Imatinib for the adjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours

8 Sources of evidence considered by the Committee

A. The Evidence Review Group (ERG) report for this appraisal was prepared by Southampton Health Technology Assessment Centre

B. The following organisations accepted the invitation to participate in this appraisal as consultees and commentators. They were invited to comment on the draft scope, the ERG report and the appraisal consultation document (ACD). Organisations listed in I were also invited to make written submissions. Organisations listed in II and III had the opportunity to give their expert views. Organisations listed in I, II and III also have the opportunity to appeal against the final appraisal determination.

I. Company:

II. Professional/specialist and patient/carer groups:

III. Other consultees:

IV. Commentator organisations (did not provide written evidence and without the right of appeal):

C. The following individuals were selected from clinical and patient expert nominations from the consultees and commentators. They gave their expert personal view on imatinib for the adjuvant treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumours by attending the initial Committee discussion and providing written evidence to the Committee. They were also invited to comment on the ACD.

D. Representatives from the following company attended Committee meetings. They contributed only when asked by the Committee chair to clarify specific issues and comment on factual accuracy.