Improving the Quality of Abstract Reporting for Economic Analyses in Oncology

Background: he increasing cost of cancer drugs underscores the importance of economic analyses. Although guide-lines for abstract reporting of randomized controlled studies and phase i trials are available, similar rec-ommendations for conference abstracts of economic analyses are lacking. Our objectives were (1) to identify items considered to be essential in abstracts of economic analyses; (2) to evaluate the quality of abstracts submitted to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (asco), the American Society of Hematology (ash), and the International Society for Pharma-coeconomics and Outcomes Research (ispor) meetings; and (3)to propose guidelines for future abstract reporting at conferences. Methods: Health economic experts were surveyed and asked to rate each of 24 possible abstract elements on a 5-point Likert scale. A scoring system for abstract quality was devised based on elements with an average ex-pert rating of 3.5 or greater. Abstracts for economic analyses from asco, ash, and ispor meetings were reviewed and assigned a quality score. Results: Of 99 experts, 50 (51%) responded to the survey (av-erage age: 53 years; 78% men; 54% from the United States, 28% from Europe, 18% from Canada). In total, 216 abstracts were reviewed: asco, 53%; ash, 14%; and ispor, 33%. The median quality score was 75, but notable deficiencies were observed. Cost per-spective was reported in only 61% of abstracts, and time horizon was described in only 47%. Abstracts from recent years demonstrated better quality scores. We also observed disparities in quality scores for various cancer sites (p = 0.005). Conclusions: The quality of conference abstracts for economic analyses in oncology has room for improvement. Abstracts may be enhanced using the guidelines derived from our survey of experts.