Perspectives of commissioners and cancer specialists in prioritising new cancer drugs: impact of the evidence threshold

Hospital priority setting with an appeals process: a qualitative case study and evaluation

“…It is a particularly thorny problem for hospitals because of budget limits, expanding need and restructuring. Several studies have focused on priority setting and policy making in hospitals [1][2][3] regional health authorities [4,5], new technologies [6], and in pharmaceuticals [7,8].…”

Alignment of Practice Guidelines with Targeted-therapy Drug Funding Policies in Ontario

“…In their review of decisionmaking at Christie Hospital NHS Trust (United Kingdom), Foy et al 54 described funding that was based on thresholds related to effectiveness. In a related study, Martin and colleagues 55 56 and cost effectiveness, it is possible that differences in funding decisions were related to different thresholds associated with economic evaluations.…”

6-STEPPPs: A Modular Tool to Facilitate Clinician Participation in Fair Decisions for Funding New Cancer Drugs

“…The seven clinical performance criteria and their definitions (Table A3) are drawn from published studies of priority decision processes for funding new cancer drugs. 11,13,14 The GRADE framework was used to inform criteria scoring related to strength of evidence. 25 Table A3 presents a guide for assigning scores to each criterion, where 5 represents most favorable and 1, least favorable.…”

“…4 -6 Recent studies have examined physicians' attitudes toward rationing as a principle of distributive justice. [7][8][9][10] Although public debate about cancer drug costs has intensified recently, proposed fair-decision frameworks [11][12][13][14] and approaches to ethical priority setting are not new. [15][16][17][18][19] The "accountability for reasonableness" (A4R) framework has garnered interest as a basis for fair and acceptable decisions about cancer drug funding.…”