The benefit of real-world evidence is that it provides more data on subpopulations and diverse populations, said Christina Barrington, vice president of pharmacy programs at Priority Health.
The benefit of real-world evidence is that it provides more data on subpopulations and diverse populations, said Christina Barrington, vice president of pharmacy programs at Priority Health.
Transcript
The use of real-world evidence has been seen as a way to rapidly expand indications for existing therapies without the cost of a new phase 3 trial. What are the pros and cons of this approach?
So, I think when you look at it from the perspective of a health plan, the research, the real-world evidence, provides potential future impacts when it comes to clinical decision making, such as formulary, management, utilization, management, tier placement, etc. While we have also noticed with the real-world evidence that there are perceived barriers, you know, with a timeliness experience with the data, sometimes potential for bias, there's also many perceived benefits that we see. So, it gives us increased data about subpopulations, diverse populations, patient-reported outcomes, health care resource utilization costs, and really helps us formulate our coverage strategy based on the additional data.
With real-world evidence, and its potential for future impact, it informs safety monitoring…also helps with formulary and utilization management, and then, you know, really gives us a better idea of how it's really, for lack of better way of saying it, how it's really working in the patient outside of the study design, right? Well, that's a very controlled environment.
Real-world evidence is viewed as a way to capture data from populations that have traditionally been hard to enroll in clinical trials. Is this a valid approach, or should researchers redouble outreach efforts in communities that are underrepresented in trials?
Well, I think that there's still an opportunity that researchers should reach out and secure those subpopulations or diverse populations for trials. But in many trials, if that's not available, or they don't have the opportunity to do that, then I do think that the real-world evidence does give us insight into those subpopulations and diverse populations. As I mentioned previously, I think that is a benefit of real-world evidence.
Exploring Racial, Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Care Prior Authorization Decisions
October 24th 2024On this episode of Managed Care Cast, we're talking with the author of a study published in the October 2024 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care® that explored prior authorization decisions in cancer care by race and ethnicity for commercially insured patients.
Listen
Exploring Possibilities in Disease Modification in MPNs
October 25th 2024Experts are asking whether the study and treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) is ready for a new era with new end points, with data that show how survival benefits are biologically linked to changes in the spleen, reduction in fibrosis, or other responses.
Read More
Targeting Progression: Amivantamab’s Role in NSCLC After Osimertinib
October 24th 2024Amivantamab's role in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been a highlight of the lung cancer space this year, with the 2 most recent approvals based on data from the MARIPOSA and MARIPOSA-2 trials.
Read More