4.7 Article

Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries

Journal

LANCET ONCOLOGY
Volume 12, Issue 10, Pages 933-980

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70141-3

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Pfizer
  2. Novartis
  3. Celgene
  4. Amgen
  5. Sandoz
  6. Helsinn
  7. Johnson Johnson
  8. Roche
  9. Merck
  10. Pierre Fabre
  11. Hospira
  12. Aveo Pharmaceuticals
  13. Bayer
  14. Genentech
  15. Heathwell Foundation
  16. MerckSerono
  17. Sanofi
  18. AstraZeneca
  19. Genomic Health
  20. Saladax
  21. Sanofi-Aventis
  22. Veridex
  23. Actelion Pharmaceuticals
  24. Allergan
  25. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
  26. Amylin Pharmaceuticals
  27. Astellas Pharma
  28. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  29. Inspire Pharmaceuticals
  30. Kureha Corporation
  31. Medtronic
  32. Merck Co
  33. Nabi Biopharmaceuticals
  34. NovaCardia
  35. OSI Eyetech
  36. Sanofi-Aventis US
  37. Scios
  38. Tengion
  39. Theravance
  40. Thomson Healthcare
  41. Vertex Pharmaceuticals
  42. Advanced Health Media
  43. Certified Medical Representatives Institute
  44. Commonwealth Fund
  45. EnablEd
  46. Forest Laboratories
  47. GlaxoSmithKline
  48. LifeMasters Supported SelfCare
  49. McKinsey Company
  50. Medical Decisions Network Medtronic
  51. National Pharmaceutical Council
  52. Novo Nordisk
  53. Orexigen Therapeutics
  54. Quintiles Transnational Corp
  55. Social and Scientific Systems
  56. Wallen and Associates
  57. WebMD
  58. NICE
  59. Department of Health
  60. Alliance Boots
  61. Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
  62. Conquer Cancer Foundation
  63. Greenwall Foundation for Bioethics
  64. Chair's Fund
  65. UCLA Department of Radiation Oncology
  66. Herculesstichting and Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen
  67. UK Department of Health NIHR Biomedical Research Centre
  68. Department of Health via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The burden of cancer is growing, and the disease is becoming a major economic expenditure for all developed countries. In 2008, the worldwide cost of cancer due to premature death and disability (not including direct medical costs) was estimated to be US$895 billion. This is not simply due to an increase in absolute numbers, but also the rate of increase of expenditure on cancer. What are the drivers and solutions to the so-called cancer-cost curve in developed countries? How are we going to afford to deliver high quality and equitable care? Here, expert opinion from health-care professionals, policy makers, and cancer survivors has been gathered to address the barriers and solutions to delivering affordable cancer care. Although many of the drivers and themes are specific to a particular field-eg, the huge development costs for cancer medicines-there is strong concordance running through each contribution. Several drivers of cost, such as over-use, rapid expansion, and shortening life cycles of cancer technologies (such as medicines and imaging modalities), and the lack of suitable clinical research and integrated health economic studies, have converged with more defensive medical practice, a less informed regulatory system, a lack of evidence-based sociopolitical debate, and a declining degree of fairness for all patients with cancer. Urgent solutions range from re-engineering of the macroeconomic basis of cancer costs (eg, value-based approaches to bend the cost curve and allow cost-saving technologies), greater education of policy makers, and an informed and transparent regulatory system. A radical shift in cancer policy is also required. Political toleration of unfairness in access to affordable cancer treatment is unacceptable. The cancer profession and industry should take responsibility and not accept a substandard evidence base and an ethos of very small benefit at whatever cost; rather, we need delivery of fair prices and real value from new technologies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available