An economic perspective on targeted treatments;Perspective économique sur les traitements ciblés

Medecine/Sciences

Volumn 30, Issue , 2014, Pages 32-35

  Seror, Valérie ^a,b  

^a INSERM   (France)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; ECONOMICS; EXPERIMENTAL THERAPY; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; PATIENT SELECTION; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; PHARMACOGENETICS; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COST SAVINGS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; GENETIC TESTING; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE; INSURANCE, HEALTH; PATIENT SELECTION; PHARMACOGENETICS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; THERAPIES, INVESTIGATIONAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84912099618     PISSN: 07670974     EISSN: 19585381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1051/medsci/201430s207     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ, Minkov M. Cultures and organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997.
2. Holzer B. Political consumerism between individual choice and collective action: social movements, role mobilization and signalling. Int J Cons Stud 2006; 30: 405-415.
3. Lesko LJ. Personalized medicine: elusive dream or imminent reality?. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2007; 81: 807-816.
4. Hoggatt J. Personalized medicine-trends in molecular diagnostics: exponential growth expected in the next ten years. Mol Diagn Ther 2011; 15: 53-55.
5. Coulter A. Paternalism or partnership? Patients have grown up-and there's no going back. Br Med J 1999; 319: 719-720.
6. Seror V, Marino P, Bertucci F, et al. Breast cancer patients' views on the use of genomic testing to guide decisions about their postoperative chemotherapy. Public Health Genomics 2013; 16: 110-117.
7. DiMasi JA, Hansen RW, Grabowski HG. The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. J Health Econ 2003; 22: 151-185.
8. Kola I, Landis J. Can the pharmaceutical industry reduce attrition rates? Nat Rev Drug Discov 2004; 3: 711-715.
9. Moore TJ, Cohen MR, Furberg CD. Serious adverse drug events reported to the Food and drug administration, 1998-2005. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167: 1752-1759.
10. Blair ED, Stratton EK, Kaufmann M. The economic value of companion diagnostics and stratified medicines. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2012; 12: 791-794.
11. Marino P, Bertucci F, Goncalvez A, Seror V. Tests diagnostiques et thérapies ciblées en cancérologie: enjeux économiques. Med Sci (Paris) 2012; 28: 19-23.
12. Fugel HJ, Nuijten M, Postma M. Stratified medicine, reimbursement issues. Front Pharmacol 2012; 3: 181.
13. Marino P, Siani C, Bertucci F, et al. Economic issues involved in integrating genomic testing into clinical care: the case of genomic testing to guide decision-making about chemotherapy for breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 129: 401-409.
14. Davis JC, Furstenthal L, Desai AA, et al. The microeconomics of personalized medicine: today's challenge and tomorrow's promise. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2009; 8: 279-286.
15. Trosman JR, Van Bebber SL, Phillips KA. Health technology assessment and private payers' coverage of personalized medicine. J Oncol Pract 2011; 7: s18s-s124.
16. Deverka PA. Pharmacogenomics, evidence, and the role of payers. Public Health Genomics 2009; 12: 149-157.
17. Frank M, Mittendorf T. Influence of pharmacogenomic profiling prior to pharmaceutical treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer on cost effectiveness: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics 2013; 31: 215-228.
18. Atherly AJ, Camidge Dr. The cost-effectiveness of screening lung cancer patients for targeted drug sensitivity markers. Br J Cancer 2012; 106: 1100-1106.
19. Retel VP, Joore MA, Drukker CA, et al. Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis of genomic profiling in breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2013; 49: 3773-3779.
20. Roche H, Fumoleau P, Spielmann M, et al. Sequential adjuvant epirubicin-based and docetaxel chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer patients: the FNCLCC PACS 01 Trial. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 5664-5671.
21. Bertucci F, Borie N, Roche H, et al. Gene expression profile predicts outcome after anthracycline-based adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 127: 363-373.
22. Ladislav S. Toxicities of taxanes. J Cancer Res Ther 2013; 9: 161.
23. Marino P, Siani C, Roche H, et al. Cost-effectiveness of adjuvant docetaxel for node-positive breast cancer patients: results of the PACS 01 economic study. Ann Oncol 2010; 21: 1448-1454.
24. Eichler HG, Bloechl-Daum B, Abadie E, et al. Relative efficacy of drugs: an emerging issue between regulatory agencies and third-party payers. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2010; 9: 277-291.
25. Schreyogg J, Baumler M, Busse R. Balancing adoption and affordability of medical devices in Europe. Health Policy 2009; 92: 218-224.
26. Meckley LM, Neumann PJ. Personalized medicine: factors influencing reimbursement. Health Policy 2010; 94: 91-100.
27. Seror V, Elasri K, Avenel E. Premières applications de la pharmacogénomique en oncologie-stratégies industrielles et enjeux de régulation publique. Revue d'Économie Industrielle 2007; 120: 235-252.
28. Bobinac A, van Exel J, Rutten FF, Brouwer WB. The value of a QALY: individual willingness to pay for health gains under risk. Pharmacoeconomics 2014; 32: 75-86.
29. Robinson A, Gyrd-Hansen D, Bacon P, et al. Estimating a WTP-based value of a QALY: the chained approach. Soc Sci Med 2013; 92: 92-104.
30. Aspinall MG, Hamermesh RG. Realizing the promise of personalized medicine. Harv Bus Rev 2007; 85: 108-117,. 165.