Prior to the ICER meeting to review evidence and vote on cost-effectiveness ratings for NSCLC treatments, five prominent oncologists published an Op-Ed in OBR raising “serious concerns” about ICER’s techniques and proposing best practices on building value frameworks. The oncologists say they are concerned about “ICER’s ability to interpret clinical evidence and reach conclusions on drug value that are scientific, comprehensive, and unbiased.”
McGA principal Bill McGivney was selected by ICER as a public speaker at the meeting. His comments questioning ICER’s motivation and assessments were well-received by stakeholders, including patient groups.
“Those who engage in the development of assessments of Evaluation and Valuation must be willing to live with, in an ABSOLUTE manner, (e.g., no appeals, no nothing) the decisions based upon their own assessments realizing that someday such assessments (e.g., ICER) may drive and direct decisions about the treatment of their mother, sister, brother, spouse, children etc.” – Bill McGivney, ICER meeting on NSCLC
by Bill McGivney, PhD, President, McGivney Global Advisors