ArticleBMJ open2020
Developing a framework to incorporate real-world evidence in cancer drug funding decisions: the Canadian Real-world Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) collaboration.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Framework for the synthesis of non-randomised studies and randomised controlled trials: a guidance on conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis for healthcare decision making.BMJ evidence-based medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Real-World Outcomes of First-Line Pembrolizumab-Based Therapy in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Center Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Shaping the future of clinical trials through strategic foresight.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Article
- The use of real-world evidence among healthcare payers: a scoping review.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2025Article
- Real-world comparative effectiveness and safety of Pertuzumab in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer: A pan-Canadian population-based cohort study.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- Drivers of innovation value: simulation for new drug pricing evaluation based on system dynamics modelling.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Real-World Evidence to Reinforce Clinical Trial Evidence in Health Technology Assessment: A Critical Review of Real-World Evidence Requirements from Seven Countries and Recommendations to Improve Acceptance.Journal of market access & health policy · 2024Article
- Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Studies for Health Technology Management: Outcomes and Lessons Learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Real-world comparative effectiveness and safety of pembrolizumab for PD-L1≥50% metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- The correlation between the costs and clinical benefits of national price-negotiated anticancer drugs for specific cancers in China.Journal of global health · 2023Article
- Overall survival in the UK in mycosis fungoides or Sézary syndrome cutaneous T-cell lymphoma: comparative effectiveness of mogamulizumab versus current standard of care.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2023Article
- Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infection rates in 5 European countries.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness of second-line ipilimumab for metastatic melanoma: A real-world population-based cohort study of resource utilization.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Development of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Rating Tool to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Questions for the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Selection Bias in Real-World Data Studies Used to Support Health Technology Assessments: A Case Study in Metastatic Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- What, Where, and How to Collect Real-World Data and Generate Real-World Evidence to Support Drug Reimbursement Decision-Making in Asia: A reflection Into the Past and A Way Forward.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Pricing and reimbursement mechanisms for advanced therapy medicinal products in 20 countries.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Advanced Lung Cancer Patients' Use of EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Overall Survival: Real-World Evidence from Quebec, Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Rapid Review of Real-World Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Cancer Interventions in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOncology therapy is becoming increasingly more expensive and challenging the affordability and sustainability of drug programmes around the world. When new drugs are evaluated, health technology assessment organisations rely on clinical trials to inform funding decisions. However, clinical trials are not able to assess overall survival and generalises evidence in a real-world setting. As a result, policy makers have little information on whether drug funding decisions based on clinical trials ultimately yield the outcomes and value for money that might be expected.
objectiveThe Canadian Real-world Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) collaboration, consisting of researchers, recommendation-makers, decision makers, payers, patients and caregivers, are developing and testing a framework for Canadian provinces to generate and use real-world evidence (RWE) for cancer drug funding in a consistent and integrated manner. STRATEGY: The CanREValue collaboration has established five formal working groups (WGs) to focus on specific processes in the generation and use of RWE for cancer drug funding decisions in Canada. The different RWE WGs are: (1) Planning and Drug Selection; (2) Methods; (3) Data; (4) Reassessment and Uptake; (5) Engagement. These WGs are acting collaboratively to develop a framework for RWE evaluation, validate the framework through the multiprovince RWE projects and help to integrate the final RWE framework into the Canadian healthcare system. OUTCOMES: The framework will enable the reassessment of cancer drugs, refinement of funding recommendations and use of novel funding mechanisms by decision-makers/payers across Canada to ensure the healthcare system is providing clinical benefits and value for money.
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.