Literature DB >> 22583470

Guidelines for health technologies: specific guidance for oncology products in Canada.

Nicole Mittmann1, William K Evans, Angela Rocchi, Christopher J Longo, Heather-Jane Au, Don Husereau, Natasha B Leighl, Pierre K Isogai, Murray D Krahn, Stuart Peacock, Deborah Marshall, Doug Coyle, Suzanne C Malfair Taylor, Philip Jacobs, Paul I Oh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Specific methodological challenges are often encountered during cancer-related economic evaluations. The objective of this study was to provide specific guidance to analysts on the methods for the conduct of high-quality economic evaluations in oncology by building on the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies (third edition).
METHODS: Fifteen oncologists, health economists, health services researchers, and decision makers from across Canada identified sections in Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health guidelines that would benefit from oncology-specific guidance. Fifteen sections of the guidelines were reviewed to determine whether 1) Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health guidelines were sufficient for the conduct of oncology economic evaluations without further guidance specific for oncology products or 2) additional guidance was necessary. A scoping review was conducted by using a comprehensive and replicable search to identify relevant literature to inform recommendations. Recommendations were reviewed by representatives of academia, government, and the pharmaceutical industry in an iterative and formal review of the recommendations.
RESULTS: Major adaptations for guidance related to time horizon, effectiveness, modeling, costs, and resources were required. Recommendations around the use of final outcomes over intermediate outcomes to calculate quality-adjusted life-years and life-years gained, the type of evidence, the source of evidence, and the use of time horizon and modeling were made.
CONCLUSIONS: This article summarizes key recommendations for the conduct of economic evaluations in oncology and describes methods required to ensure that economic assessments in oncology are conducted in a standardized manner.
Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22583470     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  7 in total

Review 1.  Is there an economic rationale for cancer drugs to have a separate reimbursement review process for resource allocation purposes?

Authors:  Heather McDonald; Cathy Charles; Laurie Elit; Amiram Gafni
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Cost Effectiveness of Ofatumumab Plus Chlorambucil in First-Line Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia in Canada.

Authors:  William Herring; Isobel Pearson; Molly Purser; Hamid Reza Nakhaipour; Amin Haiderali; Sorrel Wolowacz; Kavisha Jayasundara
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Cost-effectiveness of zoledronic acid compared with clodronate in multiple myeloma.

Authors:  T E Delea; K El Ouagari; J Rotter; A Wang; S Kaura; G J Morgan
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Cost-effectiveness of everolimus for the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumours of gastrointestinal or lung origin in Canada.

Authors:  A Chua; A Perrin; J F Ricci; M P Neary; M Thabane
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.677

Review 5.  Economic Impact of Tissue Testing and Treatments of Metastatic NSCLC in the Era of Personalized Medicine.

Authors:  Donna M Graham; Natasha B Leighl
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 6.244

6.  The economic burden of patient safety targets in acute care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Nicole Mittmann; Marika Koo; Nick Daneman; Andrew McDonald; Michael Baker; Anne Matlow; Murray Krahn; Kaveh G Shojania; Edward Etchells
Journal:  Drug Healthc Patient Saf       Date:  2012-10-05

7.  Specific guidelines for assessing and improving the methodological quality of economic evaluations of newborn screening.

Authors:  Astrid Langer; Rolf Holle; Jürgen John
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2012-09-04       Impact factor: 2.655

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.