Abstract
Precision medicine in oncology poses unique challenges to the generation of clinical and economic evidence used for cost-effectiveness analyses that can inform health technology assessment. The conduct of randomized controlled trials for biomarker-specific therapies targeted towards small populations has limitations in regard to feasibility, timeliness, and cost. These limitations result in associated challenges for groups involved in the generation of economic evidence to inform treatment-related decision making, including the Committee of Economic Analysis (CEA) at the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG). We provide a high-level description and vision about the new paradigm of clinical trial design, generation of economic evidence, and novel approaches to economic evaluations necessary in the space of precision medicine in oncology in Canada. The CEA’s previous approach to precision medicine, including master protocol designs and single-arm studies, is reviewed. Methods and approaches currently under consideration by the CEA and national collaborators, such as the role of real-world and clinical trial evidence in enabling life-cycle assessment of therapies, are explored. Finally, future initiatives being planned in the space of precision medicine at CCTG, such as the incorporation of correlative studies to identify and test high-performing biomarkers in trials, are discussed.
Reference40 articles.
1. Evolution of health technology assessment: best practices of the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review
2. NICE Technology Appraisal Guidance|NICE Guidance|Our Programmes|What We Do|About|NICE
https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do/our-programmes/nice-guidance/nice-technology-appraisal-guidance
3. The paradox of precision medicine
4. Systematic review of basket trials, umbrella trials, and platform trials: a landscape analysis of master protocols
5. Who We Are|Canadian Cancer Trials Group
https://www.ctg.queensu.ca/public/who-we-are
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献