Stakeholder engagement in economic evaluation: Protocol for using the nominal group technique to elicit patient, healthcare provider, and health system stakeholder input in the development of an early economic evaluation model of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.
health economics
oncology
qualitative research
statistics & research methods
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 08 2021
12 08 2021
Historique:
entrez:
13
8
2021
pubmed:
14
8
2021
medline:
17
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy is a class of immunotherapy. An economic evaluation conducted at an early stage of development of CAR-T therapy for treatment of adult relapsed or refractory acute lymphoblastic leukaemia could provide insight into factors contributing to the cost of treatment, the potential clinical benefits, and what the health system can afford. Traditionally, stakeholders are engaged in certain parts of health technology assessment processes, such as in the identification and selection of technologies, formulation of recommendations, and implementation of recommendations; however, little is known about processes for stakeholder engagement during the conduct of the assessment. This is especially the case for economic evaluations. Stakeholders, such as clinicians, policy-makers, patients, and their support networks, have insight into factors that can enhance the validity of an economic evaluation model. This research outlines a specific methodology for stakeholder engagement and represents an avenue to enhance health economic evaluations and support the use of these models to inform decision making for resource allocation. This protocol may inform a tailored framework for stakeholder engagement processes in future economic evaluation model development. We will involve clinicians, healthcare researchers, payers, and policy-makers, as well as patients and their support networks in the conduct and verification of an early economic evaluation of a novel health technology to incorporate stakeholder-generated knowledge. Three stakeholder-specific focus groups will be conducted using an online adaptation of the nominal group technique to elicit considerations from each. This study will use CAR-T therapy for adults with relapsed or refractory B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia as a basis for investigating broader stakeholder engagement processes. This study received ethics approval from the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute Research Ethics Board (REB 20200320-01HT) and the results will be shared via conference presentations, peer-reviewed publications, and ongoing stakeholder engagement.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34385243
pii: bmjopen-2020-046707
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046707
pmc: PMC8362692
doi:
Substances chimiques
Receptors, Chimeric Antigen
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e046707Subventions
Organisme : CIHR
ID : FDN# 143237
Pays : Canada
Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
N Engl J Med. 2018 Feb 1;378(5):439-448
pubmed: 29385370
BMJ. 2017 Aug 2;358:j3453
pubmed: 28768629
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008 May 7;100(9):630-41
pubmed: 18445825
Br J Haematol. 2016 Jan;172(1):11-22
pubmed: 26560054
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Apr 1;3(4):e202072
pubmed: 32250433
BMJ. 2013 Mar 25;346:f1049
pubmed: 23529982
Trends Ecol Evol. 2010 Aug;25(8):479-86
pubmed: 20605251
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003 Winter;19(1):17-27
pubmed: 12701936
Int J Clin Pharm. 2016 Jun;38(3):655-62
pubmed: 26846316
J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Aug;27(8):985-91
pubmed: 22528615
Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):588-601
pubmed: 27565276
F1000Res. 2017 Feb 9;6:122
pubmed: 28781752
Sci Transl Med. 2014 Feb 19;6(224):224ra25
pubmed: 24553386
N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 25;365(8):725-33
pubmed: 21830940
BMJ. 1996 Aug 3;313(7052):275-83
pubmed: 8704542
Milbank Q. 2003;81(3):363-88
pubmed: 12941000
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):785-801
pubmed: 31012259
Soc Sci Med. 2020 May;253:112975
pubmed: 32289648
Health Policy. 2007 Jan;80(1):135-43
pubmed: 16621124
Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):223-31
pubmed: 23381514
Lancet. 2015 Feb 7;385(9967):517-528
pubmed: 25319501
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016 Apr;14(2):129-33
pubmed: 26385585
Value Health. 2014 Mar;17(2):174-82
pubmed: 24636375
J Health Serv Res Policy. 1997 Jan;2(1):26-30
pubmed: 10180650
Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Mar 15;25(6):1702-1708
pubmed: 30413526
Transfus Med Rev. 2019 Apr;33(2):98-110
pubmed: 30948292
Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun;13(6):370-83
pubmed: 27000958
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008 Fall;24(4):465-72
pubmed: 18828942
Cancer Epidemiol. 2019 Apr;59:199-207
pubmed: 30831552
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jun 20;14:273
pubmed: 24950739
Health Expect. 2015 Oct;18(5):1151-66
pubmed: 23731468
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2011 Sep 1;9(5):331-47
pubmed: 21875163
Value Health. 2012 Sep-Oct;15(6):843-50
pubmed: 22999134
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Jan 16;12:14
pubmed: 22248231
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007 Spring;23(2):155-61
pubmed: 17493300
CMAJ Open. 2018 Jan 4;6(1):E1-E10
pubmed: 29301745
Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(12):1055-62
pubmed: 18047389
Pharmacoecon Open. 2019 Jun;3(2):133-141
pubmed: 30324567
J Clin Nurs. 2009 Sep;18(18):2547-54
pubmed: 19207798
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005 Spring;21(2):240-5
pubmed: 15921065
JAMA. 2017 Nov 21;318(19):1861-1862
pubmed: 28975266
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Jul;35(7):727-740
pubmed: 28432642
Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(4):355-71
pubmed: 16605282
Med Decis Making. 2012 Sep-Oct;32(5):678-89
pubmed: 22990083
JAMA. 2010 Mar 17;303(11):1086-7
pubmed: 20233828
Res Involv Engagem. 2016 Apr 27;2:15
pubmed: 29062516