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
Review
. 2020 Aug:52:78-87.
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.04.011. Epub 2020 May 10.

A multi-stakeholder approach in optimising patients' needs in the benefit assessment process of new metastatic breast cancer treatments

Fatima Cardoso  1 , Nils Wilking  2 , Renato Bernardini  3 , Laura Biganzoli  4 , Jaime Espin  5 , Kaisa Miikkulainen  6 , Susanne Schuurman  7 , Danielle Spence  8 , Sabine Spitz  9 , Sonia Ujupan  10 , Nicole Zernik  11 , Jenn Gordon  12
Affiliations
Review

A multi-stakeholder approach in optimising patients' needs in the benefit assessment process of new metastatic breast cancer treatments

Fatima Cardoso et al. Breast. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

There is a growing understanding as science evolves that different cancer types require different approaches to treatment evaluation, especially in the metastatic stages. The introduction of new metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments may be hindered by several elements, including the availability of relevant evidence related to disease-specific outcomes, the benefit assessment process around the evaluation of the clinical benefit and the patients' need of new treatments. The Steering Committee (SC) found that not all issues relevant to MBC patients are consistently considered in the current benefit assessment process of new treatments. Among these are overall survival, time-to-event endpoints (e.g. progression-free survival), patients' priorities, burden of disease, MBC-specific quality of life, value in delaying chemotherapy, route of administration, side effects and toxicities, treatment adherence and the benefit of real-world evidence. This paper calls on decision makers to (1) Include MBC-specific patient priorities and outcomes in the overall benefit assessments of new MBC treatments; (2) Enhance multi-stakeholder collaboration in order to improve MBC patient outcomes.

Keywords: Health technology assessment; Metastatic breast cancer; Patient preferences; Policy; Stakeholders; Treatment benefit.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Fatima Cardoso has acted as a consultant on advisory boards for Amgen, Astellas/Medivation, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, GE Oncology, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, MacroGenics, Medscape, Merck, Sharp & Dohme, Merus BV, Mylan, Mundipharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, prIME Oncology, Roche, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and Teva. Laura Biganzoli has acted as a consultant for AstraZeneca, Celgene, Eisai, Genomic Health, Ipsen, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre and Roche. Kaisa Miikkulainen is employed by ICON plc and Susanne Schuurman was an ICON employed at the time of article submission, and their support was funded by Eli Lilly and Company. Sonia Ujupan is an employee of Eli Lilly and Company. Jenn Gordon has no interests to declare; however, the Canadian Breast Cancer Network has received funding from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, Roche and Teva. Nils Wilking has received fees from Jansen, Merck, Sharp & Dome, Novartis and Oasmia for participation in advisory boards and educational activities outside the submitted work. Jaime Espin, Renato Bernardini, Danielle Spence, Sabina Spitz, Nicole Zernik, Sue Chambers and David Peters stated they had no interests in relation to this article, which might be perceived as posing a conflict or bias.

References

    1. Globocan Breast factsheet. 2018. https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/cancers/20-Breast-fact-sheet.pdf
    1. Cardoso F., Spence D., Mertz S. Global analysis of advanced/metastatic breast cancer: decade report (2005-2015) Breast. 2018;39:131–138. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.03.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cardoso F., Senkus E., Costa A. 4th ESO-ESMO international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 4) Ann Oncol. 2018;29(8):1634–1657. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hofmarcher, T., Brådvik, G., Svedman, C., Lindgren, P., Jönsson, B., Wilking, N. reportComparator report on cancer in europe 2019 – disease burden, costs and access to medicines. IHE Report 2019:vol. 7. IHE: Lund, Sweden.
    1. Multi-stakeholder collaboration White paper: the benefit assessment of new metastatic breast cancer (MBC) treatments. 2019. https://lillypad.eu/MBC_White_Paper_Final.pdf 2.