Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada

Jeffrey S Hoch, David C. Hodgson, Craig C. Earle

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recently, the evidence-based drug funding process in Ontario, Canada, was challenged by a young mother with a breast tumor too small, based on the evidence that existed at the time, to qualify for an expensive drug. In reality, this is only the latest in a number of challenges the publicly funded health care system has had to deal with in the face of an evolving drug policy landscape. This article defines comparative effectiveness research (CER), considering how it is viewed differently in the United States and Canada. It also reviews the role CER now plays in the Ontario drug funding process and concludes with a review of the challenges and opportunities of using observational data to conduct CER and incorporate it into policy making within a universal health care system. Many of the issues faced by Ontario are relevant beyond Canada, including in the United States during this period of health care reform.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4262-4266
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume30
Issue number34
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Comparative Effectiveness Research
Ontario
Canada
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Neoplasms
Delivery of Health Care
Health Care Reform
Policy Making
Mothers
Breast Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada. / Hoch, Jeffrey S; Hodgson, David C.; Earle, Craig C.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 30, No. 34, 01.12.2012, p. 4262-4266.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{675c412556e8477e801426439a84b5ef,
title = "Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada",
abstract = "Recently, the evidence-based drug funding process in Ontario, Canada, was challenged by a young mother with a breast tumor too small, based on the evidence that existed at the time, to qualify for an expensive drug. In reality, this is only the latest in a number of challenges the publicly funded health care system has had to deal with in the face of an evolving drug policy landscape. This article defines comparative effectiveness research (CER), considering how it is viewed differently in the United States and Canada. It also reviews the role CER now plays in the Ontario drug funding process and concludes with a review of the challenges and opportunities of using observational data to conduct CER and incorporate it into policy making within a universal health care system. Many of the issues faced by Ontario are relevant beyond Canada, including in the United States during this period of health care reform.",
author = "Hoch, {Jeffrey S} and Hodgson, {David C.} and Earle, {Craig C.}",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1200/JCO.2012.42.1958",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "4262--4266",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "34",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Role of comparative effectiveness research in cancer funding decisions in Ontario, Canada

AU - Hoch, Jeffrey S

AU - Hodgson, David C.

AU - Earle, Craig C.

PY - 2012/12/1

Y1 - 2012/12/1

N2 - Recently, the evidence-based drug funding process in Ontario, Canada, was challenged by a young mother with a breast tumor too small, based on the evidence that existed at the time, to qualify for an expensive drug. In reality, this is only the latest in a number of challenges the publicly funded health care system has had to deal with in the face of an evolving drug policy landscape. This article defines comparative effectiveness research (CER), considering how it is viewed differently in the United States and Canada. It also reviews the role CER now plays in the Ontario drug funding process and concludes with a review of the challenges and opportunities of using observational data to conduct CER and incorporate it into policy making within a universal health care system. Many of the issues faced by Ontario are relevant beyond Canada, including in the United States during this period of health care reform.

AB - Recently, the evidence-based drug funding process in Ontario, Canada, was challenged by a young mother with a breast tumor too small, based on the evidence that existed at the time, to qualify for an expensive drug. In reality, this is only the latest in a number of challenges the publicly funded health care system has had to deal with in the face of an evolving drug policy landscape. This article defines comparative effectiveness research (CER), considering how it is viewed differently in the United States and Canada. It also reviews the role CER now plays in the Ontario drug funding process and concludes with a review of the challenges and opportunities of using observational data to conduct CER and incorporate it into policy making within a universal health care system. Many of the issues faced by Ontario are relevant beyond Canada, including in the United States during this period of health care reform.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870674687&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84870674687&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.1958

DO - 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.1958

M3 - Review article

C2 - 23071242

AN - SCOPUS:84870674687

VL - 30

SP - 4262

EP - 4266

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 34

ER -