Suppr超能文献

肿瘤学中的价值框架:比较分析及其对制药行业的影响

Value Frameworks in Oncology: Comparative Analysis and Implications to the Pharmaceutical Industry.

作者信息

Slomiany Mark, Madhavan Priya, Kuehn Michael, Richardson Sasha

机构信息

Consultant, Market Access Health, GfK, New York, NY.

Senior Analyst, Market Access Health, GfK, New York, NY.

出版信息

Am Health Drug Benefits. 2017 Jul;10(5):253-260.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

As the cost of oncology care continues to rise, composite value models that variably capture the diverse concerns of patients, physicians, payers, policymakers, and the pharmaceutical industry have begun to take shape.

OBJECTIVES

To review the capabilities and limitations of 5 of the most notable value frameworks in oncology that have emerged in recent years and to compare their relative value and application among the intended stakeholders.

METHODS

We compared the methodology of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework (version 2.0), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center DrugAbacus, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review Value Assessment Framework, and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale, using a side-by-side comparative approach in terms of the input, scoring methodology, and output of each framework. In addition, we gleaned stakeholder insights about these frameworks and their potential real-world applications through dialogues with physicians and payers, as well as through secondary research and an aggregate analysis of previously published survey results.

RESULTS

The analysis identified several framework-specific themes in their respective focus on clinical trial elements, breadth of evidence, evidence weighting, scoring methodology, and value to stakeholders. Our dialogues with physicians and our aggregate analysis of previous surveys revealed a varying level of awareness of, and use of, each of the value frameworks in clinical practice. For example, although the ASCO Value Framework appears nascent in clinical practice, physicians believe that the frameworks will be more useful in practice in the future as they become more established and as their outputs are more widely accepted.

CONCLUSIONS

Along with patients and payers, who bear the burden of treatment costs, physicians and policymakers have waded into the discussion of defining value in oncology care, as well as pharmaceutical companies that seek to understand the impact of these value frameworks on each stakeholder, as they model the value and financial threshold of innovative, high-cost drugs.

摘要

背景

随着肿瘤治疗成本持续上升,能不同程度反映患者、医生、支付方、政策制定者及制药行业各种关切的综合价值模型已开始形成。

目的

回顾近年来出现的5种最显著的肿瘤学价值框架的能力与局限性,并比较它们在目标利益相关者中的相对价值及应用情况。

方法

我们采用并排比较法,从每个框架的输入、评分方法和输出方面,对美国临床肿瘤学会(ASCO)价值框架(2.0版)、美国国立综合癌症网络证据模块、纪念斯隆凯特琳癌症中心药物算盘、临床与经济评论学会价值评估框架以及欧洲医学肿瘤学会临床获益程度量表的方法进行了比较。此外,我们通过与医生和支付方的对话,以及二次研究和对先前发表的调查结果的汇总分析,收集了利益相关者对这些框架及其潜在实际应用的见解。

结果

分析确定了几个特定于框架的主题,它们分别侧重于临床试验要素、证据广度、证据权重、评分方法以及对利益相关者的价值。我们与医生的对话以及对先前调查的汇总分析显示,临床实践中对每个价值框架的认知和使用程度各不相同。例如,尽管ASCO价值框架在临床实践中似乎尚处于起步阶段,但医生们认为,随着这些框架更加成熟且其结果被更广泛接受,它们在未来的实践中将更有用。

结论

与承担治疗成本负担的患者和支付方一样,医生和政策制定者也已深入参与到肿瘤治疗价值定义的讨论中,制药公司在对创新型高成本药物的价值和财务阈值进行建模时,也试图了解这些价值框架对每个利益相关者的影响。

相似文献

2
Oncologists' Perceptions of Drug Affordability Using NCCN Evidence Blocks: Results from a National Survey.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018 Jun;24(6):565-571. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.17449. Epub 2018 Feb 16.
3
Approaches to Capturing Value in Oncology.
Recent Results Cancer Res. 2019;213:85-108. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-01207-6_7.
5
Review of Recent US Value Frameworks-A Health Economics Approach: An ISPOR Special Task Force Report [6].
Value Health. 2018 Feb;21(2):155-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.011.
6
Clinical benefit and cost of breakthrough cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
Cancer. 2020 Oct 1;126(19):4390-4399. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33095. Epub 2020 Jul 22.
7
Why Value Framework Assessments Arrive at Different Conclusions: A Multiple Myeloma Case Study.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Jun;23(6-a Suppl):S28-S33. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.6-a.s28.
8
Validity and Reliability of Value Assessment Frameworks for New Cancer Drugs.
Value Health. 2017 Feb;20(2):200-205. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.12.011. Epub 2017 Feb 10.
9
Three Sets of Case Studies Suggest Logic and Consistency Challenges with Value Frameworks.
Value Health. 2017 Feb;20(2):193-199. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.012.

引用本文的文献

1
Association between oral targeted cancer drug net health benefit, uptake, and spending.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2024 Sep 1;116(9):1479-1486. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djae110.
3
The implementation of value-based frameworks, clinical care pathways, and alternative payment models for cancer care in the United States.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2023 Sep;29(9):999-1008. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.22352. Epub 2023 Jun 15.
4
Payer perceptions and use of value assessment tools in the United States.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2023 May;29(5):582-588. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.29.5.582.
8
Do Patient Preferences Align With Value Frameworks? A Discrete-Choice Experiment of Patients With Breast Cancer.
MDM Policy Pract. 2020 Jun 15;5(1):2381468320928012. doi: 10.1177/2381468320928012. eCollection 2020 Jan-Jun.
9
The Accuracy and Usefulness of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Blocks Affordability Rating.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2020 Jul;38(7):737-745. doi: 10.1007/s40273-020-00901-x.
10
Critical Factors Shaping Strategy Development of an Innovative Medicine in Oncology.
Pharmaceut Med. 2020 Apr;34(2):103-112. doi: 10.1007/s40290-020-00328-x.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluation of the ASCO Value Framework for Anticancer Drugs at an Academic Medical Center.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Feb;23(2):163-169. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.2.163.
2
Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework: Revisions and Reflections in Response to Comments Received.
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Aug 20;34(24):2925-34. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.2518. Epub 2016 May 31.
3
Toward a Patient-Centered Value Framework in Oncology.
JAMA. 2016 May 17;315(19):2073-4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.4637.
4
Utility of Cancer Value Frameworks for Patients, Payers, and Physicians.
JAMA. 2016 May 17;315(19):2069-70. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.4915.
5
Value-Based Cancer Care.
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 31;373(27):2593-5. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1508387. Epub 2015 Nov 18.
6
American Society of Clinical Oncology Statement: A Conceptual Framework to Assess the Value of Cancer Treatment Options.
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Aug 10;33(23):2563-77. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.6706. Epub 2015 Jun 22.
8
Innovative payment models and measurement for cancer therapy.
J Oncol Pract. 2014 May;10(3):187-9. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2014.001378.
9
Projections of the cost of cancer care in the United States: 2010-2020.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jan 19;103(2):117-28. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq495. Epub 2011 Jan 12.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验