Abstract
e18311 Background: The Institute of Medicine has called for approaches to help maximize the return on research investments in cancer clinical trials. Value of Research (VOR) analysis is a health economics technique that estimates the clinical and economic returns for research investments and can inform research prioritization. Our objective was to evaluate the impact of VOR estimates on SWOG executive committee’s (EC) clinical trial proposal review scores. Methods: We used a previously developed minimal modeling approach to calculate per-patient and population-level (based on US cancer incidence) VOR estimates for 9 phase II and III SWOG research proposals between February 2015 and December 2016. VOR estimates were presented to EC members who determine which studies to submit to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) for funding approval. EC members scored proposals on scientific merit and potential impact before and after receiving VOR estimates. Scores ranged from 1 (best) to 5. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test to evaluate the change in pre-post scores. Results: Study characteristics, VOR estimates, and pre-post scores are below. EC scores changed after receiving VOR estimates for 8 of 9 proposals. There was no association between VOR estimates and the magnitude of the change in proposal scores (all p > 0.2). Proposals with larger planned annual enrollment had larger changes in scores (0.3 more points [95% CI: 0.2, 0.56] per 100 patient increase; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Presenting VOR estimates influenced EC scores for SWOG trial proposals. VOR may add important data to inform reviews of trial proposals within NCI Cooperative Clinical Trials group settings. [Table: see text]
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call