This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by de Lemos, M. L Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by de Lemos, M. L Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Cancer Cancer Chemotherapy Choosing a Doctor or Health Care Service Medicines Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Defining the clinical improvement in cancer drug therapy: implications for priority setting in healthcare

Provincial Systemic Therapy Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

An explicit approach to funding decisions has become increasingly important to ensure fairness and consistency in resource allocation in cancer therapy. Funding decisions are often based on whether a treatment is ‘medically necessary’ and the level of clinical improvement. Currently, there is a lack of consensus on defining different levels of clinical improvement, leading to controversies on the values placed on different outcomes and degrees of clinical improvements during funding evaluation. More information on how clinicians and patients define the levels of clinical improvement can help ensure the evaluation and decision-making processes of funding to become more predictable, consistent, understandable and therefore accountable to providers and consumers of healthcare.

Key Words: antineoplastic agents • evidence-based medicine • healthcare rationing

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, Vol. 12, No. 2, 91-94 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1078155206069164


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?