Current Oncology (Oct 2021)

Considerations for Developing a Reassessment Process: Report from the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration’s Reassessment and Uptake Working Group

  • Wei Fang Dai,
  • Vanessa Arciero,
  • Erica Craig,
  • Brent Fraser,
  • Jessica Arias,
  • Darryl Boehm,
  • Nevzeta Bosnic,
  • Patricia Caetano,
  • Carole Chambers,
  • Barry Jones,
  • Elena Lungu,
  • Gunita Mitera,
  • Tanya Potashnik,
  • Anthony Reiman,
  • Trevor Ritcher,
  • Jaclyn M. Beca,
  • Avram Denburg,
  • Rebecca E. Mercer,
  • Ambica Parmar,
  • Mina Tadrous,
  • Pam Takhar,
  • Kelvin K. W. Chan,
  • on behalf of the CanREValue Collaboration Reassessment and Uptake Working Group

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol28050354
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 28, no. 5
pp. 4174 – 4183

Abstract

Read online

The Canadian Real-world Evidence for Value in Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration was established to develop a framework for generating and using real-world evidence (RWE) to inform the reassessment of cancer drugs following initial health technology assessment (HTA). The Reassessment and Uptake Working Group (RWG) is one of the five established CanREValue Working Groups. The RWG aims to develop considerations for incorporating RWE for HTA reassessment and strategies for using RWE to reassess drug funding decisions. Between February 2018 and December 2019, the RWG attended four teleconferences (with follow-up surveys) and two in-person meetings to discuss recommendations for the development of a reassessment process and potential barriers and facilitators. Modified Delphi methods were used to gather input. A draft report of recommendations (to December 2018) was shared for public consultation (December 2019 to January 2020). Initial considerations for developing a reassessment process were proposed. Specifically, reassessment can be initiated by diverse stakeholders, including decision makers from public drug plans or industry stakeholders. The reassessment process should be modelled after existing deliberation and recommendation frameworks used by HTA agencies. Proposed reassessment outcome categories include maintaining status quo, revisiting funding criteria, renegotiating price, or disinvesting. Overall, these initial considerations will serve as the basis for future advancements by the Collaboration.

Keywords