The evolving value assessment of cancer therapies: Results from a modified Delphi study

• Main Authors: Myrto Lee (Author), Hugo Larose (Author), Martin Gräbeldinger (Author), Jon Williams (Author), Anne-Marie Baird (Author), Susan Brown (Author), Johannes Bruns (Author), Russell Clark (Author), Javier Cortes (Author), Giuseppe Curigliano (Author), Andrea Ferris (Author), Louis P. Garrison (Author), Y.K. Gupta (Author), Ravindran Kanesvaran (Author), Gary Lyman (Author), Luca Pani (Author), Zack Pemberton-Whiteley (Author), Tomas Salmonson (Author), Peter Sawicki (Author), Barry Stein (Author), Dong-Churl Suh (Author), Galina Velikova (Author), Jens Grueger (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Elsevier, 2024-12-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 2590-2296; 10.1016/j.hpopen.2024.100116
• Keywords: Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Health Policy Open, Vol 6, Iss , Pp 100116- (2024)

The move toward early detection and treatment of cancer presents challenges for value assessment using traditional endpoints. Current cancer management rarely considers the full economic and societal benefits of therapies. Our study used a modified Delphi process to develop principles for defining and assessing value of cancer therapies that aligns with the current trajectory of oncology research and reflects broader notions of value. 24 experts participated in consensus-building activities across 5 months (16 took part in structured interactions, including a survey, plenary sessions, interviews, and off-line discussions, while 8 participated in interviews). Discussion focused on: 1) which oncology-relevant endpoints should be used for assessing treatments for early-stage cancer and access decisions for early-stage treatments, and 2) the importance of additional value components and how these can be integrated in value assessments. The expert group reached consensus on 4 principles in relation to the first area (consider oncology-relevant endpoints other than overall survival; build evidence for endpoints that provide earlier indication of efficacy; develop evidence for the next generation of predictive measures; use managed entry agreements supported by ongoing evidence collection to address decision-maker evidence needs) and 3 principles in relation to the second (routinely use patient reported outcomes in value assessments; assess broad economic impact of new medicines; consider other value aspects of relevance to patients and society).