Clinical Review

The Cost of Oncology Drugs: A Pharmacy Perspective, Part 2

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

Conclusion

Using newer, expensive targeted oncology agents in a cost-effective manner must be a proactive, collaborative, and multidisciplinary process. Pharmacists should not be solely responsible for monitoring and controlling high-cost treatments. Well-informed, evidence-based decisions are needed to ensure expensive agents are used in the subset of patients who are most likely to benefit. Clinical tools addressing value should be used to aid in appropriate and cost-effective treatment plans using drug monographs and CFUs, VHA Guidance on Determining Clinical Benefit of High Cost Oncology Drugs, and the Oral Chemotherapy Dispensing and Monitoring Reference, among other resources. Due to the subjective nature of value in medicine, agreeing on policy will have many challenges, such as how to place a value on various gains in overall survival, progression free survival, response rates, and QOL.

eAppendix

Pages

Recommended Reading

Aprepitant Protects Against Chemo-Induced Nausea and Vomiting
Federal Practitioner
Death Rates for Brain Cancer Trend Downward
Federal Practitioner
Exercise Lowers Risk of Some Cancers
Federal Practitioner
People With HIV Are Less Likely To Get Cancer Treatment
Federal Practitioner
Immunosuppressive regimens did not affect risk of cancer recurrence in meta-analysis
Federal Practitioner
New Treatments Offer Hope in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma
Federal Practitioner
Veteran Cancer Research Highlighted in ASCO Posters and Abstracts
Federal Practitioner
Potential New Targeted Treatment for Chondrosarcoma
Federal Practitioner
Finding Synchronous Cancers
Federal Practitioner
Severe psoriasis upped lymphoma risk in large cohort study
Federal Practitioner

Related Articles