That`s nice. Maintenance treatment of pemetrexed after treatment with pemetrexed and cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer (TA309) 2014. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta309. Do patient access systems for high-cost, high-cost cancer drugs add value to society? – Lessons from the NHS Cancer Drugs Fund Buxton M, Longworth L, Raftery J, Sculpher M, Towse A. Reforming the Cancer drug fund. Bmj. 2014;349:g7276. doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7276. This work was funded by a grant from the UK Department of Cancer Research at CASMI (LM, RWB).
The funder did not have a role to play in the study or writing of the manuscript, but he did review a project. Open Access Publishing is funded by the uk Open Access Fund at Oxford University. That`s nice. PMG19 Addendum has – the latest changes to THE procedures and methods of evaluating NICE technologies Guidelines in support of the proposed new rules for the Cancer Drug Fund. www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/About/what-we-do/NICE-guidance/NICE-technology-appraisals/process-and-methods-guide-addendum.pdf, 2016. Originally introduced in 2011 as a “stop gap” measure for the supply of drugs for rare cancers, the CDF eventually acted as an indefinite source of funding for drugs deemed ineffective by NICE, and costs increased. That`s nice. Enzalutamide in metastatic endocrine prostate cancer, previously treated with a treatment regimen containing docetaxel (TA316) 2014. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta316. In these examples, the drugs had not been directly tested against the (s) treatment (s) considered a relevant comparator in England, as defined in the respective D DD. For example, studies against alternatives, which are no longer routinely used in England due to changes in practice since the exam (9/16; for example, comparing drugs for dacarbazine, which is rarely used today ), or against placebo or the best supportive treatment, where active treatment is now used (2/16 cases; for example, compared with the best supportive treatment for prostate cancer, where docetaxel or abiron is now used[ 15]).
In three cases, the practice has been described as highly variable throughout England, which has led to a large number of potential comparators that would not have been included in studies (for example. B pomalidomide in MM during a third or subsequent relapse ). Evaluations assess the relative effectiveness of drugs using an indirect treatment comparison or networked metaamée. Uncertainty in these cases relates to a common situation in oncology, where data from the study to determine the relative effect of a new drug are spread over a short period of time relative to the long-term survival of patients; this “lifespan” horizon is used in cost-benefit modeling to measure all the health effects of the QALY estimate .