Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42754625›Full record

ArticleGene therapy2026

Patient, consumer and societal values, perceptions and preferences on high-cost gene therapies.

Amanda Rush, Maria Gomez, Kristine Pierce, De Abreu Lourenco Richard, Kylie Mason, Kirsten Howard, Garry Lynch, Pippy Walker, Rosalie Viney, Jo Watson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gene therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Amanda RushSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. amanda.rush@sydney.edu.au.
Maria GomezSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kristine PierceChild Unlimited, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
De Abreu Lourenco RichardCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kylie MasonThe Sir Peter Maccallum Department of Oncology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Kirsten HowardSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Garry LynchSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Pippy WalkerSydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rosalie VineyCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jo WatsonHTA Consumer Consultative Committee, Department of Health, Disability and Ageing, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Funding

Department of Health, Australian Government (Department of Health) 2025090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel cell and gene therapies hold great potential to alter the clinical course of a range of chronic diseases, yet uncertainties remain regarding their long-term efficacy and impact. These uncertainties pose challenges for Health Technology Assessment (HTA) committees, which systematically assess health interventions seeking public subsidy. Haematological conditions are a common target for gene therapies; however, the perspectives of those both directly and indirectly impacted by funding decisions for therapies in this disease area have not been investigated. To support future HTA considerations of gene therapies, we explored the perspectives of individuals living with haematological conditions who may become eligible for such treatments, alongside their caregivers and members of the general population in Australia. We undertook interviews and focus groups with 55 participants with lived experience and 32 general population members to elicit responses on what might influence decision making on gene therapies; the potential benefits or harms of gene therapies; any perceived barriers to gene therapy access; and/or uncertainties associated with the respective gene therapy. Here, we describe the parallel perspectives of health consumers and the general population, providing five key areas of consideration for HTA decision-making: individual patient and disease factors; geographical, financial and clinical access; balancing disease and quality of life benefits with adverse effects; individual and health system costs; and remaining treatment uncertainties. These will require resolution before widespread acceptability and uptake of gene therapy.

Identifiers

PMID42754625

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.