New study on the benefits of personalized medicine

EBE and EFPIA have financed a study to understand the benefits of personalized medicine to patients, society and healthcare systems.

A consultancy firm called Charles River Associates has conducted this study on behalf of the European Biopharmaceutical Enterprises (EBE) and the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA). The final report was published on July 6th.

The objectives of this analysis were to (1) characterize the benefits of personalized medicine to patients, society and healthcare systems; (2) identify barriers and enablers to the development and adoption of personalized medicine in Europe; and (3) propose policy recommendations for decision-makers to overcome these barriers and incentivize the development and adoption of personalized medicine in Europe. Most of the case-studies used for this report focused on oncology (i.e. non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and melanoma).

The three (main) benefits identified are: delivering better treatment for patients, delivering benefits of healthcare systems and society, and more efficient development of new medicines. Based on these benefits, a series of policy recommendations are included in the report:

  • Coherent prioritization of personalized medicine that goes hand in hand with existing health strategic plans; 
  • Continued emphasis on better management of care, coordination of expertise and resources to ensure an adequate “personalization of care”;
  • Continued investment and cooperation in next generation testing infrastructure (such as molecular genetic laboratories) as well as developing dedicated funding pathways to ensure access to diagnostics;
  • Consistent diagnostic testing infrastructure throughout Europe;
  • Better alignment of data requirements between regulators and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies to improve evidence development and facilitate the value assessment process.

Although none of the policy recommendations refer to in silico medicine nor CM&S, emphasis is placed on the need for better data collection e.g. on diagnostic uptake, in relation to HTA (better alignment of data requirements to improve evidence development and facilitate the value assessment process), where CM&S has a clear added value.

For more information, the full report can be found here and accompanying slides here


Date: 10/08/2018 | Tag: | News: 822 of 853
All news

News

More news

Events

More events
newsletter

Subscribe to the VPH Institute Newsletter

Accept Privacy Policy

ARCHIVE

Read all the newsletters of the VPH Institute

GO