Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia

This study aimed to determine stakeholders’ decision criteria preferences for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in the Ministry of Health. The secondary objective was to identify the outcome measures of interest for assessment of clinical benefits for cancer drugs. A survey questionnaire was admin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Value in health regional issues 2024-11, p.101052, Article 101052
Hauptverfasser: Chandriah, Haarathi, Shafie, Asrul Akmal, Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 101052
container_title Value in health regional issues
container_volume
creator Chandriah, Haarathi
Shafie, Asrul Akmal
Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran
description This study aimed to determine stakeholders’ decision criteria preferences for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in the Ministry of Health. The secondary objective was to identify the outcome measures of interest for assessment of clinical benefits for cancer drugs. A survey questionnaire was administered online and as hard copy using purposive sampling to 32 healthcare facilities providing cancer services and the Formulary Management Branch in the Ministry of Health. Respondents reported whether a criterion “will be considered” and weighted its relative importance on a 5-point scale. The choice of safety and efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were ranked from 1 to 5, and the minimum value of benefit for the efficacy/effectiveness outcome ranked 1 was provided. Trade-offs between survival and quality of life were also explored. Inferential statistics were used to explore difference in responses. A total of 316 healthcare professionals responded to the survey. The most important criteria for value assessment of cancer drug were safety and effectiveness. Other criteria deemed important were quality of evidence, disease severity, and patient-reported outcomes. There was no difference in the criteria preference and weights across the various respondent groups. Overall survival was the most preferred clinical benefit outcome. Overall, willingness to pay was higher for life-prolonging treatment than treatment that improved quality of life. This study revealed that a wide range of criteria beyond the traditional decision-making criteria of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness are important for value assessment of cancer drugs for the purpose of formulary decisions. •Decision criteria are the core component in a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. Malaysia has recognized the potential for use of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Thus, this study aimed to identify decision criteria preference specific for value assessment of cancer drugs among multistakeholder groups in the public sector in Malaysia.•This research is the first step toward understanding the need and defining the criteria necessary for developing the first national MCDA framework for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in a middle-income country.•Current literature on decision criteria and use of MCDA for value assessment is limited to developed countries. This study is relevant for developing value assessment framework for cancer drugs using MCDA especially in the Asian region.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101052
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3124691997</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S2212109924000852</els_id><sourcerecordid>3124691997</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1521-d19a62ff7f44c05aca99402b99dda7ee0814514ffe296b77303f706f07bcd7863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1PGzEQhq0K1KDAH-ih8pFLwtj74bjqBYUWKoGKRNMeLa89Jk43u2B7QTn0v-NVoEd88ejVM680DyGfGMwZsPpsM39aBz_nwMsxgIp_IEecMz5jDPjB2wxSTshJjBvIT5RQLOAjmRSygkIAOyL_Vp3FEJPurO_u6Z-1TvRGp5SzL_Qu6b-47ttM0N8enyPtO3qBxkefh2XwGfOauj7Qpe5Mpi7CcE_vsEWTRsR3NK2R3g5N603OTcpoDm90q3fR62Ny6HQb8eT1n5LV92-_llez65-XP5bn1zPDKs5mlkldc-eEK0sDlTZayhJ4I6W1WiDCgpUVK51DLutGiAIKJ6B2IBpjxaIupuR03_sQ-scBY1JbHw22re6wH6IqGC9ryaQUGeV71IQ-xoBOPQS_1WGnGKjRvNqo0bwazau9-bz0-bV_aLZo_6-8ec7A1z2A-conj0FF4zErsz5kK8r2_r3-F-phlI8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3124691997</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Chandriah, Haarathi ; Shafie, Asrul Akmal ; Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</creator><creatorcontrib>Chandriah, Haarathi ; Shafie, Asrul Akmal ; Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</creatorcontrib><description>This study aimed to determine stakeholders’ decision criteria preferences for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in the Ministry of Health. The secondary objective was to identify the outcome measures of interest for assessment of clinical benefits for cancer drugs. A survey questionnaire was administered online and as hard copy using purposive sampling to 32 healthcare facilities providing cancer services and the Formulary Management Branch in the Ministry of Health. Respondents reported whether a criterion “will be considered” and weighted its relative importance on a 5-point scale. The choice of safety and efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were ranked from 1 to 5, and the minimum value of benefit for the efficacy/effectiveness outcome ranked 1 was provided. Trade-offs between survival and quality of life were also explored. Inferential statistics were used to explore difference in responses. A total of 316 healthcare professionals responded to the survey. The most important criteria for value assessment of cancer drug were safety and effectiveness. Other criteria deemed important were quality of evidence, disease severity, and patient-reported outcomes. There was no difference in the criteria preference and weights across the various respondent groups. Overall survival was the most preferred clinical benefit outcome. Overall, willingness to pay was higher for life-prolonging treatment than treatment that improved quality of life. This study revealed that a wide range of criteria beyond the traditional decision-making criteria of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness are important for value assessment of cancer drugs for the purpose of formulary decisions. •Decision criteria are the core component in a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. Malaysia has recognized the potential for use of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Thus, this study aimed to identify decision criteria preference specific for value assessment of cancer drugs among multistakeholder groups in the public sector in Malaysia.•This research is the first step toward understanding the need and defining the criteria necessary for developing the first national MCDA framework for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in a middle-income country.•Current literature on decision criteria and use of MCDA for value assessment is limited to developed countries. This study is relevant for developing value assessment framework for cancer drugs using MCDA especially in the Asian region.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2212-1099</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2212-1102</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2212-1102</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101052</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39503701</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cancer drug ; decision criteria ; MCDA ; value assessment</subject><ispartof>Value in health regional issues, 2024-11, p.101052, Article 101052</ispartof><rights>2024 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1521-d19a62ff7f44c05aca99402b99dda7ee0814514ffe296b77303f706f07bcd7863</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39503701$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chandriah, Haarathi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shafie, Asrul Akmal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia</title><title>Value in health regional issues</title><addtitle>Value Health Reg Issues</addtitle><description>This study aimed to determine stakeholders’ decision criteria preferences for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in the Ministry of Health. The secondary objective was to identify the outcome measures of interest for assessment of clinical benefits for cancer drugs. A survey questionnaire was administered online and as hard copy using purposive sampling to 32 healthcare facilities providing cancer services and the Formulary Management Branch in the Ministry of Health. Respondents reported whether a criterion “will be considered” and weighted its relative importance on a 5-point scale. The choice of safety and efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were ranked from 1 to 5, and the minimum value of benefit for the efficacy/effectiveness outcome ranked 1 was provided. Trade-offs between survival and quality of life were also explored. Inferential statistics were used to explore difference in responses. A total of 316 healthcare professionals responded to the survey. The most important criteria for value assessment of cancer drug were safety and effectiveness. Other criteria deemed important were quality of evidence, disease severity, and patient-reported outcomes. There was no difference in the criteria preference and weights across the various respondent groups. Overall survival was the most preferred clinical benefit outcome. Overall, willingness to pay was higher for life-prolonging treatment than treatment that improved quality of life. This study revealed that a wide range of criteria beyond the traditional decision-making criteria of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness are important for value assessment of cancer drugs for the purpose of formulary decisions. •Decision criteria are the core component in a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. Malaysia has recognized the potential for use of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Thus, this study aimed to identify decision criteria preference specific for value assessment of cancer drugs among multistakeholder groups in the public sector in Malaysia.•This research is the first step toward understanding the need and defining the criteria necessary for developing the first national MCDA framework for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in a middle-income country.•Current literature on decision criteria and use of MCDA for value assessment is limited to developed countries. This study is relevant for developing value assessment framework for cancer drugs using MCDA especially in the Asian region.</description><subject>cancer drug</subject><subject>decision criteria</subject><subject>MCDA</subject><subject>value assessment</subject><issn>2212-1099</issn><issn>2212-1102</issn><issn>2212-1102</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1PGzEQhq0K1KDAH-ih8pFLwtj74bjqBYUWKoGKRNMeLa89Jk43u2B7QTn0v-NVoEd88ejVM680DyGfGMwZsPpsM39aBz_nwMsxgIp_IEecMz5jDPjB2wxSTshJjBvIT5RQLOAjmRSygkIAOyL_Vp3FEJPurO_u6Z-1TvRGp5SzL_Qu6b-47ttM0N8enyPtO3qBxkefh2XwGfOauj7Qpe5Mpi7CcE_vsEWTRsR3NK2R3g5N603OTcpoDm90q3fR62Ny6HQb8eT1n5LV92-_llez65-XP5bn1zPDKs5mlkldc-eEK0sDlTZayhJ4I6W1WiDCgpUVK51DLutGiAIKJ6B2IBpjxaIupuR03_sQ-scBY1JbHw22re6wH6IqGC9ryaQUGeV71IQ-xoBOPQS_1WGnGKjRvNqo0bwazau9-bz0-bV_aLZo_6-8ec7A1z2A-conj0FF4zErsz5kK8r2_r3-F-phlI8</recordid><startdate>20241104</startdate><enddate>20241104</enddate><creator>Chandriah, Haarathi</creator><creator>Shafie, Asrul Akmal</creator><creator>Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20241104</creationdate><title>Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia</title><author>Chandriah, Haarathi ; Shafie, Asrul Akmal ; Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1521-d19a62ff7f44c05aca99402b99dda7ee0814514ffe296b77303f706f07bcd7863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>cancer drug</topic><topic>decision criteria</topic><topic>MCDA</topic><topic>value assessment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chandriah, Haarathi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shafie, Asrul Akmal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Value in health regional issues</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chandriah, Haarathi</au><au>Shafie, Asrul Akmal</au><au>Thiagarajan, Muthukkumaran</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia</atitle><jtitle>Value in health regional issues</jtitle><addtitle>Value Health Reg Issues</addtitle><date>2024-11-04</date><risdate>2024</risdate><spage>101052</spage><pages>101052-</pages><artnum>101052</artnum><issn>2212-1099</issn><issn>2212-1102</issn><eissn>2212-1102</eissn><abstract>This study aimed to determine stakeholders’ decision criteria preferences for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in the Ministry of Health. The secondary objective was to identify the outcome measures of interest for assessment of clinical benefits for cancer drugs. A survey questionnaire was administered online and as hard copy using purposive sampling to 32 healthcare facilities providing cancer services and the Formulary Management Branch in the Ministry of Health. Respondents reported whether a criterion “will be considered” and weighted its relative importance on a 5-point scale. The choice of safety and efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were ranked from 1 to 5, and the minimum value of benefit for the efficacy/effectiveness outcome ranked 1 was provided. Trade-offs between survival and quality of life were also explored. Inferential statistics were used to explore difference in responses. A total of 316 healthcare professionals responded to the survey. The most important criteria for value assessment of cancer drug were safety and effectiveness. Other criteria deemed important were quality of evidence, disease severity, and patient-reported outcomes. There was no difference in the criteria preference and weights across the various respondent groups. Overall survival was the most preferred clinical benefit outcome. Overall, willingness to pay was higher for life-prolonging treatment than treatment that improved quality of life. This study revealed that a wide range of criteria beyond the traditional decision-making criteria of efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness are important for value assessment of cancer drugs for the purpose of formulary decisions. •Decision criteria are the core component in a multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. Malaysia has recognized the potential for use of MCDA in healthcare decision making. Thus, this study aimed to identify decision criteria preference specific for value assessment of cancer drugs among multistakeholder groups in the public sector in Malaysia.•This research is the first step toward understanding the need and defining the criteria necessary for developing the first national MCDA framework for formulary decisions of cancer drugs in a middle-income country.•Current literature on decision criteria and use of MCDA for value assessment is limited to developed countries. This study is relevant for developing value assessment framework for cancer drugs using MCDA especially in the Asian region.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39503701</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101052</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2212-1099
ispartof Value in health regional issues, 2024-11, p.101052, Article 101052
issn 2212-1099
2212-1102
2212-1102
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3124691997
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects cancer drug
decision criteria
MCDA
value assessment
title Understanding What Matters: Stakeholder Views on Decision Criteria for Cancer Drug Selection in the Public Sector in Malaysia
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T18%3A46%3A52IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20What%20Matters:%20Stakeholder%20Views%20on%20Decision%20Criteria%20for%20Cancer%20Drug%20Selection%20in%20the%20Public%20Sector%20in%20Malaysia&rft.jtitle=Value%20in%20health%20regional%20issues&rft.au=Chandriah,%20Haarathi&rft.date=2024-11-04&rft.spage=101052&rft.pages=101052-&rft.artnum=101052&rft.issn=2212-1099&rft.eissn=2212-1102&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.vhri.2024.101052&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3124691997%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3124691997&rft_id=info:pmid/39503701&rft_els_id=S2212109924000852&rfr_iscdi=true