nomic costs, and patients, providers, and payors faced the growing challenge of deciding whether or not the benefits of these treatments justified their expense. A clearer understanding of value in cancer care would be integral to support those decisions, and the forum members recognized that value, which is commonly regarded in health care as the benefits of a treatment weighed against its financial cost, deserves particularly careful consideration in oncology. Value in cancer care, the forum members noted, encompasses complex topics including quality end-of-life care, clinical discussions of health care costs, and evidence for treatment effectiveness, among many others. Dr. Ramsey proposed that the forum provide a vehicle for examination of these issues by holding and reporting a workshop on value in cancer care. Shortly after the workshop was proposed, the planning group was expanded to include the nine members of the planning committee on assessing and improving value in cancer care. The planning committee volunteered to work with IOM staff to organize and lead the workshop, which took place in Washington, DC. Throughout the workshop, attendees from a multitude of fields related to cancer care, health economics, ethics, and public policy engaged with the workshop’s two dozen speakers to raise questions, offer thoughts, and contribute suggestions.
This workshop summary details the presentations and discussions that took place during this workshop on assessing and improving value in cancer care. The summary is divided into two parts, matching the format of the workshop itself. The first part focuses on the features of oncology that affect the value proposition and the second part presents viable solutions to improve value in cancer care. The final chapter discusses how value in cancer care can be understood, logical next steps, and ways to promote value in oncology. In addition to informing the forum, this published summary is provided to deliver the information and views that emerged from the workshop to a wider public audience for further dialogue or as an opening to additional IOM study in the future.