Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37638358›Full record

ArticleBulletin of the World Health Organization2023

A National Cancer Grid pooled procurement initiative, India.

C S Pramesh, Manju Sengar, Sumedha Patankar, Girish Chinnaswamy, Sudeep Gupta, M Vijayakumar, Sanjeev Sood, Anil N Sathe, Venkatraman Radhakrishnan, Prasanth Ganesan and 2 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

C S PrameshTata Memorial Hospital, Tata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Dr Ernest Borges Road, Parel, Mumbai400012, India.
Manju SengarTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sumedha PatankarTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Girish ChinnaswamyTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Sudeep GuptaTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
M VijayakumarZulekha Yenepoya Institute of Oncology, Yenepoya (Deemed to be university), Mangalore, India.
Sanjeev SoodTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Anil N SatheTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Venkatraman RadhakrishnanCancer Institute (Women in India) Chennai, India.
Prasanth GanesanJawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research, Puducherry, India.
Krishna Mohan MallavarapuBasavatarakam Indo American Cancer Hospital & Research Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Rajendra A BadweTata Memorial Centre, affiliated with the Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India.
Basavatarakam Indo American Cancer Hospital and Research Institute · INJawaharlal Institute of Post Graduate Medical Education and Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In health systems with little public funding and decentralized procurement processes, the pricing and quality of anti-cancer medicines directly affects access to effective anti-cancer therapy. Factors such as differential pricing, volume-dependent negotiation and reliance on low-priced generics without any evaluation of their quality can lead to supply and demand lags, high out-of-pocket expenditures for patients and poor treatment outcomes. While pooled procurement of medicines can help address some of these challenges, monitoring of the procurement process requires considerable administrative investment. Group negotiation to fix prices, issuing of uniform contracts with standardized terms and conditions, and procurement by individual hospitals also reduce costs and improve quality without significant investment. The National Cancer Grid, a network of more than 250 cancer centres in India, piloted pooled procurement to improve negotiability of high-value oncology and supportive care medicines. A total of 40 drugs were included in this pilot. The pooled demand for the drugs from 23 centres was equivalent to 15.6 billion Indian rupees (197 million United States dollars (US$)) based on maximum retail prices. The process included technical and financial evaluation followed by contracts between individual centres and the selected vendors. Savings of 13.2 billion Indian Rupees (US$ 166.7million) were made compared to the maximum retail prices. The savings ranged from 23% to 99% (median: 82%) and were more with generics than innovator and newly patented medicines. This study reveals the advantages of group negotiation in pooled procurement for high-value medicines, an approach that can be applied to other health systems.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsDrugs, GenericHealth ExpendituresHospitalsHumansIndiaDrugs, Generic

Identifiers

PMID37638358
PMCPMC10452934
OpenAlexW4386209307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.