Oncologist use of clinical pathways (OCP) has reached 58%. Clinicians and payers have aggressively adopted OCPs as a means of delivering high value care because pathways promise to weigh the efficacy and toxicity of a regimen and, if no significant difference is found, make a therapy determination based on cost. This method facilitates changes in prescribing behavior. One study that measured the effect of a substitution of panitumumab for cetuximab across metastatic colorectal cancer pathways at 2 large health care networks found that selections for cetuximab plummeted from 93.5% to 18.1%.1 The determination of “on-pathway” is frequently subjective depending on a committee’s evaluation of the available data. The American Society of Clinical Oncology advocates for the disclosure of conflicts of interest for OCP committee members and those that contribute to development. We sought to quantify those financial conflicts of interest.
Daly B, Bach PB, Page RD. Financial Conflicts of Interest Among Oncology Clinical Pathway Vendors. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(2):255–257. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.4473
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: