— Report will be subject of CTAF meeting in April 2022; Draft Scoping Document open to public comment until September 14, 2021 —

BOSTON, August 25, 2021 – The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) announced today that it will assess the comparative clinical effectiveness and value of plinabulin (BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals) and trilaciclib (Cosela™, G1 Therapeutics) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. BeyondSpring Pharmaceuticals announced the submission of a New Drug Application (NDA) for plinabulin, and the FDA is expected to respond by late 2021. Trilaciclib received FDA approval in February 2021.
The assessment will be publicly discussed during a meeting of the California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF) in April 2022, where the independent evidence review panel will deliberate and vote on evidence presented in ICER’s report.

Consistent with ICER’s process for announcing new assessments, we have spent the past five weeks engaging with targeted stakeholders, including relevant patient groups, the manufacturers of the treatments being assessed, clinical specialists, as well as payers. Based on this preliminary cross-stakeholder engagement, today ICER has posted a Draft Scoping Document outlining how we plan to conduct this assessment.  

All interested stakeholders are encouraged to submit comments and suggested refinements to the scope to ensure all perspectives are adequately considered. Comments can be submitted by email to publiccomments@icer.org and must be received by 5 PM ET on September 14, 2021. Please submit public comments as a Word document in the following format:

  • 12-point Times New Roman font
  • Three-page maximum (not including references or appendices)

ICER’s Patient Participation Guide and Manufacturer Engagement Guide provide additional guidance for submitting public comments, including suggestions for what types of information may be most useful.

In addition to comments on the scope, ICER also welcomes submissions from stakeholders on examples of low-value care practices within this clinical area. These submissions will inform a report section focused on strategies to reduce waste and preserve resources for high-value, potentially higher-cost treatments.

More information is available in the scoping document.

Following the public comment period, a revised scoping document will be posted on or about September 22, 2021.

About ICER


The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) is an independent non-profit research institute that produces reports analyzing the evidence on the effectiveness and value of drugs and other medical services. ICER’s reports include evidence-based calculations of prices for new drugs that accurately reflect the degree of improvement expected in long-term patient outcomes, while also highlighting price levels that might contribute to unaffordable short-term cost growth for the overall health care system.
ICER’s reports incorporate extensive input from all stakeholders and are the subject of public hearings through three core programs: the California Technology Assessment Forum (CTAF), the Midwest Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council (Midwest CEPAC), and the New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council (New England CEPAC). These independent panels review ICER’s reports at public meetings to deliberate on the evidence and develop recommendations for how patients, clinicians, insurers, and policymakers can improve the quality and value of health care. For more information about ICER, please visit ICER’s website.