review
- Analysis of Survival Curves: Statistical Methods Accounting for the Presence of Long-Term Survivors.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Review
- The price of innovation - the role of drug pricing in financing pharmaceutical innovation. A conceptual framework.Journal of market access & health policy · 2019Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs the cost of oncology care continues to rise, composite value models that variably capture the diverse concerns of patients, physicians, payers, policymakers, and the pharmaceutical industry have begun to take shape.
objectivesTo review the capabilities and limitations of 5 of the most notable value frameworks in oncology that have emerged in recent years and to compare their relative value and application among the intended stakeholders.
methodsWe compared the methodology of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework (version 2.0), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center DrugAbacus, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review Value Assessment Framework, and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale, using a side-by-side comparative approach in terms of the input, scoring methodology, and output of each framework. In addition, we gleaned stakeholder insights about these frameworks and their potential real-world applications through dialogues with physicians and payers, as well as through secondary research and an aggregate analysis of previously published survey results.
resultsThe analysis identified several framework-specific themes in their respective focus on clinical trial elements, breadth of evidence, evidence weighting, scoring methodology, and value to stakeholders. Our dialogues with physicians and our aggregate analysis of previous surveys revealed a varying level of awareness of, and use of, each of the value frameworks in clinical practice. For example, although the ASCO Value Framework appears nascent in clinical practice, physicians believe that the frameworks will be more useful in practice in the future as they become more established and as their outputs are more widely accepted.
conclusionsAlong with patients and payers, who bear the burden of treatment costs, physicians and policymakers have waded into the discussion of defining value in oncology care, as well as pharmaceutical companies that seek to understand the impact of these value frameworks on each stakeholder, as they model the value and financial threshold of innovative, high-cost drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28975009PMC5620505What 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.