Literature DB >> 31043821

Impact of a novel prioritization framework on clinician-led oncology drug submissions.

J Keech1,2, J Beca1,2, A Eisen1,3, E Kennedy1,4, J Kim1,5, C T Kouroukis1,6, G Darling1,5, S E Ferguson1,5, A Finelli1,5, T M Petrella1,3, J R Perry1,3, K Chan1,2,3, S Gavura1.   

Abstract

Background: In Canada, requests for public reimbursement of cancer drugs are predominately initiated by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Clinician-led submissions provide a mechanism to initiate the drug funding process when industry does not submit a request for funding consideration. Although such requests are resource-intensive to produce, Cancer Care Ontario (cco) has the capacity to facilitate clinician-led submissions. In 2014, cco began developing a cancer drug prioritization framework that allocates resources to systematically address a growing number of clinician-identified funding gaps with clinician-led submissions.
Methods: Cancer site-specific drug advisory committees established by cco consist of health care practitioners whose roles include identifying and prioritizing funding gaps. The committees submit their identified gaps to a cross-cancer-site prioritization exercise in which the requests are ranked based on a set of guiding principles derived from health technology assessment. The requests are then sequentially allocated the resources needed to meet submission requirements. Whether the funding gap is of provincial or pan-Canadian relevance determines where the submission is filed for assessment.
Results: Since its inception, the cco framework has identified 17 funding gaps in 9 cancer sites. In 4 prioritizations, the framework supported 6 submissions. As of June 2018, the framework had contributed to the eventual funding of more than 9 new drug-indication pairs, with more awaiting funding consideration. Conclusions: The cco prioritization framework has enabled clinicians to effectively and systematically identify, prioritize, and fill funding gaps not addressed by industry. Ultimately, the framework helps to ensure that patients can access evidence-informed and cost-effective therapies. The framework will continue to evolve as it encounters new challenges, including funding requests for rare indications.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Drug funding; clinician-led funding submissions; health technology assessment; prioritization

Year:  2019        PMID: 31043821      PMCID: PMC6476458          DOI: 10.3747/co.26.4501

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Oncol        ISSN: 1198-0052            Impact factor:   3.677


  14 in total

1.  Accountability for reasonableness.

Authors:  N Daniels
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-11-25

2.  Fairness, accountability for reasonableness, and the views of priority setting decision-makers.

Authors:  Douglas K Martin; Mita Giacomini; Peter A Singer
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: how are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge?

Authors:  Hans-Georg Eichler; Sheldon X Kong; William C Gerth; Panagiotis Mavros; Bengt Jönsson
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

Review 4.  Health technology assessment: a comprehensive framework for evidence-based recommendations in Ontario.

Authors:  Ana P Johnson; Nancy J Sikich; Gerald Evans; William Evans; Mita Giacomini; Murray Glendining; Murray Krahn; Les Levin; Paul Oh; Charmaine Perera
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.188

5.  Measuring value and benefit-a matter of perspective.

Authors:  William Kenneth Evans; Matthew C Cheung; Kelvin K-W Chan
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Do the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework and the European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale Measure the Same Construct of Clinical Benefit?

Authors:  Sierra Cheng; Erica J McDonald; Matthew C Cheung; Vanessa S Arciero; Mahin Qureshi; Di Jiang; Doreen Ezeife; Mona Sabharwal; Alexandra Chambers; Dolly Han; Natasha Leighl; Kelley-Anne Sabarre; Kelvin K W Chan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  6-STEPPPs: A Modular Tool to Facilitate Clinician Participation in Fair Decisions for Funding New Cancer Drugs.

Authors:  George P Browman; Braden Manns; Neil Hagen; Carole R Chambers; Anita Simon; Shane Sinclair
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  The prioritization preferences of pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review members and the Canadian public: a stated-preferences comparison.

Authors:  C Skedgel
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 3.677

9.  From efficacy to equity: Literature review of decision criteria for resource allocation and healthcare decisionmaking.

Authors:  Lalla Aïda Guindo; Monika Wagner; Rob Baltussen; Donna Rindress; Janine van Til; Paul Kind; Mireille M Goetghebeur
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2012-07-18

10.  Clinician-led improvement in cancer care (CLICC)--testing a multifaceted implementation strategy to increase evidence-based prostate cancer care: phased randomised controlled trial--study protocol.

Authors:  Bernadette Bea Brown; Jane Young; David P Smith; Andrew B Kneebone; Andrew J Brooks; Miranda Xhilaga; Amanda Dominello; Dianne L O'Connell; Mary Haines
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 7.327

View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparison of Use of Neoadjuvant Systemic Treatment for Breast Cancer and Short-term Outcomes Before vs During the COVID-19 Era in Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Steven Habbous; Xiaochen Tai; Jaclyn M Beca; Jessica Arias; Michael J Raphael; Ambica Parmar; Andrea Crespo; Matthew C Cheung; Andrea Eisen; Antoine Eskander; Simron Singh; Maureen Trudeau; Scott Gavura; Wei Fang Dai; Jonathan Irish; Monika Krzyzanowska; Lauren Lapointe-Shaw; Rohini Naipaul; Stuart Peacock; Lyndee Yeung; Leta Forbes; Kelvin K W Chan
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-08-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.