Comparing assessment frameworks for cancer drugs between Canada and Europe: What can we learn from the differences?

Related Articles

Comparing assessment frameworks for cancer drugs between Canada and Europe: What can we learn from the differences?

ESMO Open. 2016;1(6):e000124

Authors: Cheung MC, Chan KK, Sabharwal M, Fields A, Chambers A, Evans WK

Abstract
The increasing burden of costs associated with novel cancer therapies is becoming untenable. In Europe and Canada, assessment frameworks have been developed to attribute value to novel therapies and ultimately facilitate access to cancer drug funding. A review of the two frameworks has not previously been undertaken. This review provides insight into the relative strengths and benefits of each approach, the various perspectives of value (patient, physician and societal) and how the frameworks relate to their unique context and core principles. Both frameworks assess the clinical benefit of a new cancer therapy. The European framework considers effectiveness, quality of life, and toxicity in its determination of benefit and has the advantage of providing a simple summary score to facilitate priority setting. The Canadian framework considers other elements including cost-effectiveness, patient preferences and adoption feasibility; its deliberative framework precludes a simple summative presentation of value but can address complex and nuanced drug funding considerations with flexibility. Both frameworks have evolved to meet the needs unique to their jurisdictions and offer potentially complementary tools in the assessment of new cancer drugs. Lessons learnt in both systems can be applied to future iterations of the frameworks, which remain works in progress.

PMID: 29209520 [PubMed]

from # All Medicine by Alexandros G. Sfakianakis via alkiviadis.1961 on Inoreader http://ift.tt/2joDHEF