1. Drummond, M, Sculpher, MJ, Torrance, GW, O’Brien, BJ, Stoddart, GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. 3rd ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford Medical Publications; 2005.
Google Scholar2. van Baal, P, Morton, A, Severens, JL. Health care input constraints and cost effectiveness analysis decision rules. Soc Sci Med. 2018;200:59–64.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Brennan, A, Chick, SE, Davies, R. A taxonomy of model structures for economic evaluation of health technologies. Health Econ. 2006;15(12):1295–310.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline4. Wright, SJ, Newman, WG, Payne, K. Accounting for capacity constraints in economic evaluations of precision medicine: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(8):1011–27.
Google Scholar | Crossref5. Medical Research Council . Precision medicine. 2021. Available from: https://mrc.ukri.org/research/initiatives/precision-medicine/. Accessed April 27, 2021.
Google Scholar6. Genome Canada . Genome Canada. 2021. Available from: https://www.genomecanada.ca/. Accessed April 27, 2021.
Google Scholar7. ERA PerMEd . ERA PerMed. 2021. Available from: https://erapermed.isciii.es/. Accessed April 27, 2021.
Google Scholar8. Gavan, SP, Thompson, AJ, Payne, K. The economic case for precision medicine. Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev. 2018;3(1):1–9.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline9. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . Gefitinib for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. 2010. Accessed October 12, 2021. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta192
Google Scholar10. Cancer Research UK . Molecular diagnostic provision in the NHS in England. 2015. Accessed October 12, 2021. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/sites/default/files/policy_august2015_mdx_final_1.pdf
Google Scholar11. Thokala, P, Dixon, S, Jahn, B. Resource modelling: the missing piece of the HTA jigsaw? Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(3):193–203.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline12. Adang, EMM . Economic evaluation of innovative technologies in health care should include a short-run perspective. Eur J Health Econ. 2008;9(4):381–4.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline13. Caro, JJ, Briggs, AH, Siebert, U, Kuntz, KM. Modeling good research practices—overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1 on behalf of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2012;15(6):796–803.
Google Scholar | Crossref14. Husereau, D, Drummond, M, Petrou, S, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. BMJ. 2013;346:f1049.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline15. National institute for Health and Clinical Excellence . Appraising life-extending, end of life treatments. 2009. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/gid-tag387/documents/appraising-life-extending-end-of-life-treatments-paper2. Accessed January 20, 2017.
Google Scholar16. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . Final appraisal determination crizotinib for previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer associated with an anaplastic lymphoma kinase fusion gene. Technology appraisal guidance [TA296]. 2013. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta296/resources/guidance-crizotinib-for-previously-treated-nonsmallcell-lung-cancer-associated-with-an-anaplastic-lymphoma-kinase-fusion-gene-pdf
Google Scholar17. Craig, P, Dieppe, P, Macintyre, S, Michie, S, Nazareth, I, Petticrew, M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions. 2018. Available from: www.mrc.ac.uk/complexinterventionsguidance
Google Scholar18. Duarte, A, Burch, J, Smith, A, et al. Crizotinib for ALK fusion positive NSCLC: ERG report crizotinib for ALK fusion positive NSCLC. Technology appraisal guidance [TA296]. ERG report. 2013. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta296
Google Scholar19. Djalalov, S, Beca, J, Hoch, JS, et al. Cost effectiveness of EML4-ALK fusion testing and first-line crizotinib treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(10):1012–9.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline20. Lu, S, Zhang, J, Ye, M, Wang, B, Wu, B. Economic analysis of ALK testing and crizotinib therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Pharmacogenomics. 2016;17(9):985–94.
Google Scholar | Crossref21. Safonov, A, Wang, S, Gross, CP, et al. Assessing cost-utility of predictive biomarkers in oncology: a streamlined approach. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;155(2):223–34.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline22. Wright, S, Daker-White, G, Newman, W, Payne, K. Understanding barriers to the introduction of precision medicines in non-small cell lung cancer: a qualitative interview protocol. Wellcome Open Res. 2018;3:24.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline23. Wright, SJ, Daker-White, G, Newman, W, Payne, K. Understanding barriers to the introduction of precision medicine in non-small cell lung cancer: a qualitative interview study. Wellcome Open Res. 2021;6:25.
Google Scholar | Crossref24. Büyükkaramikli, NC, Rutten-van Mölken, MPMH, Severens, JL, Al, M. TECH-VER: a verification checklist to reduce errors in models and improve their credibility. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(11):1391–408.
Google Scholar | Crossref25. Wolters, Kluwer . Ovid. 2019. Available from: https://www.ovid.com/platforms/point-of-reference/ovid.html
Google Scholar26. Royal College of Physicians . National Lung Cancer Audit annual report 2015 (for the audit period 2014). Vol. 2015. Available from: http://www.hqip.org.uk/assets/NCAPOP-Library/NCAPOP-2014-15/HSCICNLCA-2014finalinteractivereport.pdf. Date accessed June 2015
Google Scholar27. Cancer Research UK . Testing times to come? An evaluation of pathology capacity across the UK. 2016. Available from: www.cancerresearchuk.org. Accessed December 4, 2018.
Google Scholar28. National Cancer Research Institute . Overcoming barriers to the uptake of molecular diagnostics NCRI’s CM-Path. 2018. Available from: www.ncri.org.uk. Accessed June 18, 2019.
Google Scholar29. Ess, SM, Herrmann, C, Frick, H, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase testing and mutation prevalence in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Switzerland: a comprehensive evaluation of real world practices. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2017;26(6):e12721.
Google Scholar | Crossref30. Lee, DH, Tsao, M-S, Kambartel, K-O, et al. Molecular testing and treatment patterns for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: PIvOTAL observational study. PLoS One. 2018;13(8):e0202865.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline31. Peake, M, Beckett, P, Woolhouse, I, et al. Lung Cancer Audit Report. 2014. Accessed October 12, 2021. https://www.rcplondon.ac.uk/projects/outputs/nlca-annual-report-2014
Google Scholar32. NHS Improvement . Pathology networks. 2019. Available from: https://improvement.nhs.uk/resources/pathology-networks/. Accessed August 12, 2019.
Google Scholar33. Sullivan, W, Payne, K. The appropriate elicitation of expert opinion in economic models: making expert data fit for purpose. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(6):455–9.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline34. Blackhall, F, Camidge, DR, Shaw, AT, et al. Final results of the large-scale multinational trial PROFILE 1005: efficacy and safety of crizotinib in previously treated patients with advanced/metastatic ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. ESMO Open. 2017;2:219.
Google Scholar | Crossref35. Moseholm, E, Rydahl-Hansen, S, Overgaard, D, et al. Health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression in the diagnostic phase of suspected cancer, and the influence of diagnosis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14:80.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline36. Curtis, L, Burns, A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2016. Canterbury (UK): University of Kent; 2016.
Google Scholar37. Buckell, J, Smith, A, Longo, R, Holland, D. Efficiency, heterogeneity and cost function analysis: empirical evidence from pathology services in the National Health Service in England. Appl Econ. 2015;47(31):3311–31.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline38. Curtis, L . Unit costs of health & social care. 2014. Available from: http://www.pssru.ac.uk. Accessed August 23, 2019.
Google Scholar39. Walker, S, Dixon, S, Palmer, S, Sculpher, M. Getting cost-effective technologies into practice: the value of implementation. 2013. Report No.: 14. Available from: http://www.eepru.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/getting-cost-effectiveness-014.pdf. Accessed February 9, 2018.
Google Scholar40. Wright, SJ, Paulden, M, Payne, K. Implementing interventions with varying marginal cost-effectiveness: an application in precision medicine. Med Decis Making. 2020;40(7):924–38.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals41. Doubilet, P, Begg, CB, Weinstein, MC, Braun, P, McNeil, BJ. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation. a practical approach. Med Decis Making. 1985;5(2):157–77.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals42. Claxton, K . The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ. 1999;18(3):341–64.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline43. Barton, GR, Briggs, AH, Fenwick, EAL. Optimal cost-effectiveness decisions: the role of the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC), the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier (CEAF), and the expected value of perfection information (EVPI). Value Health. 2008;11(5):886–97.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline44. Retèl, VP, Joore, M, Linn, SC, Rutgers, EJT, van Harten, WH. Scenario drafting to anticipate future developments in technology assessment. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:442.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline45. McCowan, C, Wang, S, Thompson, AM, Makubate, B, Petrie, DJ. The value of high adherence to tamoxifen in women with breast cancer: a community-based cohort study. Br J Cancer. 2013;109(5):1172–80.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline46. Romanus, D, Cardarella, S, Cutler, D, Landrum, MB, Lindeman, NI, Gazelle, GS. Cost-effectiveness of multiplexed predictive biomarker screening in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(4):586–94.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline47. Delea, TE, Hawkes, C, Amonkar, MM, Lykopoulos, K, Johnston, SRD. Cost-effectiveness of lapatinib plus letrozole in post-menopausal women with hormone receptor- and HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Breast Care. 2013;8(6):429–37.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline48. Van De Wetering, G, Woertman, WH, Verbeek, AL, Broeders, MJ, Adang, EMM. Quantifying short run cost-effectiveness during a gradual implementation process. Eur J Health Econ. 2013;14(6):911–8.
Google Scholar | Crossref49. Van De Wetering, G, Woertman, WH, Adang, EM. Time to incorporate time in cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Health Econ. 2012;13(3):223–6.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline50. Adang, E, Voordijk, L, Van Der Wilt, GJ, Ament, A. Cost-effectiveness analysis in relation to budgetary constraints and reallocative restrictions. Health Policy. 2005;74(2):146–56.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline51. Husbands, S, Jowett, S, Barton, P, Coast, J. How qualitative methods can be used to inform model development. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(6):607–12.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline