What matters to society when making decisions about reimbursing drugs for prostate cancer: a discrete choice experiment
The analysis found preference for interventions with maximum benefits while minimizing costs. Respondents preferred studies with longer follow-up time for reimbursement decisions despite consequent treatment delays. Notably, respondents were willing to accept the uncertainty associated with surrogate outcomes-reflected through study length and completeness of evidence-provided the intervention demonstrated a favorable ICER.
Authors
- Tracey‐Lea Laba (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5182-9092)
- Rafael Emilio de Feria Cardet
- Marion Haas (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9726-3063)
- Deborah J. Street (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4476-0656)
- Ian D. Davis (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9066-8244)
- Stephen Goodall (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6611-6565)
- Richard De Abreu Lourenço (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5978-8774)
- Christopher Sweeney
Institutions
- University of Technology Sydney (AU)
- Breast Cancer Trials (AU)
- Eastern Health (AU)
- Centre for Cancer Biology (AU)
- Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group (AU)
- Act Health (AU)
- The University of Adelaide (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Published
- 2025-10-29
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djaf315
- Primary Topic
- Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- Astellas Pharma
- Australian and New Zealand Urogenital and Prostate Cancer Trials Group