ArticleESMO open2023
Access to novel cancer medicines in four countries in Central and Eastern Europe in relation to clinical benefit.
Article in ESMO open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physicians' Perspectives on Access to Innovative Oncology Therapies: A Cross-Sectional Survey in Bulgaria.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Societal Burden of Breast Cancer in Working-Age Women in Croatia: A Multicentre Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cancer mortality in Europe in 2020, and an overview of trends since 1990.European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation (ECP) · 2026Article
- Accuracy of Budget Impact Projections in Bulgarian Health Technology Assessment: A Five-Year Validation Study (2020-2025).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Quality of Life Among Polish Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Characteristics and availability of medicine early access programs and donations in Slovenia.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Characteristics of indications, clinical trial evidence, clinical benefits and the costs of price-negotiated multi-indication drugs for solid tumours in China.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Multi-Year Multi-Indication Agreements for Supporting Patient Access to Oncology Medicines with Multiple Indications: An Experimental Approach or Here to Stay?Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- Improvement in breast cancer survival across molecular subtypes in Hungary between 2011 and 2020: a nationwide, retrospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Impact of competition on reimbursement decisions for cancer drugs in China: an observational study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Demographic Analysis of Cancer Research Priorities and Treatment Correlations.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- New systemic treatment paradigms in resectable non-small cell lung cancer and variations in patient access across Europe.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Review
- Challenges and controversies in resectable non-small cell lung cancer: a clinician's perspective.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2024Review
- Obstacles and solutions for implementing amyloid-targeting treatments in Europe.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlmost 100 novel cancer medicines have been approved in Europe over the last decade. Limited public health care resources in countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) call for a prioritization of access to effective medicines. We investigated how both reimbursement status and waiting time to reimbursement correlate with the magnitude of clinical benefit provided by novel medicines in four selected countries (Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 124 indications of 51 cancer medicines with marketing authorization by the European Medicines Agency in 2011-2020 were included and followed up until 2022. Data on reimbursement status and waiting time to reimbursement (i.e. time from marketing authorization to national reimbursement approval) were collected for each country. Data were analyzed in relation to clinical benefit status (i.e. substantial versus nonsubstantial clinical benefit) of indications according to the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).
resultsThe degree of reimbursement differed between countries with 64% of indications with reimbursement in Czechia, 40% in Hungary, 51% in Poland, and 19% in Slovakia. In all countries, a significantly greater proportion of indications with a substantial clinical benefit was reimbursed (P < 0.05). The median waiting time to reimbursement ranged from 27 months in Poland to 37 months in Hungary. No significant differences in waiting time in relation to clinical benefit were observed in any country (P = 0.25-0.84).
conclusionsCancer medicines with a substantial clinical benefit are more likely to be reimbursed in all four CEE countries. Waiting times to reimbursement are equally long for medicines with or without a substantial clinical benefit, indicating a lack of prioritization of fast access to medicines delivering a substantial benefit. Incorporation of the ESMO-MCBS in reimbursement assessments and decisions could aid in better utilization of limited resources to deliver more effective cancer care.
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.