American Society of Clinical Oncology statement: A conceptual framework to assess the value of cancer treatment options

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 33, Issue 23, 2015, Pages 2563-2577

  Schnipper, Lowell E ^a   Davidson, Nancy E ^e   Wollins, Dana S ^g   Tyne, Courtney ^g   Blayney, Douglas W ^h   Blum, Diane ^d   Dicker, Adam P ^f   Ganz, Patricia A ⁱ   Hoverman, J Russell ^l   Langdon, Robert ^d   Lyman, Gary H ^m   Meropol, Neal J ⁿ   Mulvey, Therese ^d   Newcomer, Lee ^o   Peppercorn, Jeffrey ^b   Polite, Blase ^p   Raghavan, Derek ^d   Rossi, Gregory ^q   Saltz, Leonard ^k   Schrag, Deborah ^c   Smith, Thomas J ^r   Yu, Peter P ^j   Hudis, Clifford A ^k   Schilsky, Richard L ^g   more..

^a HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d Southcoast Centers for Cancer Care ^*  (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^f THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY   (United States)

^h STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^j PALO ALTO MEDICAL FOUNDATION   (United States)

^k MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^l TEXAS ONCOLOGY   (United States)

^m Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

ⁿ UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS OF CLEVELAND   (United States)

^o UNITEDHEALTH GROUP   (United States)

^p UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^q ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^r JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT;

ARTICLE; CANCER THERAPY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; COST; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MEDICAL SOCIETY; ONCOLOGY; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE; UNITED STATES;

DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; HUMANS; NEOPLASMS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84939251874     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.6706     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Mariotto AB, Yabroff KR, Shao Y, et al: Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:117-128, 2011
2. Institute of Medicine: US Health in International Perspective: Shorter Lives, Poorer Health. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2013
3. Schoen C, Osborn R, Squires D, et al: Access, affordability, and insurance complexity are often worse in the United States compared to 10 other countries. Health Aff (Millwood) 32:2205-2215, 2013
4. Commonwealth Fund Commission on a High Performance Health System: Why Not the Best? Results from the National Scorecard on US Health System Performance, 2011. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/files/publications/fund-report/2011/oct/1500-wntb-natl-scorecard-2011-web-v2.pdf
5. Shih YT, Ganz PA, Aberle D, et al: Delivering high-quality and affordable care throughout the cancer care continuum. J Clin Oncol 31:4151-4157, 2013
6. Weeks JC, Catalano PJ, Cronin A, et al: Patients' expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer. N Engl J Med 367:1616-1625, 2012
7. Ramsey S, Blough D, Kirchhoff A, et al: Washington State cancer patients found to be at greater risk for bankruptcy than people without a cancer diagnosis. Health Aff (Millwood) 32:1143-1152, 2013
8. Zafar SY, Abernathy AP: Financial toxicity, part 1: A new name for a growing problem. Oncology (Williston Park) 27:80-81, 149, 2013
9. Streeter SB, Schwartzberg L, Husain N, et al: Patient and plan characteristics affecting abandonment of oral oncolytic prescriptions. J Oncol Pract 7:46s-51s, 2011 (suppl)
10. Zafar SU, McNeil RB, Thomas CM, et al: Population-based assessment of cancer survivors' financial burden and quality of life: A prospective cohort study. J Oncol Pract 11:145-150, 2015
11. Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, et al: The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: A pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience. Oncologist 18:381-390, 2013
12. Ahmed IA, Harvey A, Amsellem M, et al: Provider-patient communication about cost of care: Results from a national patient education program. J Clin Oncol 31:594s, 2013 (suppl 15; abstr 9578)
13. Alexander GC, Casalino LP, Meltzer DO: Patient-physician communication about out-of-pocket costs. JAMA 290:953-958, 2003
14. Sulmasy D, Moy B: Debating the oncologist's role in defining the value of cancer care: Our duty is to our patients. J Clin Oncol 32:4039-4041, 2014
15. Weinstein MC: Should physicians be gatekeepers of medical resources? J Med Ethics 27:268-274, 2001
16. Meropol NJ, Schrag D, Smith TJ, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology guidance statement: The cost of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 27:3868-3874, 2009
17. Schnipper LE, Smith TJ, Raghavan D, et al: ASCO identifies five key opportunities to improve care and reduce costs: The top five list for oncology. J Clin Oncol 30:1715-1724, 2012
18. Schnipper LE, Lyman GH, Blayney DW: American Society of Clinical Oncology 2013 top five list in oncology. J Clin Oncol 31:4362-4370, 2013
19. Snyder LS: Review of the American College of Physicians Ethics Manual: Sixth edition. Ann Intern Med 156:73-104, 2012
20. Feeley TW, Fly HS, Albright H, et al: A method for defining value in healthcare using cancer care as a model. J Healthc Manag 55:399-411, 2010
21. Institute of Medicine: Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2001
22. Institute of Medicine: Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2013
23. Zafar SY, Alexander SC, Weinfurt KP, et al: Decision making and quality of life in the treatment of cancer: A review. Support Care Cancer 17:117-127, 2009
24. Ubel PA: Beyond costs and benefits: Understanding how patients make health care decisions. Oncologist 15:5-10, 2010 (suppl 1)
25. Danzon PM, Taylor E: Drug pricing and value in oncology. Oncologist 15:24-31, 2010 (suppl 1)
26. Surbone A: Communication preferences and needs of cancer patients: The importance of content. Support Care Cancer 14:789-791, 2006
27. Weinstein M, Torrance G, McGuire A: QALYS: The basics. Value Health 12:S5-S9, 2009 (suppl 1)
28. Sorenson C, Drummond M, Kanavos P: Ensuring value for money in health care: The role of health technology assessment in the European Union. http://www.euro.who.int/-data/assets/pdf-file/0011/98291/E91271.pdf
29. Morgan SG, McMahon M, Mitton C, et al: Centralized drug review processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom. Health Aff (Millwood) 25:337-347, 2006
30. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. http://www.nice.org.uk/article/pmg9/chapter/1-introduction
31. Scottish Medicines Consortium: Templates/guidelines for submission. https://www.scottishmedicines.org.uk/Submission-Process/Submission-guidance-and-forms/Templates-Guidance-for-Submission/Templates-Guidance-for-Submission
32. All Wales Medicines Strategy Group: Medicines strategy for Wales. http://www.awmsg.org/awmsg-strategy.html
33. Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: pCODR Expert Review Committee Deliberative Framework. http://www.pcodr.ca/idc/groups/pcodr/documents/pcodrdocument/pcodr-perc-deliberative-frame.pdf
34. Institut National d'Excellence Santé et en Services Sociaux: Evaluation process and criteria. https://www.inesss.qc.ca/en/activites/drug-products/evaluation-process-and-criteria.html
35. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Guidelines for preparing submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. http://www.pbac.pbs.gov.au/
36. Haute Autorité de Santé: Contribuer à la régulation par la qualité et l'efficience. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c-419565/fr/commission-evaluation-economique-et-de-sante-publique
37. Ministère des Affaires Sociales de la Santéet des Droits des Femmes. http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000026453514&dateTexte=&oldAction=rechJO&categorieLien=id
38. Bundesministerium für Gesundheit: Das Gesetz zur Neuordnung des Arzneimittelmarktes (AMNOG). http://www.bmg.bund.de/glossarbegriffe/a/das-gesetz-zur-neuordnung-des-arzneimittelmarktes-amnog.html
39. Peppercorn J, Zafar SY, Houck K, et al: Does comparative effectiveness research promote rationing of cancer care? Lancet Oncol. 15:e132-e138, 2014
40. Anderson JL, Heidenreich PA, Barnett PG, et al: ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on performance measures and task force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 63:2304-2322, 2014
41. Sandler A, Gray R, Perry MC, et al: Paclitaxel-carboplatin alone or with bevacizumab for non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 355:2542-50, 2006
42. Scagliotti GV, Parikh P, von Pawel J, et al: Phase III study comparing cisplatin plus gemcitabine with cisplatin plus pemetrexed in chemotherapynaive patients with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 26:3543-3551, 2008
43. Georgoulias V, Papadakis E, Alexopoulos A, et al: Platinum-based and nonplatinum-based chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A randomized multicenter trial. Lancet 357:1478-1484, 2001
44. Rosell R, Carcereny E, Gervais R, et al: Erlotinib versus standard chemotherapy as first-line treatment for European patients with advanced EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (EURTAC): A multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 13:239-246, 2012
45. UnitedHealthcare
46. San Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al: Bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone for initial treatment of multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med 359:906-917, 2008
47. San Miguel JF, Schlag R, Khuageva NK, et al: Persistent overall survival benefit and no increased risk of second malignancies with bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone versus melphalan-prednisone in patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol 31:448-455, 2013
48. De Bono JS, Logothetis CJ, Molina A, et al: Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 364:1995-2005, 2011
49. Logothetis CJ, Basch E, Molina A, et al: Effect of abiraterone acetate and prednisone compared with placebo and prednisone on pain control and skeletal-related events in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: Exploratory analysis of data from the COU-AA-301 randomized trial. Lancet Oncol 13:1210-1217, 2012
50. De Bono JS, Oudard S, Ozguroglu M, et al: Prednisone plus cabazitaxel or mitoxantrone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment: A randomized open-label trial. Lancet 376:1147-1154, 2010
51. Scher HI, Fizazi K, Saad F, et al: Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med 367:1187-1197, 2012
52. Romond EH, Perez EA, Bryant J, et al: Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 353:1673-1684, 2005
53. Perez EA, Romond EH, Suman VJ, et al: Four-year follow-up of trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: Joint analysis of data from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol 29:3366-3373, 2011
54. Slamon D, Eirmann W, Robert N, et al: Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 365:1273-1283, 2011
55. Ellis LM, Bernstein DS, Voest EE, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology perspective: Raising the bar for clinical trials by defining clinically meaningful outcomes. J Clin Oncol 32:1277-1280, 2014
56. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J: Net health benefits: A new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 12:S68-S80, 1998 (suppl)
57. Ollendorf D, Pearson SD: ICER Evidence Rating Matrix: A User's Guide. http://www.icer-review.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Rating-Matrix-User-Guide-Exec-Summ-FINAL.pdf
58. Prieto L, Sacristán JA: Problems and solutions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:80, 2003