IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v23y2025i6d10.1007_s40258-025-01000-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structured Expert Elicitation to Inform Long-Term Survival Extrapolations in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma

Author

Listed:
  • Dawn Lee

    (University of Exeter, University of Exeter Medical School)

  • Zain Ahmad

    (University of Exeter, University of Exeter Medical School)

  • James M. G. Larkin

    (Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust)

  • Amit Bahl

    (Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre)

  • G. J. Melendez-Torres

    (University of Exeter, University of Exeter Medical School)

Abstract

Background In the absence of long-term data, structured expert elicitation gathers expert judgments and associated uncertainties to assess the clinical plausibility of long-term extrapolations. Objective The objective of this study was to obtain expert estimates of expected long-term outcomes for advanced renal cell carcinoma treatments to inform cost-effectiveness analysis for National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)’s pathways pilot. Methods Using materials from the structured expert elicitation resources (STEER) repository, aligned with the Medical Research Council (MRC) protocol, the exercise was planned and conducted. Aiming for 5–10 oncologists from diverse UK geographies and settings, experts estimated progression-free survival (PFS) at three landmark timepoints for 21 disease-risk-prior treatment combinations and overall survival for best supportive care. Within an 8-week timeframe, we piloted with one clinician, conducted online training, collected responses via an online survey using the roulette method and mathematically aggregated results through linear opinion pooling. Results Nine experts participated (question response rate: 95%). For first-line intermediate/poor-risk patients, clinicians projected similar PFS for three immune oncology/tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) combinations from 5 years onward and comparable PFS for two TKI monotherapies. Nivolumab + ipilimumab was anticipated to achieve the highest PFS amongst first-line therapies. Expert reasoning incorporated treatment class, clinical experience, and awareness of trial data optimism. Expert estimates were generally somewhat optimistic compared with observed UK real-world evidence and pessimistic compared with observed trial data. Conclusions Structured expert elicitation is a pragmatic, efficient approach for informing long-term survival extrapolations in the context of a rapidly evolving treatment pathway. We demonstrated that expert elicitation is possible even for complex decision problems in a relatively short timeframe.

Suggested Citation

  • Dawn Lee & Zain Ahmad & James M. G. Larkin & Amit Bahl & G. J. Melendez-Torres, 2025. "Structured Expert Elicitation to Inform Long-Term Survival Extrapolations in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 1073-1083, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-025-01000-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-025-01000-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-025-01000-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-025-01000-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-025-01000-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.