Examining Convergent Construct Validity and Inter-Rater Reliability Between ESMO-MCBS and ASCO-VF When Evaluating Hematologic Malignancies

ConclusionsOur results suggest divergent validity of ESMO-MCBS and ASCO-VF when assessing hematologic malignancies, indicating that these frameworks likely measure different constructs of clinical benefit in this setting. Furthermore, the ASCO-VF demonstrated improved inter-rater reliability compared to ESMO-MCBS. It remains unclear which framework is correctly assessing the clinical benefit of hematologic drugs. To better understand if one framework is more accurate in its evaluation, future research that compares these frameworks to other established measures of clinical benefit (such as quality adjusted life years) in the hematologic setting is warranted. Due to the lack of construct validity and ESMO's endorsement of their framework solely for solid cancers, the ASCO-VF should currently be considered for use in the hematologic setting.DisclosuresNo relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Source: Blood - Category: Hematology Authors: Tags: 902. Health Services Research-Malignant Diseases: Poster III Source Type: research