↓ Skip to main content

Challenges for Relative Effectiveness Assessment and Early Access of Cancer Immunotherapies in Europe

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Challenges for Relative Effectiveness Assessment and Early Access of Cancer Immunotherapies in Europe
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2016.00056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mira Pavlovic

Abstract

Clinical endpoints relevant for relative effectiveness assessment (REA) reflect how patients feel, function, or survive. Outcome data requested by health technology assessment (HTA) bodies in Europe to support reimbursement of an anticancer drug are based on final endpoints coming from completed comparative phase 3 trials; overall survival improvement is the preferred criterion for the demonstration of the patient benefit in this field. Recent arrival of new treatments that target identified functional genetic mutations ("targeted therapies") or PD-1/PD-L1,2 axis ("immunotherapies") and their combinations have profoundly changed treatment strategies in cancers as they considerably improve patient survival, but also raise new challenges in REA and decision-making process in Europe as compared to the REA of "classical" chemotherapies. In addition, recent regulatory initiatives to support accelerated clinical development and approval of innovative cancer immunotherapies based on non-final endpoints, such as priority medicines through the European Medicines Agency, represent an additional challenge for HTA bodies and decision makers. In order to support adequate data generation for REA of anticancer drugs and especially for drugs candidates for accelerated assessment and early access to market, a close and open dialog of all stakeholders involved in development of such drugs is crucial.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Unspecified 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 11 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 10 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2017.
All research outputs
#12,856,308
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#1,848
of 5,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,127
of 307,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#13
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,484 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.