Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39088340›Full record

ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2024

Evolving oncology care management trends in the United States: A survey among health care decision makers.

Gary Oderda, Diana Brixner, Joseph Biskupiak, James Harnett, Chieh-I Chen, Ruben G W Quek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. AMCP Market Insights: Managed care approaches toJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Gary OderdaCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Diana BrixnerCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Joseph BiskupiakCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
James HarnettRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY.
Chieh-I ChenRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY.
Ruben G W QuekRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is limited knowledge of how US managed care professionals view and prioritize quality metrics/performance measures, care models, alternative payment models, and clinical pathways in oncology settings.

objectiveTo characterize payor perspectives on, and the use of, oncology clinical pathways and performance measures in their reimbursement/access decision-making process.

methodsA survey was implemented via SurveyMonkey software and distributed electronically to a national sample of the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) Market Insights Panel members from July 11 through August 5, 2022. The survey was created by a steering committee based on literature reviews of the current and future oncology care landscapes. The survey consisted of 47 questions, including those to establish respondents' position, responsibilities, and demographics. The results are presented as descriptive statistics for 7 key questions that covered the perceptions and use of quality metrics/performance measures, alternative payment models, and oncology care pathways as prioritized by the steering committee.

resultsAmong the 695 AMCP panel members who were sent the survey, 73 responded (response rate 10.5%), 54 were eligible to continue, and 31 completed the entire questionnaire; the low response rate may limit generalizability of the survey results. Specific oncology clinical and economic measures of performance were currently used (70%-88%) but generally received less endorsement for future use (39%-49%) except for chemotherapy during end of life, which was considered for future use by 80% of respondents but was only currently used by 31%. Benchmarking was the primary reason for the use of performance measures; only 27% used these to inform value-based agreements. Real-world data tracked by respondents' institutions primarily focused on managed care and pharmacy utilization (39%-85%), with patient-reported and clinical outcomes tracked by only 17%-34%. Almost one-third (31%) did not use clinical oncology pathways, and among those who did, fewer than half (48%) reported that their organization tracks whether treatment decisions agree with the oncology care pathways, and only 26% reported feedback to oncology providers on how often their treatment decisions agree with the pathways. When considering alternative payment models, patient-related components received lower rankings in importance than clinical relevance, actionability, and costs.

conclusionsVariation among payors regarding current trends in oncology care management, including on the importance of patient-centric outcomes and the use of oncology clinical pathways, suggests the need to focus on value-based health care and greater uptake of oncology clinical pathways.

Indexed as

Managed Care ProgramsMedical OncologyDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleNeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39088340
PMCPMC11293761

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.