CREST has developed a number of resources to assist the CTGs to incorporate health economic and pharmacoeconomic analyses into trial protocols, as well as to build capacity for health economics within the CTGs.
CREST Resources
Workshop recordings and training videos
CTG members can access recordings of previous workshops and webinars. We encourage members to attend workshops and webinars where possible to ensure you get the latest knowledge. Topics currently available include:
- Understanding health economics in cancer research
- Health Economics in Cancer Research - a consumer's guide
- Preferences in Cancer Trials - what choices can tell us about value
- Using Medicare data in cancer trials - webinar series
Health Technology Assessment (HTA) - webinar series
Note: you will be directed to a form prior to accessing the videos. You will need to select your CTG and what video series you'd like to view.
Checklists, factsheets and templates
To aid the CTGs in developing a protocol to include an economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial, a standard proforma has been developed. This proforma includes key issues for consideration, key questions and options, essential data items, identification of data sources, ethics requirements for collection of economics data, and standard forms for data collection from a range of sources.
Checklists
- Health economic checklist of clinical trials. This provides questions to determine whether the study may require a health economics audit by CREST
Health economics essentials
- Economics evaluations in cancer clinical trials - why would I do an economic evaluation as part of my clinical trial?
- Health-related quality of life for economic evaluations in cancer - why do clinical trials need economic evaluation-specific quality of life measures?
- Step-by-step guide to economic evaluation in cancer trials
- Costing an economic evaluation
- Discounting in economic evaluations in health care: a brief review
Data and calculations
Collecting the data
Over the years, CREST has provided advice on the choice and development of questions to collect resource use (cost) and outcomes data from clinical trials. The advice provided has been summarised, in a de-identified manner, into a proforma document (in Excel) that contains example questions on collecting information within clinical trials on the following:
- Treatment use and follow-up services (including medical and diagnostic services use)
- Hospital services use
- Treatment of adverse events
- Patient-reported outcomes (PROs): quality of life and other PROs
- Demographic information
Data and calculations factsheets
Command files
Frequently Asked Questions
Need to find a quick answer to your question? Click below to view our FAQs.
Useful links
Other health economics and health services research associations
- Academy Health (open an external site)
- Australian Health Economics Society (AHES) (open an external site)
- Health Services Research Association of Australia & New Zealand (HSRAANZ) (open an external site)
- International Health Economics Association (iHEA) (open an external site)
Health-related links
- Australian Research Council (ARC) (open an external site)
- Australian Resource Centre for Hospital Innovation (ARCHI) (open an external site)
- Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (open an external site)
- Cancer Australia (open an external site)
- Cochrane Collaboration (open an external site)
- Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group (open an external site) La Trobe University
- Consumers' Health Forum of Australia (open an external site)
- Cooperative Research Centre for Asthma (open an external site)
- Department of Health (open an external site)
- European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) (open an external site)
- Health Policy Monitor — International Network for Health Policy & Reform (open an external site)
- Institute of Health Economics (open an external site) Edmonton, Canada
- Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) (open an external site)
- National and Health Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (open an external site)
- National Breast Cancer Centre (open an external site)
- National Institute of Clinical Studies (open an external site)
- NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (open an external site)
- NSW Cancer Council (open an external site)
- School of Public Health (open an external site) The University of Sydney
- US National Library of Medicine (open an external site)
Data and methods
- Centre for Health Record Linkage (CheRel) (open an external site)
- Population Health Research Network (PHRN) — Australian Data Linkage Units (open an external site)
Journals and newsletters
- Applied Health Economics and Health Policy (open an external site)
- British Medical Journal (BMJ) (open an external site)
- The Economic Record (open an external site)
- European Journal of Health Economics (open an external site)
- Health Economics (open an external site)
- Health Policy (open an external site)
- Health Services Research Journal (open an external site)
- Journal of Health Economics (open an external site)
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy (open an external site)
- Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) (open an external site)
- Pharmacoeconomics (open an external site)
- Quality of Life Research (open an external site)
- Scandinavian Working Papers in Economics (open an external site)
- Social Science and Medicine (open an external site)
- Value in Health (open an external site)
Government sector
- Department of Health (open an external site)
- Department of Human Services, Victoria (open an external site)
- ACT Health (open an external site)
- QLD Health (open an external site)
- WA Health (open an external site)
- SA Health (open an external site)
- NSW Health (open an external site)
- NT Health (open an external site)
- Tasmania Health (open an external site)
Information about health and health care in Australia
- Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW)
- Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) for private health insurance (open an external site)
- Independent Hospital Pricing Authority (IHPA)
- Medicare Australia statistics
Research funding bodies
- Australian Research Council (open an external site)
- Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) (open an external site)
- National Health and Medical Research Council (open an external site)
Useful journal articles
- Phillips et al. 2018, ‘Methodological Issues in Assessing the Economic Value of Next-Generation Sequencing Tests: Many Challenges and Not Enough Solutions’, Value Health, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1033–1042
- King et al. 2018, ‘Australian Utility Weights for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument Derived from the Cancer-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30’, Pharmacoeconomics, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 225–238.
- Huang et al. 2018, ‘Life satisfaction, QALYs, and the monetary value of health’, Social Science & Medicine, vol. 211, pp. 131–136.
- van Sambeek et al. 2018, ‘Comparing the cost of preparing matched unrelated donor and TCR α+β+/CD19+ depleted donor material for pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplants in Australia’, Pediatric Transplantation, vol. 22, no. 7, p. e13279
- Wang et al. 2018, ‘A Generic Model for Follicular Lymphoma: Predicting Cost, Life Expectancy, and Quality-Adjusted-Life-Year Using UK Population–Based Observational Data’, Value in Health, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 1176–1185
- Pearce et al. 2018, ‘Productivity losses due to premature mortality from cancer in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS): A population-based comparison’, Cancer Epidemiology, vol. 53, pp 27–34
- Santos et al. 2018, ‘Cost-effectiveness thresholds: methods for setting and examples from around the world’, Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, vol. 18, no. 3, pp 277–288.
- The Conversation Media Group Ltd 2017, We don’t need to change how we subsidise ‘breakthrough’ cancer treatments, viewed 21 January 2019
- Bien et al. 2017, ‘Patients’ Preferences for Outcome, Process and Cost Attributes in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments’, Patient, vol. 10, no. 5, pp 553–565
- Morrell et al. 2017, ‘Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics’, Pharmacoeconomics, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 793–804
- Nerich et al. 2017, ‘Critical appraisal of health-state utility values used in breast cancer-related cost–utility analyses’, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, vol. 164, no. 3, pp. 527–536
- Nerich et al. 2016, ‘Cost-utility analyses of drug therapies in breast cancer: a systematic review’, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, vol. 159, no. 3, pp. 407–424
- Schiller-Fruhwirth et al. 2017, ‘Cost-effectiveness Models in Breast Cancer Screening in the General Population: A Systematic Review’, Applied Health Econ Health Policy, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 333–351
- Phillips, K. 2017, ‘Assessing the value and implications of personalized/ precision medicine and the "lessons learned" for emerging technologies: An introduction’, Value in Health, vol. 20, no. 1, pp 30–31
- Garrison, L., Kamal-Bahl, S. & Towse, A. 2017, ‘Toward a broader concept of value: Identifying and defining elements for an expanded cost-effectiveness analysis’, Value in Health, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 213–216
- Marshall D, Gonzalez J, MacDonald K, et al. ‘Estimating preferences for complex health technologies: Lessons learned and implications for personalized medicine’. Value in Health, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 32–39
- Hernandez-Villafuerte, K., Fischer, A. & Latimer, N. 2018, ‘Challenges and Methodologies in Using Progression Free Survival as a Surrogate for Overall Survival in Oncology’, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, vol. 34, no. 3, pp 300–316