Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Aug;25(4):257-261.
doi: 10.3747/co.25.3993. Epub 2018 Aug 14.

Understanding the reasons for provincial discordance in cancer drug funding-a survey of policymakers

Affiliations

Understanding the reasons for provincial discordance in cancer drug funding-a survey of policymakers

A Srikanthan et al. Curr Oncol. 2018 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Cancer drug-funding decisions between provinces shows discordance. The pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr) was implemented in 2011 partly to address uneven drug coverage and lack of transparency in the various provincial cancer drug review processes in Canada. We evaluated the underlying reasons for ongoing provincial discordance since the implementation of pcodr.

Methods: Participation in an online survey was solicited from participating provincial ministries of health (mohs) and cancer agencies (cas). The 4-question survey (with both multiple-choice and free-text responses) was administered between 4 March 2015 and 1 April 2015, inclusive. Anonymity was ensured. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate responses.

Results: Data were available from 9 provinces (all Canadian provinces except Quebec), with a response rate of 100%. The 12 responses received each came from a senior policymaker with more than 5 years' experience in cancer drug funding decision-making (5 from mohs, 7 from cas). Responses for 3 provinces came from both a moh representative and a ca representative. The most common reason for funding a drug not recommended by pcodr was political pressure (64%). The most common reason not to fund a drug recommended by pcodr was budget constraints (91%). The most common reason for a province to fund a drug before completion of the pcodr review was also political pressure (57%).

Conclusions: Political pressure and budgetary constraints continue to affect equity of access to cancer drugs for patients throughout Canada.

Keywords: Cancer drugs; discordance; drug funding.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Marin A. Funding for Avastin Across Canada. Toronto, ON: Ombudsman Ontario; 2009. [Available online at: http://www.ombudsman.on.ca/Files/sitemedia/Documents/Investigations/SORT...; cited 15 April 2015]
    1. Hoch JS, Sabharwal M. Informing Canada’s cancer drug funding decisions with scientific evidence and patient perspectives: the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review. Curr Oncol. 2013;20:121–4. doi: 10.3747/co.20.1315. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Savage C. Report Card on Cancer in Canada 2009–2010. Toronto, ON: Cancer Advocacy Coalition of Canada; 2015. From jodr to pcodr: one step closer, but miles to go; p. 36.
    1. pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr), Steering Committee . Correspondence [letter announcing transfer to the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health] Ottawa, ON: pCODR; 2014. [Available online at: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pcodr/Communications/pcodr-comm...; cited 1 August 2017]
    1. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (cadth), pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pcodr) CADTH pCODR Operational and Performance Metrics Report. Toronto, ON: CADTH; 2016. [Available online at: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pcodr/pCODR-Performance-Metrics...; cited 1 August 2017]

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources