Defining the clinical improvement in cancer drug therapy: implications for priority setting in healthcare

Abstract

An explicit approach to funding decisions has become increasingly important to ensure fairness and consistency in resource allocation in cancer therapy. Funding decisions are often based on whether a treatment is 'medically necessary' and the level of clinical improvement. Currently, there is a lack of consensus on defining different levels of clinical improvement, leading to controversies on the values placed on different outcomes and degrees of clinical improvements during funding evaluation. More information on how clinicians and patients define the levels of clinical improvement can help ensure the evaluation and decision-making processes of funding to become more predictable, consistent, understandable and therefore accountable to providers and consumers of healthcare.