Evidence-based approach to the introduction of positron emission tomography in ontario, Canada.

PURPOSE The uptake of new health care technologies is usually driven by industry promotion, physician interest, patient demand, and institutional ability to acquire the technology. The introduction of positron emission tomography (PET) scanning in the province of Ontario, Canada, followed a different path. METHODS The Ontario provincial government, through its Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, commissioned a systematic review of the literature. When this found only weak evidence that PET has a positive impact on clinical outcomes, the Ministry introduced a provincial PET evaluation program to close the evidence gap. RESULTS This article describes the challenges encountered establishing the PET evaluation program. These included the design and conduct of the initial clinical trials, the establishment of a PET cancer registry, standardizing how PET scans were performed and reported, and gaining acceptance by health professionals for the evaluative program. CONCLUSION The proliferation of health technologies is a key driver of increasing health care costs. The Ontario approach to the introduction of PET is a model worth consideration by health systems seeking to ensure that they receive value for money based on a strong evidentiary base when introducing new health technologies.

[1]  W. Oyen,et al.  Improved selection of patients for hepatic surgery of colorectal liver metastases with FDG-PET: A randomized study , 2008 .

[2]  Y. Ung,et al.  A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) versus conventional imaging (CI) in staging potentially resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) , 2008 .

[3]  K. Pritchard,et al.  A prospective study evaluating 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose (18FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in the assessment of axillary nodal spread in women undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for breast cancer , 2008 .

[4]  Barry A Siegel,et al.  Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[5]  Y. Ung,et al.  18Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer: a systematic review. , 2007, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[6]  R. Coleman,et al.  The National Oncologic PET Registry: expanded medicare coverage for PET under coverage with evidence development. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  Peter B Bach,et al.  Federal initiatives to support rapid learning about new technologies. , 2007, Health affairs.

[8]  Y. Ung,et al.  169 The impact of positron emission tomography (PET) in stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A prospective randomized clinical trial-improving clinical trials accrual using screening log evaluations , 2006 .

[9]  S. Tunis,et al.  Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare's 'coverage with evidence development'. , 2006, Health affairs.

[10]  J. Rajendran,et al.  Expanding role of positron emission tomography in cancer of the uterine cervix. , 2006, Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN.

[11]  H. Groen,et al.  Traditional versus up-front [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography staging of non-small-cell lung cancer: a Dutch cooperative randomized study. , 2006, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[12]  A. Laupacis,et al.  Diagnostic imaging in Canada. , 2005, HealthcarePapers.

[13]  Hain Sf,et al.  Positron emission tomography in uro-oncology , 2005 .

[14]  M. King,et al.  Randomized controlled trial of the role of positron emission tomography in the management of stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[15]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  A randomized trial comparing lung-volume-reduction surgery with medical therapy for severe emphysema. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  M. Boers,et al.  Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[17]  J. Mortensen,et al.  Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer: a systematic, quantitative review. , 2001, The Lancet. Oncology.

[18]  L. Hooft,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the follow-up of papillary or follicular thyroid cancer. , 2001, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[19]  D K Owens,et al.  Accuracy of positron emission tomography for diagnosis of pulmonary nodules and mass lesions: a meta-analysis. , 2001, JAMA.

[20]  S S Gambhir,et al.  A meta-analysis of the literature for whole-body FDG PET detection of recurrent colorectal cancer. , 2000, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[21]  R. Hustinx,et al.  Oncological applications of positron emission tomography with fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose , 1996, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  J S Fowler,et al.  A FLUORINATED GLUCOSE ANALOG, 2‐FLUORO-2‐DEOXY-D‐GLUCOSE (F‐18): NONTOXIC TRACER FOR RAPID TUMOR DETECTION , 1980, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[23]  Wang Jun Effectiveness of Positron Emission Tomography in the Preoperative Assessment of Patients with Suspected Non-small-cell Lung Cancer:The PLUS Multicentre Randomized Trial , 2005 .