American Society of Clinical Oncology Statement: A Conceptual Framework to Assess the Value of Cancer Treatment Options.

By L. Schnipper, N. Davidson, D. Wollins, Courtney A Tyne, D. Blayney, D. Blum, A. Dicker, Patricia A. Ganz, J. R. Hoverman, R. Langdon and 15 more. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2015

818 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Oncology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a9aeae653d1314aed2d394298c5145b64649e045

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. A. Jemal
2. Jiemin Ma
3. A. Mariotto

In Oncology

1. A. Jemal
2. Jiemin Ma
3. A. Mariotto
4. R. Siegel
5. K. Miller

Citations in the corpus

• Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975–2014, Featuring Survival (2017, background): “Cognizant of this problem, the American Society of Clinical Oncology recently developed a conceptual framework for medical oncologists to assess the value of cancer treatment options, with an emphasis on the clinical benefit (efficacy), toxicity (safety), and cost (efficiency) of drugs (113).”
• Fertility Preservation in Patients With Cancer: ASCO Clinical Practice Guideline Update. (2018, background): “Increasingly, individuals with cancer are required to pay a larger proportion of costs through deductibles and coinsurance.(31,32) Higher patient out-of-pocket costs have been shown to be a barrier to initiating and adhering to recommended treatments.”
• Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy, Endocrine Therapy, and Targeted Therapy for Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline (2021, background): “Increasingly, individuals with cancer are required to pay a larger proportion of their treatment costs through deductibles and coinsurance.(129,130) Higher patient out-of-pocket costs have been shown to be a barrier to initiating and adhering to recommended cancer treatments.”