The ecosystem of health decision making: from fragmentation to synergy

A scoping review of the role of managed entry agreements in upcoming drugs for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: learning from the case of spinal muscular atrophy

INTRODUCTION

The therapeutic options for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) are encouraging. However, there is currently no cure for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The clinical and economic uncertainty surrounding innovative treatments for rare neurodegenerative diseases makes it necessary to understand managed entry agreements (MEAs). The aim of this study was to review whether models of MEAs in SMA could be extrapolated to ALS.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review with information on MEAs on SMA in Web of Science (WOS), PubMed, Lyfegen Library, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH).

RESULTS

We found 45 results in WOS and PubMed. After an initial survey, 10 were reviewed to assess eligibility, and three were selected. We obtained 44 results from Lyfegen Library, and three results each from NICE and CADTH.

CONCLUSION

The main objective of MEAs is to reduce uncertainty in the financing of drugs with a high budgetary impact and clinical concerns, as is the case with drugs for SMA and ALS. While the information available on MEAs in SMA is scarce, some conceptual models are publicly available. MEAs for long-term treatments for SMA could be used for the design of MEAs in ALS because of their similarities in economic and clinical uncertainty.

Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in colon cancer patients: a study protocol for emulating a target trial using cancer registry data

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study is to compare the 5 year overall survival of patients with stage I-III colon cancer treated by laparoscopic colectomy versus open colectomy.

METHODS

Using Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Cancer Registry data from 2008 to 2018, we will emulate a phase III, multicenter, open-label, two-parallel-arm hypothetical target trial in adult patients with stage I-III colon cancer who received laparoscopic or open colectomy as an elective treatment. An inverse-probability weighted Royston‒Parmar parametric survival model (RPpsm) will be used to estimate the hazard ratio of laparoscopic versus open surgery after confounding factors are balanced between the two treatment arms. Further to the hazard ratio, we will also compute differences in the absolute risk (at 1, 3, and 5 years) and restricted mean survival time (up to 1, 3, and 5 years). A weighted Kaplan‒Meier curve will be used to compare five-year overall survival in both treatment arms. Various comparator and sensitivity analyses will be performed to check the robustness of the results that will be estimated by the RPpsm main model. Treatment period- and stage-specific results will also be provided.

DISCUSSION

This study aims to causally model the effect of laparoscopic versus open colectomy on 5 year overall survival using a target trial emulation approach. As the cancer registry data do not cover BMI, comorbidity, and previous abdominal surgery for non-malignant indications, the potential for residual confounding arising from these factors is a limitation of this study. This will be approached in a quantitative bias analysis using the E-method. The results will substantiate existing evidence on the comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in patients with stage I-III colon cancer and may guide clinical decisions as to whether a laparoscopic approach is as safe as an open approach in terms of improving 5-year overall survival in these patient groups.

An integrated framework to guide evidence-informed public health policymaking

Evidence-informed policymaking emphasizes that policy decisions should be informed by the best available evidence from research and follow a systematic and transparent approach. For public health policymaking we can learn from existing practices of transparent, evidence-informed decision-making for clinical practice, medicines, and medical technology. We review existing evidence-to-decision frameworks, as well as frameworks and theories for policymaking to address the political dimension of policymaking, and use this analysis to propose an integrated framework to guide evidence-informed policymaking. The framework includes nine decision-making criteria and allows for the addition of other context-specific criteria. It also emphasizes elements of the decision-making process that can give greater legitimacy, fairness, and transparency to the policy decision, such as the use of deliberative processes and assessment of conflicts of interest. We offer the framework as a tool to help government policy makers use evidence in a structured and transparent way when making decisions about public health policy options.

Good Practices for Health Technology Assessment Guideline Development: A Report of the Health Technology Assessment International, HTAsiaLink, and ISPOR Special Task Force

OBJECTIVES

Health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines are intended to support the successful implementation of HTA by enhancing consistency and transparency in concepts, methods, processes, and use, thereby enhancing the legitimacy of the decision-making process. This report lays out good practices and practical recommendations for developing or updating HTA guidelines to ensure successful implementation.

METHODS

The task force was established in 2022 and comprised experts and academics from various geographical regions, each with substantial experience in developing HTA guidelines for national health policy making. Literature reviews and key informant interviews were conducted to inform these good practices. Stakeholder consultations, open peer reviews, and expert opinions validated the recommendations. A series of teleconferences among task force members was held to iteratively refine the report.

RESULTS

The recommendations cover six key aspects throughout the guideline development cycle: (1) setting objectives, scope, and principles of the guideline, (2) building a team for a quality guideline, (3) defining a stakeholder engagement plan, (4) developing content and utilizing available resources, (5) putting in place appropriate institutional arrangements, and (6) monitoring and evaluating guideline success.

CONCLUSION

This report presents a set of resources and context-appropriate practices for developing or updating HTA guidelines. Across all contexts, the recommendations emphasize transparency, building trust among stakeholders, and fostering a culture of ongoing learning and improvement. The report recommends timing development and revision of guidelines according to the HTA landscape and pace of HTA institutionalization. Because HTA is increasingly used to inform different kinds of decision making in a variety of country contexts, it will be important to continue to monitor lessons learned to ensure the recommendations remain relevant and effective.

Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials With External Controls From Real-World Data: A Systematic Literature Review and Comparison With European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to provide an overview of analytical methods in scientific literature for comparing uncontrolled medicine trials with external controls from individual patient data real-world data (IPD-RWD) and to compare these methods with recommendations made in guidelines from European regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) organizations and with their evaluations described in assessment reports.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (until March 1, 2023) in PubMed and Connected Papers was performed to identify analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD. These methods were compared descriptively with methods recommended in method guidelines and encountered in assessment reports of the European Medicines Agency (2015-2020) and 4 European HTA organizations (2015-2023).

RESULTS

Thirty-four identified scientific articles described analytical methods for comparing uncontrolled trial data with IPD-RWD-based external controls. The various methods covered controlling for confounding and/or dependent censoring, correction for missing data, and analytical comparative modeling methods. Seven guidelines also focused on research design, RWD quality, and transparency aspects, and 4 of those recommended analytical methods for comparisons with IPD-RWD. The methods discussed in regulatory (n = 15) and HTA (n = 35) assessment reports were often based on aggregate data and lacked transparency owing to the few details provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature and guidelines suggest a methodological approach to comparing uncontrolled trials with external controls from IPD-RWD similar to target trial emulation, using state-of-the-art methods. External controls supporting regulatory and HTA decision making were rarely in line with this approach. Twelve recommendations are proposed to improve the quality and acceptability of these methods.

Strategic interventions and a novel model for the integration of community pharmacy and primary care in Spain: qualitative insights

OBJECTIVES

To explore the opinions and perceptions of key stakeholders on the integration between community pharmacy and primary care, within the Valencian Autonomous Community. Specific objectives include identifying strategic interventions to facilitate this integration. Additionally, the manuscript discusses the formulation of a novel model for the integration of community pharmacy and primary care.

DESIGN

Qualitative, with data from five virtual focus groups (FG) and 12 semistructured interviews analysed thematically using NVivo and interventions prioritised through a virtual nominal group technique.

SETTING

Valencian Autonomous Community (Spain).

PARTICIPANTS

FG involved community pharmacists (CP) and primary care stakeholders including general practitioners, primary care nurses, general practitioner pharmacists, social services managers and administrators. Interviewees were government representatives and professionals from organisations. Selection was through snowball sampling and invitations by Official Colleges of Pharmacists.

RESULTS

Five themes emerged, revealing the multifaceted nature of integrating community pharmacies and primary care. 'Integration' was identified as an ambitious target, anchored in collaboration and communication efforts. The role of CP was particularly noted for their direct patient interaction and trust, vital in fostering medication adherence. Barriers like role ambiguity and regulatory environment were highlighted. Seven interventions were identified to enable integration, with three of them prioritised: 'bidirectional communication', 'protocol standardisation' and 'multidisciplinary team strengthening'. These interventions, linked with prior components of health system integration, led to a pioneer integration model.

CONCLUSIONS

Recognising stakeholder insights is essential in shaping workable, practical and adaptable models for integration. Tailoring these temporal models to stakeholders' immediate needs and strategic priorities may serve as effective starting points for integration. Support from professional bodies and proactive stakeholders' engagement will optimise the integration success and its acceptance across healthcare levels.

ASPEN international survey on ethical competencies dealing with decision-making in the use of artificially administered nutrition and hydration and competency application in clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Ethical competencies dealing with decision-making for clinicians involved in artificially administered nutrition and hydration (AANH) have not been defined in the literature. Although clinical assessments identify nutrition needs and appropriate routes of nutrition administration, an assessment of the ethical, cultural, and spiritual implications of the medical nutrition therapy may be overlooked.

METHODS

Eleven competency statements were developed by members of two international sections of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. This descriptive cross-sectional survey study was conducted to measure the importance of the competency statements to the membership of two sections using a five-point Likert scale of 1-5 (1-low to 5-high).

RESULTS

A total of 113 responses (12.5% response rate) were obtained predominantly from physicians and dietitians from 25 countries. There was a wide range of world regions of the 49% respondents outside of the United States. Means and SDs were calculated for agreement with the 11 competency statements with overall means ranging from 4.32 to 4.67. Most of the participants cared for adult/older adult patients (63.7%) exclusively, and 12.4% cared for pediatric/neonate patients exclusively; the remainder (23.9%) cared for both populations. Respondents reported they were either experienced, competent, or expert (88.6%) in dealing with ethical issues related to AANH.

CONCLUSION

This international interdisciplinary group agreed that the integration of ethical, cultural, and spiritual competencies into clinical decision-making regarding artificially AANH is important.

Technology Assessment vs. Technology Appraisal-How to Strengthen the Science/Value Dichotomy with EU HTA?

Many countries around the world use health technology assessment (HTA) to inform reimbursement and pricing decisions. HTA is often split into two steps, called assessment and appraisal. While the term HTA itself has been defined by international consortia, there is heterogeneity in the way different stakeholders use the terms assessment and appraisal. This creates ambiguity regarding which activities are included in technology assessment. With the new EU HTA Regulation, the HTA community should urgently seek to clarify the distinction between assessment and appraisal, as the regulation aims to centralize the clinical part of technology assessment at the European level. Failure to clarify this terminology will put the ambition of the regulation such as increased efficiency and reduction in duplication at risk. In this article, we argue that the distinction between assessment and appraisal should be seen as a science/value dichotomy. We discuss the transition from centralized assessment activities to country-level appraisal, which should culminate in a categorization of the overall added benefit in a local context. Finally, we touch on the important dimension of uncertainty always present in medical decision making.

"I Do Not Believe We Should Disclose Everything to an Older Patient": Challenges and Ethical Concerns in Clinical Decision-Making in Old-Age Care in Ethiopia

Clinical decision-making in old-age care is a complex and ethically sensitive process. Despite its importance, research addressing the challenges of clinical decision-making in old-age care within this cultural context is limited. This study aimed to explore the challenges and ethical concerns in clinical decision-making in old-age care in Ethiopia. This qualitative study employed an inductive approach with data collected via semi-structured interviews with 20 older patients and 26 health professionals recruited from healthcare facilities in Ethiopia. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Our analysis identified three key themes. First, participants highlighted perceptions that older patients' religious beliefs interfere with the clinical decisions both older patients and health professionals make. Second, older patients often receive limited information from health professionals about their diagnosis and treatment. Third, families of older patients appear to strongly influence clinical decisions made by older patients or health professionals. This research enhances the understanding of clinical decision-making in old-age care within Ethiopia, a context where such research is scarce. As a result, this study contributes towards advancing the deliberation of ethical dilemmas that health professionals who work with older patients in Ethiopia might face. A key implication of the study is that there is a need for more ethics and cultural competence training for health professionals working with older patients in Ethiopia.

Assessment of the development of social skills among undergraduate medical students through participation in a socio-educational project during the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic: a Brazilian pilot study

Coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 had an impact on medical graduation, causing weaknesses arising from social isolation and remote emergency teaching, with an emphasis on deficits in the development of non-technical skills (soft skills). In this context, the interaction between a group of medical students and adolescents who develop activities at the Center for Learning and Mobilization for Citizenship in Campinas/SP, Brazil, was evaluated about the development of soft skills during the COVID-19 pandemic. The observational study was carried out using an electronic questionnaire based on a Likert scale on the feelings of undergraduate medical students regarding participation in project activities in the context of the development of social skills. The study demonstrated an important positive impact of student participation in a socio-educational project for the development of soft skills, emphasizing the ability to deal with adverse situations, decision-making, and the ability to deal with the fear of not corresponding. However, the existence of limitations and difficulties in the development of non-technical skills by students was revealed, further reinforced by the challenges brought by the COVID-19 pandemic. In this aspect, the study demonstrated participation in a voluntary social project as an important strategy to improve the teaching of these skills.

GRADE guidance 39: using GRADE-ADOLOPMENT to adopt, adapt or create contextualized recommendations from source guidelines and evidence syntheses

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE)-ADOLOPMENT methodology has been widely used to adopt, adapt, or de novo develop recommendations from existing or new guideline and evidence synthesis efforts. The objective of this guidance is to refine the operationalization for applying GRADE-ADOLOPMENT.

METHODS

Through iterative discussions, online meetings, and email communications, the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT project group drafted the updated guidance. We then conducted a review of handbooks of guideline-producing organizations, and a scoping review of published and planned adolopment guideline projects. The lead authors refined the existing approach based on the scoping review findings and feedback from members of the GRADE working group. We presented the revised approach to the group in November 2022 (approximately 115 people), in May 2023 (approximately 100 people), and twice in September 2023 (approximately 60 and 90 people) for approval.

RESULTS

This GRADE guidance shows how to effectively and efficiently contextualize recommendations using the GRADE-ADOLOPMENT approach by doing the following: (1) showcasing alternative pathways for starting an adolopment effort; (2) elaborating on the different essential steps of this approach, such as building on existing evidence-to-decision (EtDs), when available or developing new EtDs, if necessary; and (3) providing examples from adolopment case studies to facilitate the application of the approach. We demonstrate how to use contextual evidence to make judgments about EtD criteria, and highlight the importance of making the resulting EtDs available to facilitate adolopment efforts by others.

CONCLUSION

This updated GRADE guidance further operationalizes the application of GRADE-ADOLOPMENT based on over 6 years of experience. It serves to support uptake and application by end users interested in contextualizing recommendations to a local setting or specific reality in a short period of time or with limited resources.

Efficacy of different protocols of non-surgical periodontal therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of the present systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of different protocols of NSPT without any adjunctive therapy in subjects with type 2 diabetes, by considering clinical and patient-centered outcomes. For the purposes of the study randomized controlled clinical trials with more than 3-month follow-up were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central. Then the articles were screened for inclusion and considered based on the protocols adopted, the outcome measure, follow-up, and the level of glycemic control. A total of 23 articles about 22 studies were included. NSPT was more effective than just oral hygiene measures/no treatment in reducing periodontal probing depth (PPD) and clinical attachment loss (CAL) at 3 months (0.47 mm [0.29-0.65 mm] and 0.50 mm [0.24-0.76 mm], respectively) and 6 months (0.56 mm [0.28-0.84 mm] and 0.45 mm [0.13-0.77 mm], respectively for PPD and CAL) follow-up (very low and low level of evidence). The meta-analysis found no evidence of a difference between full-mouth disinfection versus quadrant protocol clinical outcomes (very low level of evidence). One study found no evidence of a difference in periodontal clinical response between good versus poor glycemic control. Based on the results of the present research NSPT protocols could be considered more efficacious than others in terms of clinical outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Moreover, NSPT resulted in efficacious improvement of periodontal parameters and HbA1c levels compared to no treatment or oral hygiene instructions alone.

Statistical characteristics of analytical studies published in Peruvian medical journals from 2021 to 2022: A methodological study

OBJECTIVE

While statistical analysis plays a crucial role in medical science, some published studies might have utilized suboptimal analysis methods, potentially undermining the credibility of their findings. Critically appraising analytical approaches can help elevate the standard of evidence and ensure clinicians and other stakeholders have trustworthy results on which to base decisions. The aim of the present study was to examine the statistical characteristics of original articles published in Peruvian medical journals in 2021-2022.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We performed a methodological study of articles published between 2021 and 2022 from nine medical journals indexed in SciELO-Peru, Scopus, and Medline. We included original articles that conducted analytical analyses (i.e., association between variables). The statistical variables assessed were: statistical software used for analysis, sample size, and statistical methods employed (measures of effect), controlling for confounders, and the method employed for confounder control or epidemiological approaches.

RESULTS

We included 313 articles (ranging from 11 to 77 across journals), of which 67.7% were cross-sectional studies. While 90.7% of articles specified the statistical software used, 78.3% omitted details on sample size calculation. Descriptive and bivariate statistics were commonly employed, whereas measures of association were less common. Only 13.4% of articles (ranging from 0% to 39% across journals) presented measures of effect controlling for confounding and explained the criteria for selecting such confounders.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed important statistical deficiencies within analytical studies published in Peruvian journals, including inadequate reporting of sample sizes, absence of measures of association and confounding control, and suboptimal explanations regarding the methodologies employed for adjusted analyses. These findings highlight the need for better statistical reporting and researcher-editor collaboration to improve the quality of research production and dissemination in Peruvian journals.

Healthcare decision-making for tumour-agnostic therapies in Europe: lessons learned

The tumour-agnostic authorisations of larotrectinib and entrectinib shifted the paradigm for indication setting. European healthcare decision-makers agreed on their therapeutic potential but diverged primarily in identified uncertainties concerning basket trial designs and endpoints, prognostic value of neurotrophic tropomyosin receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions, and resistance mechanisms. In addition, assessments of relevant comparators, unmet medical needs (UMNs), and implementation of NTRK-testing strategies diverged. In particular, the tumour-specific reimbursement recommendations and guidelines do not reflect tumour-agnostic thinking. These differences indicate difficulties experienced in these assessments and provide valuable lessons for future disruptive therapies. As we discuss here, early multistakeholder dialogues concerning minimum evidence requirements and involving clinicians are essential.

Evidence-informed guidelines in oral health: insights from a systematic survey

BACKGROUND

Oral diseases are a major global public health problem, impacting the quality of life of those affected. While consensus exists on the importance of high-quality, evidence-informed guidelines to inform practice and public health decisions in medicine, appropriate methodologies and standards are not commonly adhered to among producers of oral health guidelines. This study aimed to systematically identify organizations that develop evidence-informed guidelines in oral health globally and survey the methodological process followed to formulate recommendations.

METHODS

We searched numerous electronic databases, guideline repositories, and websites of guideline developers, scientific societies, and international organizations (January 2012-October 2023) to identify organizations that develop guidelines addressing any oral health topic and that explicitly declare the inclusion of research evidence in their development. Pairs of reviewers independently evaluated potentially eligible organizations according to predefined selection criteria and extracted data about the organization's characteristics, key features of their guidelines, and the process followed when formulating formal recommendations. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze and summarize data.

RESULTS

We included 46 organizations that developed evidence-informed guidelines in oral health. The organizations were mainly professional associations and scientific societies (67%), followed by governmental organizations (28%). In total, organizations produced 55 different guideline document types, most of them containing recommendations for clinical practice (77%). Panels were primarily composed of healthcare professionals (87%), followed by research methodologists (40%), policymakers (24%), and patient partners (18%). Most (60%) of the guidelines reported their funding source, but only one out of three (33%) included a conflict of interest (COI) policy management. The methodology used in the 55 guideline document types varied across the organizations, but only 19 (35%) contained formal recommendations. Half (51%) of the guideline documents referred to a methodology handbook, 46% suggested a structured approach or system for rating the certainty of the evidence and the strength of recommendations, and 37% mentioned using a framework to move from evidence to decisions, with the GRADE-EtD being the most widely used (27%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings underscore the need for alignment and standardization of both terminology and methodologies used in oral health guidelines with current international standards to formulate trustworthy recommendations.

Nursing and waste management in health services: unveiling meanings in the hospital context

OBJECTIVE

To unveil the meanings that nursing professionals attribute to practices related to waste management in health services, within the hospital context.

METHOD

Qualitative research, whose theoretical and methodological references were, respectively, Complexity Theory and Grounded Theory. A total of 30 nursing professionals from a public hospital in Rio de Janeiro participated in the study, between January and August 2022. A semi-structured interview was used for data collection.

RESULTS

The professionals indicate the need for better knowledge about waste management in healthcare services, while revealing their understanding on the importance of this process and of themselves as important elements in impacting the environment and health.

CONCLUSION

The complexity of the meanings attributed to healthcare waste management practices indicates the dialogue between the fragility of nursing professionals' knowledge and their expanded perceptions about the impacts they can have on this reality.

Deliberative process of health technology reassessment by health technology assessment agency in Korea

In 2019, the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA) in Korea established a health technology reassessment (HTR) system to manage the life cycle of health technologies and develop operational measures promoting the efficient use of healthcare resources. The purpose of this study is to introduce the detailed implementation process and practical functional methods of the HTR implemented by NECA.The HTR is a structured multidisciplinary method for analyzing health technologies currently used in the healthcare system based on the latest information on parameters, such as clinical safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of optimizing the use of healthcare resources as well as social and ethical issues. All decision-making stages of the HTR are carefully reviewed and transparently managed. The HTR committee makes significant decisions, and the subcommittee decides the details related to the assessment process.Since the pilot began in 2018, 262 cases have been reassessed, of which, 126 cases (48.1 percent) were health services not covered by the National Health Insurance (NHI). Over the past 5 years, approximately 130 recommendations for the in-use technologies were determined by the HTR committee. In the near future, it will be necessary to officially develop and establish a Korean HTR system and a legal foundation to optimize the NHI system.

Evidence uptake is only part of the process: Stakeholders' insights on WHO treatment guideline recommendation processes for radical cure of P. vivax malaria

Health policy processes should be evidence-informed, transparent and timely, but these processes are often unclear to stakeholders outside the immediate policymaking environment. We spoke to 36 international malaria stakeholders to gain insights on the processes involved in the World Health Organization's Global Malaria Programme's recommendations for their treatment guidelines of P. vivax malaria. Four key themes which drew on the 3i policy framework and Shiffman's four factors that influence global and national policymaking were identified to understand these processes. Triggers for policy change and change prioritisation, evidence types that inform policy, effects of funding on decision-making processes, and transparency and communication of these processes to external stakeholders. Results indicate that more clarity is needed on what triggers global malaria policy change processes, a clearer justification of evidence types used to inform policymaking, better understanding of the impact of the WHO's funding model on policymaking and further transparency and improved communication of these processes to external stakeholders is also needed. We suggest that global malaria policymaking could be improved by using the following strategies: ensuring that identified triggers actually initiate the policy change process, expediting decision-making timelines by developing a priority framework for assessing new evidence, adopting suitable frameworks to assess contextual evidence, and increasing the transparency of the role of non-state funders in policy decision-making processes and when publishing new recommendations.

[Concordance between essential medicines lists and diabetes guidelines in Latin America and the CaribbeanConcordância entre as listas de medicamentos essenciais e diretrizes para diabetes na América Latina e no Caribe]

Objective

Conduct an analysis to determine the existence and updating of national essential medicines lists (EMLs) and clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of diabetes in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC); and compare the medicines included in each country's list and guidelines both with each other and with those of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Methods

Cross-sectional study. EMLs and CPGs for diabetes were found on the websites of the Pan American Health Organization and national health authorities. Medicines were noted and analyzed according to pharmacological group, based on the fourth level of nomenclature of the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification system. F1 scoring was used to assess the proximity of EMLs to the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (MLEM).

Results

Of the total number of countries, 87.2% have EMLs, and 91% have CPGs (78% and 45% updated in the last five years, respectively). Compared to the six hypoglycemic groups of the MLEM, the EMLs had a median (range) of 6 (4-13) and an F1 score of 0.80; This indicates proper alignment. CPGs had a median (range) of 12 (1-12) hypoglycemic drugs compared to eight in the WHO guidelines. CPGs had a median of 15 more drugs than their respective EMLs.

Conclusions

While most LAC countries have EMLs and CPGs for diabetes, the lack of concordance among them limits their effectiveness. It is necessary to align the processes and criteria for the development of these two tools for policymaking on medicines.

Mapping Theories, Models, and Frameworks to Evaluate Digital Health Interventions: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Digital health interventions (DHIs) are a central focus of health care transformation efforts, yet their uptake in practice continues to fall short of their potential. In order to achieve their desired outcomes and impact, DHIs need to reach their target population and need to be used. Many factors can rapidly intersect between this dynamic of users and interventions. The application of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) can facilitate the systematic understanding and explanation of the complex interactions between users, practices, technology, and health system factors that underpin research questions. There remains a gap in our understanding of how TMFs have been applied to guide the evaluation of DHIs with real-world health system operations.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to map TMFs used in studies to guide the evaluation of DHIs. The objectives are to (1) describe the TMFs and the constructs they target, (2) identify how TMFs have been prospectively used (ie, their roles) in primary studies to evaluate DHIs, and (3) to reflect on the relevance and utility of our findings for knowledge users.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted in partnership with knowledge users using an integrated knowledge translation approach. We included papers (eg, reports; empirical quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies; conference proceedings; and dissertations) if primary insights resulting from the application of TMFs were presented. Any type of DHI was eligible. Papers published from 2000 and onward were mainly identified from the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL Complete (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (Ovid), EBM Reviews (Ovid), and Embase (Ovid).

RESULTS

A total of 156 studies published between 2000 and 2022 were included. A total of 68 distinct TMFs were identified across 85 individual studies. In more than half (85/156, 55%) of the included studies, 1 of following 6 prevailing TMFs were reported: Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (n=39); the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework (n=17); the Technology of Acceptance Model (n=16); the Unified Theory on Acceptance and Use of Technology (n=12); the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (n=10); and Normalization Process Theory (n=9). The most common intended roles of the 6 TMFs were to inform data collection (n=86), to inform data analysis (n=69), and to identify key constructs that may serve as barriers and facilitators (n=52).

CONCLUSIONS

As TMFs are most often reported to be applied to support data collection and analysis, researchers should consider more clearly synthesizing key insights as practical use cases to both increase the relevance and digestibility of their findings. There is also a need to adapt or develop guidelines for better reporting DHIs and the use of TMFs to guide evaluation. Hence, it would contribute to ensuring ongoing technology transformation efforts are evidence and theory informed rather than anecdotally driven.

GRADE Concept 7: Issues and Insights Linking Guideline Recommendations to Trustworthy Essential Medicine Lists

OBJECTIVES

Guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs) bear similarities and differences in the process that lead to decisions. Access to essential medicines is central to achieve universal health coverage. The World Health Organization (WHO) EML has guided prioritization of essential medicines globally for nearly 50 years, and national EMLs (NEMLs) exist in over 130 countries. Guideline and EML decisions, at WHO or national levels, are not always coordinated and aligned. We sought to explore challenges, and potential solutions, for decision-making to support trustworthy medicine selection for EMLs from a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) Working Group perspective. We primarily focus on the WHO EML; however, our findings may be applicable to NEML decisions as well.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We identified key challenges in connecting the EML to health guidelines by involving a broad group of stakeholders and assessing case studies including real applications to the WHO EML, South Africa NEML, and a multiple sclerosis guideline connected to a WHO EML application for multiple sclerosis treatments. To address challenges, we utilized the results of a survey and feedback from the stakeholders, and iteratively met as a project group. We drafted a conceptual framework of challenges and potential solutions. We presented a summary of the results for feedback to all attendees of the GRADE Working Group meetings in November 2022 (approximately 120 people) and in May 2023 (approximately 100 people) before finalizing the framework.

RESULTS

We prioritized issues and insights/solutions that addressed the connections between the EML and health guidelines. Our suggested solutions include early planning alignment of guideline groups and EMLs, considering shared participation to strengthen linkage, further clarity on price/cost considerations, and using explicit shared criteria to make guideline and EML decisions. We also provide recommendations to strengthen the connection between WHO EML and NEMLs including through contextualization methods.

CONCLUSION

This GRADE concept article, jointly developed by key stakeholders from the guidelines and EMLs field, identified key conceptual issues and potential solutions to support the continued advancement of trustworthy EMLs. Adopting structured decision criteria that can be linked to guideline recommendations bears the potential to advance health equity and gaps in availability of essential medicines within and between countries.

Exploring the diverse definitions of 'evidence': a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically collect and analyse diverse definitions of 'evidence' in both health and social sciences, and help users to correctly use the term 'evidence' and rethink what is the definition of 'evidence' in scientific research.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Definitions of evidence in the health sciences and social sciences were included. We have excluded the definition of evidence applied in the legal field, abstracts without full text, documents not published in either Chinese or English and so on. We established a multidisciplinary working group and systematically searched five electronic databases including Medline, Web of Science, EBSCO, the Chinese Social Sciences Citation Index and the Chinese Science Citation Database from their inception to 26 February 2022. We also searched websites and reviewed the reference lists of the identified studies. Six reviewers working in pairs, independently, selected studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and extracted information. Any differences were discussed in pairs, and if there was disagreement, it was resolved via discussion or with the help of a third reviewer. Reviewers extracted document characteristics, the original content for the definitions of 'evidence', assessed definitions as either intensional or extensional, and any citations for the given definition.

RESULTS

Forty-nine documents were finally included after screening, and 68 definitions were obtained. After excluding duplicates, a total of 54 different definitions of 'evidence' were identified. There were 42 intensional definitions and 12 extensional definitions. The top three definiens were 'information', 'fact' and 'research/study'. The definition of 'evidence' differed between health and social sciences. The term 'research' appeared most frequently in the definitions.

CONCLUSIONS

The definition of 'evidence' has gradually attracted the attention of many scholars and decision-makers in health and social sciences. Nevertheless, there is no widely recognised and accepted definition in scientific research. Given the wide use of the term, we need to think about whether, or under what circumstances, a standardised, clear, meaningful and widely applicable definition of 'evidence' might be helpful.

User-experience testing of an evidence-to-decision framework for selecting essential medicines

Essential medicine lists (EMLs) are important medicine prioritization tools used by the World Health Organization (WHO) EML and over 130 countries. The criteria used by WHO's Expert Committee on the Selection and Use of Essential Medicines has parallels to the GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. In this study, we explored the EtD frameworks and a visual abstract as adjunctive tools to strengthen the integrate evidence and improve the transparency of decisions of EML applications. We conducted user-experience testing interviews of key EML stakeholders using Morville's honeycomb model. Interviews explored multifaceted dimensions (e.g., usability) on two EML applications for the 2021 WHO EML-long-acting insulin analogues for diabetes and immune checkpoint inhibitors for lung cancer. Using a pre-determined coding framework and thematic analysis we iteratively improved both the EtD framework and the visual abstract. We coded the transcripts of 17 interviews with 13 respondents in 103 locations of the interview texts across all dimensions of the user-experience honeycomb. Respondents felt the EtD framework and visual abstract presented complementary useful and findable adjuncts to the traditional EML application. They felt this would increase transparency and efficiency in evidence assessed by EML committees. As EtD frameworks are also used in health practice guidelines, including those by the WHO, respondents articulated that the adoption of the EtD by EML applications represents a tangible mechanism to align EMLs and guidelines, decrease duplication of work and improve coordination. Improvements were made to clarify instructions for the EtD and visual abstract, and to refine the design and content included. 'Availability' was added as an additional criterion for EML applications to highlight this criterion in alignment with WHO EML criteria. EtD frameworks and visual abstracts present additional important tools to communicate evidence and support decision-criteria in EML applications, which have global health impact. Access to essential medicines is important for achieving universal health coverage, and the development of essential medicine lists should be as evidence-based and trustworthy as possible.

Slow data public health

Surveillance and research data, despite their massive production, often fail to inform evidence-based and rigorous data-driven health decision-making. In the age of infodemic, as revealed by the COVID-19 pandemic, providing useful information for decision-making requires more than getting more data. Data of dubious quality and reliability waste resources and create data-genic public health damages. We call therefore for a slow data public health, which means focusing, first, on the identification of specific information needs and, second, on the dissemination of information in a way that informs decision-making, rather than devoting massive resources to data collection and analysis. A slow data public health prioritizes better data, ideally population-based, over more data and aims to be timely rather than deceptively fast. Applied by independent institutions with expertise in epidemiology and surveillance methods, it allows a thoughtful and timely public health response, based on high-quality data fostering trustworthiness.

A systematic review of full economic evaluations of robotic-assisted surgery in thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial.

Moving from intervention management to disease management: a qualitative study exploring a systems approach to health technology assessment in Canada

OBJECTIVES

Health technology assessment (HTA) traditionally informs decision making for single health technologies, which could lead to ill-informed decisions, suboptimal care, and system inefficiencies. We explored opportunities for conceptualizing the decision space in HTA as a disease management question versus an intervention management question.

METHODS

Semistructured interviews were conducted between April 2022 and October 2022 with purposefully selected individuals from national and provincial HTA agencies and related organizations in Canada. We conducted manual line by line coding of data informed by our interview guide and sensitizing concepts from the literature. One author coded the data, and findings were independently verified by a second author who coded a subset of transcripts.

RESULTS

Twenty-four invitations were distributed, and eighteen individuals agreed to participate. A disease management approach to HTA was differentiated from traditional approaches as being disease-based, multi-interventional, and dynamic. There was general support for an explicit care pathway approach to HTA by informing discussions around patient choice and suboptimal care, creating a space where decision makers can collaborate on shared objectives, and in setting up a platform for open dialogue about managing high-cost and high-severity diseases. There are opportunities for a care pathway approach to be implemented that build on the strengths of the existing HTA system in Canada.

CONCLUSIONS

A disease management approach may enhance the impact of HTA by supporting dynamic decision making that could better inform a proactive, resilient, and sustainable healthcare system in Canada.

Exploring the definition and methodology of "best practice" in the health care literature: a scoping review protocol

OBJECTIVE

This review will map and define the terminology used in health care literature for "best practice" as well as its underpinning framework/methodology.

INTRODUCTION

Numerous international organizations and institutions have sought to develop models or frameworks to guide health care providers to integrate the best evidence into clinical practice. However, different concepts related to best practice have been used, both in the biomedical literature and by public institutions, leading to a lack of consistency in definitions of the term. This poses a potential difficulty for clinical professionals in applying evidence effectively to achieve desired patient outcomes.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

This review will adopt the following inclusion criteria: i) the study must contain a definition of the term "best practice" or its related concepts; ii) the concept of best practice must refer to clinical activities and not have organizational features; and iii) any study design can be included. Studies will be excluded if they describe a definition of best practice that is not directly related to clinical practice (eg, business).

METHODS

The review will follow the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. An initial search of MEDLINE identified keywords and MeSH terms. MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), and Google Scholar will be searched from 2001 until the present, the year in which the first definition of best practice appeared in the literature. Four pairs of reviewers will independently select studies and perform data extraction and data synthesis. Data will be presented in figures or tables, accompanied by a narrative summary. Searches will be limited to articles in English, Italian, German, French, and Spanish.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/52vxe/.

Negotiating public-health intellectual property licensing agreements to increase access to health technologies: an insider's story

Public health voluntary licensing of intellectual property has successfully been applied to increase access to medicines in certain disease areas, producing health benefits and economic savings, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. There is however limited understanding of the intricacies of the approach, the modalities by which it works in practice, its levers and the trade-offs made. Such knowledge may be critical in deciding what role licensing should have in pandemic preparedness and equitable access to health technologies more broadly. This paper examines the case for licensing, the considerations for balancing public health needs, the challenges of negotiations, and the processes for validating proposed agreements. No access mechanism is perfect, but evidence suggests that public-health licensing has an important role to play, although it remains underused. Understanding some of the realities, strengths, limitations and complexities of applying the model may help calibrate expectations and develop incentives to expand its applications.

Perspectives on how to build bridges between regulation, health technology assessment and clinical guideline development: a qualitative focus group study with European experts

OBJECTIVE

Improving synergy among regulation, health technology assessment (HTA) and clinical guideline development is relevant as these independent processes are building on shared evidence-based grounds. The two objectives were first to assess how convergence of evidentiary needs among stakeholders may be achieved, and second, to determine to what extent convergence can be achieved.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using eight online dual-moderator focus groups.

SETTING

Discussions had a European focus and were contextualised in four case studies on head and neck cancer, diabetes mellitus, multiple sclerosis and myelodysplastic syndromes.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty-two experienced (over 10 years) European regulators, HTA representatives and clinicians participated in the discussion.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received information on the case study and research topic in advance. An introductory background presentation and interview guide for the moderators were used to steer the discussion.

RESULTS

Convergence may be achieved through improved communication institutionalised in multistakeholder early dialogues, shared definitions and shared methods. Required data sets should be inclusive rather than aligned. Deliberation and decision-making should remain independent. Alignment could be sought for pragmatic clinical trial designs and patient registries. Smaller and lower-income countries should be included in these efforts.

CONCLUSION

Actors in the field expressed that improving synergy among stakeholders always involves trade-offs. A balance needs to be found between the convergence of processes and the institutional remits or geographical independence. A similar tension exists between the involvement of more actors, for example, patients or additional countries, and the level of collaboration that may be achieved. Communication is key to establishing this balance.

What could health technology assessment learn from living clinical practice guidelines?

A "living" approach to clinical practice guidelines is when the identification, appraisal and synthesis of evidence is maintained and repeated at an agreed frequency, with a clear process for when and how new evidence is to be incorporated. The value of a living approach to guidelines was emphasised during the COVID-19 pandemic when health professionals and policymakers needed to make decisions regarding patient care in the context of a nascent but rapidly evolving evidence base. In this perspective, we draw on our recent experience developing Australian and international living guidelines and reflect on the feasibility of applying living guideline methods and processes to a lifecycle approach to health technology assessment (HTA). We believe the opportunities and challenges of adopting a living approach in HTA fall into five key themes: identification, appraisal and synthesis of evidence; optimising the frequency of updates; embedding ongoing multi-stakeholder engagement; linking the emergence of new evidence to reimbursement; and system capacity to support a living approach. We acknowledge that the suitability of specific living approaches to HTA will be heavily influenced by the type of health technology, its intended use in the health system, local reimbursement pathways, and other policy settings. But we believe that the methods and processes applied successfully to guideline development to manage evidentiary uncertainty could be applied in the context of HTA and reimbursement decision-making to help manage similar sources of uncertainty.

Drug interference with biochemical laboratory tests

Clinical laboratory practice represents an essential part of clinical decision-making, as it influences 60-70% of medical decisions at all levels of health care. Results of biochemical laboratory tests (BLTs) have a key role in establishment of adequate diagnosis as well as in evaluation of treatment progress and outcome. The prevalence of drug-laboratory test interactions (DLTIs) is up to 43% of patients who had laboratory results influenced by drugs. Unrecognized DLTIs may lead to misinterpreted BLTs results, incorrect or delayed diagnosis, extra costs for unnecessary additional tests or inadequate therapy, as all may cause false clinical decisions. The significance of timely and adequate recognition of DLTIs is to prevent common clinical consequences such as incorrectly interpreted test results, delayed or non-treated condition due to erroneous diagnosis or unnecessary extra tests or therapy. Medical professionals should be educated that it is essential to obtain patient data about medications especially for the drugs used in the last 10 days before biological material collection. Our mini-review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state in this important domain of medical biochemistry with detailed analysis of the effect of drugs on BLTs and to give detailed information to medical specialists.

Financing and Reimbursement of Approved Advanced Therapies in Several European Countries

OBJECTIVES

The uncertainty in the cost-benefit of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) is a current challenge for their reimbursement in health systems. This study aimed to provide a comparative analysis of the National Health Authorities (NHAs) reimbursement recommendations issued in different European countries.

METHODS

The NHA reimbursement recommendations for the approved ATMPs were compared among 8 European Union (EU) Countries (EU8: Ireland, England/Wales, Scotland, The Netherlands, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy). The search was carried out until December 31, 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 19 approved ATMPs and 76 appraisal reports were analyzed. The majority of the ATMPs were reimbursed, although with uncertainty in added therapeutic value. No relationship between the type of the European Medicines Agency approval and reimbursement was found. Managed entry agreements, such as payment by results, were necessary to ensure market access. The main issue during the evaluation was to base the cost-effectiveness analyses on assumptions because of the limited long-term data. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio among countries reveals high variability. Overall, the median time to NHA recommendation for the EU8 is in the range of 9 to 17 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Transparent, harmonized, and systematic assessments across the EU NHAs in terms of cost-effectiveness, added therapeutic value, and grade of innovativeness are needed. This could lead to a more aligned access, increasing the EU market attractiveness and raising public fairness in terms of patient access and pricing.

Prioritising Cochrane reviews to be updated with health equity focus

BACKGROUND

The prioritisation of updating published systematic reviews of interventions is vital to prevent research waste and ensure relevance to stakeholders. The consideration of health equity in reviews is also important to ensure interventions will not exacerbate the existing inequities of the disadvantaged if universally implemented. This study aimed to pilot a priority setting exercise based on systematic reviews of interventions published in the Cochrane Library, to identify and prioritise reviews to be updated with a focus on health equity.

METHODS

We conducted a priority setting exercise with a group of 13 international stakeholders. We identified Cochrane reviews of interventions that showed a reduction in mortality, had at least one Summary of Findings table and that focused on one of 42 conditions with a high global burden of disease from the 2019 WHO Global Burden of Disease report. This included 21 conditions used as indicators of success of the United Nations Universal Health Coverage in attaining the Sustainable Development Goals. Stakeholders prioritised reviews that were relevant to disadvantaged populations, or to characteristics of potential disadvantage within the general population.

RESULTS

After searching for Cochrane reviews of interventions within 42 conditions, we identified 359 reviews that assessed mortality and included at least one Summary of Findings table. These pertained to 29 of the 42 conditions; 13 priority conditions had no reviews with the outcome mortality. Reducing the list to only reviews showing a clinically important reduction in mortality left 33 reviews. Stakeholders ranked these reviews in order of priority to be updated with a focus on health equity.

CONCLUSIONS

This project developed and implemented a methodology to set priorities for updating systematic reviews spanning multiple health topics with a health equity focus. It prioritised reviews that reduce overall mortality, are relevant to disadvantaged populations, and focus on conditions with a high global burden of disease. This approach to the prioritisation of systematic reviews of interventions that reduce mortality provides a template that can be extended to reducing morbidity, and the combination of mortality and morbidity as represented in Disability-Adjusted Life Years and Quality-Adjusted Life Years.

Constructing big data prevention and control model for public health emergencies in China: A grounded theory study

Big data technology plays an important role in the prevention and control of public health emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Current studies on model construction, such as SIR infectious disease model, 4R crisis management model, etc., have put forward decision-making suggestions from different perspectives, which also provide a reference basis for the research in this paper. This paper conducts an exploratory study on the construction of a big data prevention and control model for public health emergencies by using the grounded theory, a qualitative research method, with literature, policies, and regulations as research samples, and makes a grounded analysis through three-level coding and saturation test. Main results are as follows: (1) The three elements of data layer, subject layer, and application layer play a prominent role in the digital prevention and control practice of epidemic in China and constitute the basic framework of the “DSA” model. (2) The “DSA” model integrates cross-industry, cross-region, and cross-domain epidemic data into one system framework, effectively solving the disadvantages of fragmentation caused by “information island”. (3) The “DSA” model analyzes the differences in information needs of different subjects during an outbreak and summarizes several collaborative approaches to promote resource sharing and cooperative governance. (4) The “DSA” model analyzes the specific application scenarios of big data technology in different stages of epidemic development, effectively responding to the disconnection between current technological development and realistic needs.

Decision criteria for selecting essential medicines and their connection to guidelines: an interpretive descriptive qualitative interview study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines has led to at least 137 national lists. Essential medicines should be grounded in evidence-based guideline recommendations and explicit decision criteria. Essential medicines should be available, accessible, affordable, and the supporting evidence should be accompanied by a rating of the certainty one can place in it. Our objectives were to identify criteria and considerations that should be addressed in moving from a guideline recommendation regarding a medicine to the decision of whether to add, maintain, or remove a medicine from an essential medicines list. We also seek to explore opportunities to improve organizational processes to support evidence-based health decision-making more broadly.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study with semistructured interviews of key informant stakeholders in the development and use of guidelines and essential medicine lists (EMLs). We used an interpretive descriptive analysis approach and thematic analysis of interview transcripts in NVIVO v12.

RESULTS

We interviewed 16 key informants working at national and global levels across all WHO regions. We identified five themes: three descriptive/explanatory themes 1) EMLs and guidelines, the same, but different; 2) EMLs can drive price reductions and improve affordability and access; 3) Time lag and disconnect between guidelines and EMLs; and two prescriptive themes 4) An "evidence pipeline" could improve coordination between guidelines and EMLs; 5) Facilitating the link between the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO EML) and national EMLs could increase alignment.

CONCLUSION

We found significant overlap and opportunities for alignment between guideline and essential medicine decision processes. This finding presents opportunities for guideline and EML developers to enhance strategies for collaboration. Future research should assess and evaluate these strategies in practice to support the shared goal of guidelines and EMLs: improvements in health.

Cancer medicines on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines: processes, challenges, and a way forward

The selection of cancer medicines for national procurement requires deliberate evaluation of population benefit, budget impact, sustainability, and health system capacity. However, this process is complicated by numerous challenges, including the large volume and rapid pace of newly developed therapies offering marginal gains at prohibitively high prices. The WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) and Model List of Essential Medicines for Children (EMLc) have undergone a series of evidence-based updates to ensure recommended cancer medicines offer meaningful clinical benefit. This Health Policy paper describes how cancer medicines are listed on the EML and EMLc, including two updated WHO processes: (1) the formation of the Cancer Medicines Working Group, and (2) additional selection principles for recommending cancer medicines, including a minimum overall survival benefit of 4-6 months with improvement to quality of life compared with standard treatment. These updates, along with proposals to include formal price considerations, additional selection criteria, and multisectoral collaboration (eg, voluntary licensing) promote procurement of high-value essential cancer medicines on national formularies in the context of supporting sustainable health systems to achieve universal health coverage.