ReviewClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2026
Early access to medicines in Spain: a retrospective hospital study with a proposal for a regulatory change.
Review in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedicines awaiting price and reimbursement (P&R) decisions represent a delicate situation in the Spanish NHS. The interval between marketing authorisation (MA) and PR averages 616 days, leaving patients without standard access to EU-approved treatments for almost 2 years, despite their eventual availability. While early access before MA is regulated, no framework exists for the period between MA and PR. Responsibility for funding falls to hospitals or autonomous regions, with no harmonised criteria, leading to inequities in access.
objectivesTo describe our access model to medicines in special situations (MSS), and to evaluate the clinical and regulatory implications of this procedure.
methodsWe conducted a 2-year retrospective review of MSS access requests. Our tertiary hospital uses a transparent pathway: clinicians submit a consultation to Clinical Pharmacology and Hospital Pharmacy; departments issue independent reports to Hospital Administration, which decides, considering individual justification, clinical need, early access, and treatment benefit.
resultsA total of 295 request were received, and 78 involved products pending PR decision. Of them, 73 (93.6%) were granted local access. Subsequently, PR status changed to regular access in 64.1% of these requests (50/78), ensuring early access for 62.8% of patients (49/78). Onco-haematological patients granted early access showed an overall disease control rate of 63%, with a median survival of 16 months.
conclusionsUntil legislation regulates access to medicines awaiting reimbursement, or decision times are reduced, implementing robust local procedures is essential to guarantee fair and equitable MSS access, particularly for patients requiring treatment before national PR resolution.
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.