Predictors for reimbursement of oncology drugs in Belgium between 2002 and 2013

References

• Global status report on noncommunicable diseases. World Health Organization (WHO). 2014. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/148114/1/9789241564854_eng.pdf [Last accessed 28 April 2015]
   Google Scholar
• Berggren R, Moller M, Moss R, et al. Outlook for the next 5 years in drug innovation. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2012;11(6):435-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The global use of medicines : outlook through 2016. IMS Institure for healthcare informatics. 2012. Available from: www.imshealth.com/deployedfiles/ims/Global/Content/Insights/IMS%20Institute%20for%20Healthcare%20Informatics/Global%20Use%20of%20Meds%202011/Medicines_Outlook_Through_2016_Report.pdf [Last accessed 28 April 2015]
   Google Scholar
• M.O.R.S.E semesterieel rapport 2008 (2). RIZIV/INAMI. 2012
   Google Scholar
• Health spending continues to stagnate, says OECD. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2013. Available from: www.oecd.org/newsroom/health-spending-continues-to-stagnate-says-oecd.htm [Last accessed 28 April 2015]
   Google Scholar
• Apolone G, Joppi R, Bertele’ V, et al. Ten years of marketing approvals of anticancer drugs in Europe: regulatory policy and guidance documents need to find a balance between different pressures. Br J Cancer 2005;93(5):504-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheema PK, Gavura S, Migus M, et al. International variability in the reimbursement of cancer drugs by publically funded drug programs. Curr Oncol 2012;19(3):e165-76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Council of the European Communities, Dir. 89/105/EEC OJ 1989;L40:65-71
   Google Scholar
• Koninklijk besluit tot vaststelling van de procedures, termijnen en voorwaarden inzake de tegemoetkoming van de verplichte verzekering voor geneeskundige verzorging en uitkeringen in de kosten van farmaceutische specialiteiten. 2001
   Google Scholar
• Huishoudelijk reglement van de Commissie Tegemoetkoming Geneesmiddelen. 2013
   Google Scholar
• Adamski J, Godman B, Ofierska-Sujkowska G, et al. Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers. BMC Health Serv Res 2010;10:153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson JJ, Garrison LP, Sullivan SD. Paying for outcomes: innovative coverage and reimbursement schemes for pharmaceuticals. J Manag Care Pharm 2009;15(8):683-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Pouvourville G. Risk-sharing agreements for innovative drugs: a new solution to old problems? Eur J Health Econ 2006;7(3):155-7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Espin J, Rovira J, Garcia L. Experiences and Impact of European Risk-Sharing Schemes Focusing on Oncology Medicines. Eminet. 2011
   Google Scholar
• McCabe C, Bergmann L, Bosanquet N, et al. Market and patient access to new oncology products in Europe: a current, multidisciplinary perspective. Ann Oncol 2009;20(3):403-12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mullins CD, Montgomery R, Tunis S. Uncertainty in assessing value of oncology treatments. Oncologist 2010;15(Suppl 1):58-64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerri KH, Knapp M, Fernandez JL. Decision making by NICE: examining the influences of evidence, process and context. Health Econ Policy Law 2014;9(2):119-41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerri KH, Knapp M, Fernandez JL. Public funding of pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands: investigating the effect of evidence, process and context on CVZ decision-making. Eur J Health Econ 2014;15(7):681-95
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dakin HA, Devlin NJ, Odeyemi IA. “Yes”, “No” or “Yes, but”? Multinomial modelling of NICE decision-making. Health Policy 2006;77(3):352-67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004;13(5):437-52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont AG, Van Wilder PB. Access to orphan drugs despite poor quality of clinical evidence. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2011;71(4):488-96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pauwels K, Huys I, Casteels M, et al. Market access of cancer drugs in European countries: improving resource allocation. Target Oncol 2014;9(2):95-110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Wilder PB, Dupont AG. Reimbursement of medicines in Belgium: role of evidence-based medicine. Acta Clin Belg 2009;64(2):120-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Herck P, Annemans L, Sermeus W, et al. Evidence-based health care policy in reimbursement decisions: lessons from a series of six equivocal case-studies. PLoS One 2013;8(10):e78662
   Google Scholar
• Meekings KN, Williams CS, Arrowsmith JE. Orphan drug development: an economically viable strategy for biopharma R&D. Drug Discov Today 2012;17(13-14):660-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michel M, Toumi M. Access to orphan drugs in Europe: current and future issues. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2012;12(1):23-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linley WG, Hughes DA. Reimbursement decisions of the All Wales Medicines Strategy Group: influence of policy and clinical and economic factors. Pharmacoeconomics 2012;30(9):779-94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linley WG, Hughes DA. Societal views on NICE, cancer Drug fund, and value-based pricing criteria for prioritising medicines: a cross-sectional survey of 4118 adults in Great-Britain. Health Econ 2012;22(8):948-64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleemput I, Devries S, Kohn L, et al. Incorporating societal preferences in reimbursement decisions – Relative importance of decision criteria according to Belgian citizens. Health Services Research (HSR) Brussels: Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre 2014
   Google Scholar