Value Assessment Frameworks May Undermine Personalized Medicine

December 14, 2017

In a white paper released today, the Personalized Medicine Coalition (PMC) suggests that most value assessment frameworks unintentionally undermine personalized medicine.

The white paper, Personalized Medicine and Value Assessment Frameworks: Context, Considerations, and Next Steps, principally authored by Xcenda's Jennifer Snow, Kristen Migliaccio-Walle and Ann Cameron, contends that most value assessment frameworks still make sweeping conclusions about the economic worth of a particular treatment based almost exclusively on population averages. As a result, most value assessment frameworks could unintentionally discourage payers and providers from considering important information about a patient's biology, values and preferences that can improve health outcomes — especially when value assessment frameworks influence the coverage and payment decisions that determine whether patients have access to treatment options that will work for them. Click here to download the white paper.

PMC has scheduled a panel discussion for 4:00 p.m. ET this afternoon, to discuss the paper's implications with Alan Balch, Ph.D., CEO, National Patient Advocate Foundation; Dan Leonard, President, National Pharmaceutical Council; Kristen Migliaccio-Walle, Director, Global Health Economics and Outcomes, Xcenda; and Dana Wollins, Senior Director, Health Policy, American Society for Clinical Oncology. The discussion is accessible in person and by webinar. Register for the panel discussion.



Principal Authors

About the Personalized Medicine Coalition:
The Personalized Medicine Coalition, representing innovators, scientists, patients, providers and payers, promotes the understanding and adoption of personalized medicine concepts, services and products to benefit patients and the health system. For more information, please visit