ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2017
Impact of the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review on provincial concordance with respect to cancer drug funding decisions and time to funding.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2017. 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.
- International comparisons of survival after recurrent metastatic breast cancer in four countries: A population-based study.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2026Article
- Conditional Funding Recommendations for Drugs in Canada: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Article
- CAR-T Cells in Canada; Perspective on How to Ensure We Get Our Value's Worth.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Not All Canadian Cancer Patients Are Equal-Disparities in Public Cancer Drug Funding across Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
- Determinants of the Cancer Drug Funding Process in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Potential Life-Years Lost: The Impact of the Cancer Drug Regulatory and Funding Process in Canada.The oncologist · 2020Article
- Developing a model of a patient-group pathway to accessing cancer clinical trials in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Timeliness of the oncology drug review process for public funding in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr) was implemented in 2011 to address uneven drug coverage and lack of transparency with respect to the various provincial cancer drug review processes in Canada. We evaluated the impact of the pcodr on provincial decision concordance and time from Notice of Compliance (noc) to drug funding.
methodsIn a retrospective review, Health Canada's Drug Product Database was used to identify new indications for cancer drugs between January 2003 and May 2014, and provincial formulary listings for drug-funding dates and decisions between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2014 were retrieved. Multiple linear models and quantile regressions were used to evaluate changes in time to decision-making before and after the implementation of the pcodr. Agreement of decisions between provinces was evaluated using kappa statistics.
resultsData were available from 9 provinces (all Canadian provinces except Quebec), identifying 88 indications that represented 51 unique cancer drugs. Two provinces lacked available data for all 88 indications at the time of data collection. Interprovincial concordance in drug funding decisions significantly increased after the pcodr's implementation (Brennan-Prediger coefficient: 0.54 pre-pcodr vs. 0.78 post-pcodr;
conclusionsAfter the implementation of the pcodr, greater concordance in cancer drug funding decisions between provinces and decreased time to funding decisions were observed.
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.