ArticleActa oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden)2026
Stakeholders' experiences with a clinician-led access programme linking evidence generation and reimbursement for precision cancer treatments: the drug access protocol in the Netherlands.
Article in Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Merging clinical research and standard healthcare - Nordic Precision Cancer Medicine Symposium 2025.Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeIn the current landscape of tumour-agnostic oncology drugs receiving European Medicines Agency (EMA) authorisation, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies face challenges in assessing these innovative drugs. Due to these products' non-randomised, single-arm nature, uncertainty exists regarding their real-world benefit. In the Netherlands, the Drug Access Protocol (DAP), a programme developed by oncologists, insurers and the healthcare public institute, aims to provide an innovative solution to address this uncertainty. This study aims to investigate the key characteristics, enablers and challenges of the programme by exploring stakeholders' perceptions. Patient/material and methods: A qualitative, semi-structured interview study was conducted. A supporting interview guide was drafted using available literature and a flowchart figure to illustrate the process. Interviews were conducted with market authorisation holders (MAHs) who participated in the programme, the insurer, the DAP study management and the DAP's governance committee. Recorded interviews were transcribed, pseudonymised and subsequently coded using NVivo software. Inductive thematic analysis was used to identify common themes, enablers and challenges for participating in the programme.
resultsIn total, eight organisations were interviewed. Although MAHs indicated several enablers (e.g. providing patient access, collecting real-world data), several challenges (e.g. the lack of transparency) lead to questions regarding the feasibility of the programme. Health insurers acknowledge these outcomes and expect products that obtain regular reimbursement to serve as an example.
interpretationAs the Drug Access Protocol may be a promising solution to mitigate uncertainties for healthcare decision-makers, implementation challenges can hamper its feasibility. Addressing these challenges could realise the potential of such programmes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.