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 language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 4262-4266 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Oncology |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 34 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 1 2012 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
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 journal › Review article
}
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 -