ArticleJournal of market access & health policy2019
Perspectives to mitigate payer uncertainty in health technology assessment of novel oncology drugs.
Article in Journal of market access & health policy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addressing clinical uncertainties in ATMP reimbursement: a review of methodological guidelines and European practice.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Do trial benefits predict real-world gains in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
- The evolving value assessment of cancer therapies: Results from a modified Delphi study.Health policy OPEN · 2024Article
- The NYMERIA Study: A Real-World, Multicentre Contemporary Assessment of Disease- and Patient-Related Burden and Treatment Strategies in Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2024Article
- An Investigation into the Relationship Between Choice of Model Structure and How to Adjust for Subsequent Therapies Using a Case Study in Oncology.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Article
- Patient preferences do matter: a discrete choice experiment conducted with breast cancer patients in six European countries, with latent class analysis.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2023Article
- Considerations for the Utility of Real-World Evidence Beyond Trial Data in Advanced NSCLC: The Case of Frontline Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors.Cancer management and research · 2022Article
- The Impasse on Overall Survival in Oncology Reimbursement Decision-Making: How Can We Resolve This?Cancer management and research · 2021Article
- Integrative Review of Managed Entry Agreements: Chances and Limitations.PharmacoEconomics · 2020Review
- Cost-effectiveness and financial risks associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2020Review
- Critical Factors Shaping Strategy Development of an Innovative Medicine in Oncology.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2020Review
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
Reimbursement decisions on new oncology drugs are now often made while uncertainty remains about a drug's risk-benefit profile. One consequence of this is a delay in patient access to valuable new medicines. We share our perspectives on strategies to mitigate sources of uncertainty in the health technology assessment process. These include flexible approaches for evaluating the additional benefit, such as better use of surrogate endpoints and health-related quality of life data, and renewed research efforts to define the optimal target population and generate real-world evidence post-authorisation.
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.