Skip to main content

Table 3 Parameters and corresponding questions

From: Scenario drafting for early technology assessment of next generation sequencing in clinical oncology

Domain Parameter Q Average ± SD
Social factors Patients interested in NGS (prim/meta) Q1 28,3 ± 29,2/65,3 ± 32,1
Patients interested in trial (prim/meta) Q2 41,5 ± 26,6/78,2 ± 16,1
Consult extra (min) Q3 13,2 ± 12,4
Education extra (hrs.) Q10 25,1 ± 26,1
NGS Adoption given: RCT3 Q6 84,9 ± 23,6
Pros. observational   62,3 ± 20,3
Retro. observational   39,6 ± 22,6
Lower levels   16,7 ± 8,6
Technical Factors Max. turnover rate (days) Q9 17,8 ± 21,3
Dutch institutes able to supply FF Q16 50,5 ± 36,5
Min. sensitivity/specificity Q15 90,5 ± 5,7/89,0 ± 9,7
Max. failure rate Q17 18,4 ± 20,1
Re-biopsy decline: CRC Q18 33,3 ± 23,6
NSCLC   30,0 ± 22,9
Melanoma   8,5 ± 5,9
Re-biopsy unfeasible: CRC Q19 19,2 ± 11,1
NSCLC   22,9 ± 16,0
Melanoma   9,3 ± 10,0
Min. storage tissue (yrs.) Q14 24,2 ± 22,1
Min. storage NGS results (yrs.) Q13 22,6 ± 21,4
Reimbursement Pay extra for NGS panel (euro) Q12 380,8 ± 316,6
Probability opt for NGS panel if €1000 Q40 44,0 ± 44,0
Clinical utility and evidence generation Nb. Targets per patient Q37 6,6 ± 7,5
Nb. new therapies in five years Q29 22,5 ± 20,4
Off-label therapy required Q22 30,2 ± 26,5
Physicians willing to prescribe off-label Q23 44,6 ± 31,6
Probability reimbursement off-label Q27 28,0 ± 32,0
Lenient towards off-label (yrs.) Q26 9,8 ± 12,4
Market access Min. years NGS common practice Q33 6,5 ± 6,3
Min. years competition other technology Q35 9,6 ± 5,5
  1. Depicted are the mean results (percentages unless stated otherwise) and standard deviations on quantitative parameters, in order of appearance. Column Q refers to the number of the corresponding questions in the questionnaire (Additional file 1). NGS next generation sequencing, Prim primary cancer, Meta metastatic cancer, FF fresh frozen [tissue preservation]