Advanced

Assessment of value for resource allocation in cancer care

Lindgren, Peter; Jönsson, Bengt and Wilking, Nils LU (2017) In Journal of Cancer Policy 11. p.12-18
Abstract

There has been an increased interest in ways of measuring the value of new therapeutic options in oncology. An example of this in a European context is the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The purpose of this study is to analyse how the value scales, exemplified with ESMO-MCBS, developed mainly to assist decisions by physicians, relate to other measures of clinical benefit and value used by reimbursement agencies.We undertook a comparison of ESMO-MCBS with three different approaches to measure value; the patient benefit scale (AMNOG) used in in Germany, the assessment of ASMR (Amélioration du Service MédicalRendu) used in France and estimates of gain in quality adjusted life years (QALY) used in several countries... (More)

There has been an increased interest in ways of measuring the value of new therapeutic options in oncology. An example of this in a European context is the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The purpose of this study is to analyse how the value scales, exemplified with ESMO-MCBS, developed mainly to assist decisions by physicians, relate to other measures of clinical benefit and value used by reimbursement agencies.We undertook a comparison of ESMO-MCBS with three different approaches to measure value; the patient benefit scale (AMNOG) used in in Germany, the assessment of ASMR (Amélioration du Service MédicalRendu) used in France and estimates of gain in quality adjusted life years (QALY) used in several countries such England and Wales, Scotland and Sweden. The criteria and metrics, as well as the purpose and decision making processes differs between the agencies, which makes it possible to study both differences and similarities between the three different approaches compared to the ESMO-MCBS value framework. Correlations between the scales were formally tested using the Spearmans rank test.There was reasonable agreement between ESMO-MCBS and the AMNOG. Although there was a statistically significant correlation between the scale and ASMR scores overall there is very little agreement between the two categories in the middle of the scale. The link between ESMO-MCBS and QALYs appears to be very weak with very little differentiation between drugs receiving a ESMO-MCBS of 2, 3 or 4.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Clinical benefit, Health priorities, Oncology
in
Journal of Cancer Policy
volume
11
pages
12 - 18
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:85006391375
ISSN
2213-5383
DOI
10.1016/j.jcpo.2016.10.001
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
b20b75a8-bb37-4c6c-b57d-3708415ce9c0
date added to LUP
2017-01-12 08:18:26
date last changed
2018-01-07 11:44:22
@article{b20b75a8-bb37-4c6c-b57d-3708415ce9c0,
  abstract     = {<p>There has been an increased interest in ways of measuring the value of new therapeutic options in oncology. An example of this in a European context is the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The purpose of this study is to analyse how the value scales, exemplified with ESMO-MCBS, developed mainly to assist decisions by physicians, relate to other measures of clinical benefit and value used by reimbursement agencies.We undertook a comparison of ESMO-MCBS with three different approaches to measure value; the patient benefit scale (AMNOG) used in in Germany, the assessment of ASMR (Amélioration du Service MédicalRendu) used in France and estimates of gain in quality adjusted life years (QALY) used in several countries such England and Wales, Scotland and Sweden. The criteria and metrics, as well as the purpose and decision making processes differs between the agencies, which makes it possible to study both differences and similarities between the three different approaches compared to the ESMO-MCBS value framework. Correlations between the scales were formally tested using the Spearmans rank test.There was reasonable agreement between ESMO-MCBS and the AMNOG. Although there was a statistically significant correlation between the scale and ASMR scores overall there is very little agreement between the two categories in the middle of the scale. The link between ESMO-MCBS and QALYs appears to be very weak with very little differentiation between drugs receiving a ESMO-MCBS of 2, 3 or 4.</p>},
  author       = {Lindgren, Peter and Jönsson, Bengt and Wilking, Nils},
  issn         = {2213-5383},
  keyword      = {Clinical benefit,Health priorities,Oncology},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {12--18},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Journal of Cancer Policy},
  title        = {Assessment of value for resource allocation in cancer care},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcpo.2016.10.001},
  volume       = {11},
  year         = {2017},
}