Topotecan for the treatment of recurrent and stage IVB cervical cancer

Appendix B: Sources of evidence considered by the Committee

A. The Evidence Review Group (ERG) report for this appraisal was prepared by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), Centre for Health Economics (CHE), The University of York:

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 and II also have the opportunity to appeal against the final appraisal determination.

I) Manufacturer/sponsor:

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 specialist and patient expert nominations from the non-manufacturer/sponsor consultees and commentators. They gave their expert personal view on topotecan for the treatment of recurrent and stage IVB carcinoma of the cervix by attending the initial Committee discussion and providing written evidence to the Committee. They were also invited to comment on the ACD.