Literature DB >> 16350873

Access to drugs for cancer: Does where you live matter?

Devidas Menon1, Tania Stafinski, Gavin Stuart.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Provincial governments are responsible for administering publicly-funded anti-cancer drug benefit programs in Canada. This study examines inter-provincial variations in not only the content of such programs, but also the policies/processes used when considering a new drug for coverage.
METHODS: Pharmaceutical manufacturers and provincial/regional cancer boards were surveyed to identify the drugs covered by public drug benefit plans. Kappa coefficients were calculated to determine inter-provincial coverage variations. The comprehensiveness of availability of anti-cancer drugs across the country was also assessed. A semi-structured survey of all 10 provincial/regional cancer board pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committees was employed to examine decision-making policies/procedures. It included questions on committee composition and processes and on factors influencing decisions regarding the introduction of new drugs. Completed surveys were analyzed using qualitative and quantitative techniques.
RESULTS: All cancer boards and 75% of manufacturers contacted provided information on drugs covered in each province. Where lists were obtained from both sources, there was full agreement on content. Kappa values calculated ranged from -0.403 to 0.594, indicating poor to moderate agreement on anti-cancer drug coverage between provinces. Only 7 of the 115 drugs were available in all 10 provinces. Regarding decision-making processes, while ratings for both the relative importance and use of factors involved in decision-making (clinical effectiveness, patient preference, etc.) were similar across provinces, those for the relative importance and use of different information types (clinical trials, expert opinion, etc.) varied.
CONCLUSION: Access to anti-cancer drugs clearly varies across the country. In part, this may be due to differences in the views of P&T committees on the usefulness of information they use in their deliberations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16350873

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Public Health        ISSN: 0008-4263


  21 in total

1.  Listening for prescriptions: a national consultation on pharmaceutical policy issues.

Authors:  Steve Morgan; Colleen M Cunningham
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2010-11

2.  Access to cancer drugs in Canada: looking beyond coverage decisions.

Authors:  Roger Chafe; Anthony Culyer; Mark Dobrow; Peter C Coyte; Carol Sawka; Susan O'Reilly; Kara Laing; Maureen Trudeau; Sharon Smith; Jeffrey S Hoch; Steve Morgan; Stuart Peacock; Rick Abbott; Terrence Sullivan
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2011-02

3.  Common Drug Review recommendations: an evidence base for expectations?

Authors:  Angela Rocchi; Elizabeth Miller; Robert B Hopkins; Ron Goeree
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Breadth, Depth and Agreement among Provincial Formularies in Canada.

Authors:  Steve Morgan; Gillian Hanley; Colette Raymond; Régis Blais
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2009-05

Review 5.  Reimbursement of Drugs for Rare Diseases through the Public Healthcare System in Canada: Where Are We Now?

Authors:  Devidas Menon; Derek Clark; Tania Stafinski
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2015-08

6.  To fund or not to fund: development of a decision-making framework for the coverage of new health technologies.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Christopher McCabe; Donald J Philippon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Public funding of pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands: investigating the effect of evidence, process and context on CVZ decision-making.

Authors:  Karin H Cerri; Martin Knapp; Jose-Luis Fernandez
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-07-18

Review 8.  Health technology funding decision-making processes around the world: the same, yet different.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Donald J Philippon; Christopher McCabe
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Less than ideal: how oncologists practice with limited drug access.

Authors:  Kelvin K Chan; Bertha Wong; Lillian L Siu; Sharon E Straus; José Chang; Scott R Berry
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2012-01-10       Impact factor: 3.840

10.  The politics of access to expensive drugs: INESSS and the innovative pharmaceutical industry.

Authors:  David Hughes
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2012-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.