Bringing Value to Cancer Research

Casey Jackson Allen ^1* Horn M Danea ² Fabrice Smieliauskas ³ Stephen Edge ⁴ Rachel A Greenup ⁵

• ¹ Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, United States
• ² University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
• ³ Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States
• ⁴ Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, United States
• ⁵ Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

This article argues for incorporating a broader definition of "value" into cancer clinical trials.Current trials primarily focus on efficacy and safety, neglecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as quality of life, financial toxicity, and time burden, as well as cost-effectiveness.We propose a novel framework integrating oncologic outcomes, PROs, and cost analyses. We also propose a multidimensional visual tool, such as a radar chart, to facilitate better-informed, value-based shared decision-making. This requires a collaborative approach, involving stakeholders in defining value metrics. While acknowledging challenges such as increased administrative burden and data interpretation complexities, a comprehensive framework can substantially improve patient-centered cancer care. The ultimate goal is to standardize value assessment in cancer research, leading to more equitable and effective care.