Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36897550›Full record

ReviewApplied health economics and health policy2023

Review and Assessment of Policy Options for Improving Access to Combination Therapies in Oncology in Europe.

Christopher H Henshall, Dávid Dankó, Leela Barham, Jaime Espín, Jorge Felix, Mary Harney, Peter Indra, Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz, Gérard de Pouvourville, Federico Spandonaro and 2 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Applied health economics and health policy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Pricing combination products: not how but who?The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.

Christopher H Henshall, London, UK.
Dávid DankóIdeas & Solutions, H1114, Vásárhelyi Pál u. 7. II. em. 9, Budapest, Hungary. david.danko@i-s.hu.
Leela BarhamLeela Barham Economic Consulting Ltd, Royston, UK.
Jaime EspínAndalusian School of Public Health, Granada, Spain.
Jorge FelixExigo, Lisbon, Portugal.
Mary Harney, Dublin, Ireland.
Peter IndraAmt für Gesundheit, Kanton Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jorge Mestre-Ferrandiz, Madrid, Spain.
Gérard de PouvourvilleESSEC Business School, Cergy-Pontoise, France.
Federico SpandonaroUniversity San Raffaele, Rome, Italy.
Luka VončinaFaculty of Health Studies, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia.
Nils WilkingKarolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Andalusian School of Public Health · ESÉcole Supérieure des Sciences Économiques et Commerciales · FRInstitute of Materials and Environmental Chemistry · HUKarolinska Institutet · SESan Raffaele University of Rome · ITUniversity of Rijeka · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesCombinations of on-patent therapies (CTs) are increasingly common in oncology. They cause challenges for funding and affordability, and hence patient access, especially when constituent therapies are owned by different manufacturers. The aim of our study was to develop policy proposals for the assessment, pricing, and funding of CTs and identify which might be relevant in different European countries.

methodsFollowing a review of available literature, seven hypothetical policy proposals were developed and subsequently assessed through 19 semi-structured interviews with health policy, pricing, technology assessment and legal experts in seven European countries to identify those most likely to gain traction.

resultsExperts saw a need for agreed approaches within a country to manage affordability and funding challenges for CTs. Changes to health technology assessment (HTA) and funding models were considered unlikely, but other policy proposals were seen as mostly useful, with country-specific adaptations. Bilateral discussions between manufacturers and payers were deemed important, and less challenging and protracted than arbitrated dialogue between manufacturers. Usage-specific pricing, possibly using weighted average prices, was considered a prerequisite for the financial management of CTs.

conclusionsThere is a growing need to ensure that CTs are affordable to health systems. It would appear that there is no one set of policies that is appropriate for all countries in Europe, so countries wishing to ensure that patients have (or continue to have) access to CTs of value to them must explore and implement the policies that are best suited to their general approach to funding health care and to the assessment and reimbursement of medicines.

Indexed as

Health PolicyMedical OncologyCosts and Cost AnalysisEuropeHumans

Identifiers

PMID36897550
OpenAlexW4323812941

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.