Cardiovascular • May 1-3, 2017
Boston, MA • United States

Disruptive Dozen

2016 | Cancer Disruptive Dozen

Leading Harvard faculty from the Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital and Dana-Farber nominated the technologies that they believe will have the greatest impact on cancer care during the next decade. A rigorous process was used to choose the 12 technologies that represent their consensus on the one’s that will most influence care in the ten years. The technologies were featured as part of the World Medical Innovation Forum™, an annual collaborative innovation event held in Boston to examine the state of health care and innovation in a chosen medical discipline. The 2016 Forum, which took place April 25-27 focused on cancer.

2015 | Neuroscience Disruptive Dozen

The culture of innovation at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, McLean Hospital and Spaulding Rehabilitation Network – throughout all of Partners HealthCare -- naturally fosters a good deal of discussion about new “disruptive” technologies and which ones will have the biggest impact. The passion of Partners clinicians and researchers to provide the best care for patients drives a continuous dialogue on what state-of-the-art medical technologies are just over the horizon. The Disruptive Dozen was created to identify and rank the most disruptive technologies that Partners leading faculty feel will breakthrough over the next decade in neurological care.

First Look

The Goal

The culture of innovation at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital—throughout all of Partners HealthCare and collaborating institutions such as Dana-Farber Cancer Institute—naturally fosters a good deal of discussion about new “disruptive” technologies and which ones will have the biggest impact in bringing novel complex health care products and services to greater levels of affordability and accessibility. The mission of Partners clinicians and researchers to provide the best care for patients drives a continuous dialogue on what state-of-the-art medical technologies are just over the horizon. The Disruptive Dozen was created to identify and rank the most disruptive technologies that Partners leading faculty feel will break through over the next decade in cancer care.

The Nomination Process

Beginning November 2015 and through January 2016, 42 30-minute in-person and telephone interviews were conducted with leading faculty from Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute to elicit their nominations of the technologies they believe will have the greatest impact on oncological care at any point in the next decade. The interviews resulted in 34 nominated technologies that varied from the broad in scope to quite specific.

The Selection Process

12-15 leading Partners faculty gathered in February to form a committee of “selectors” to jointly choose and rank the final 12 technologies. Drs. Daniel Haber and Monica Bertagnolli served as selection committee moderators and were supported by Partners Innovation staff. To receive consideration for the final Disruptive Dozen, nominated technologies had to meet the following criteria:

Criteria 1
The innovation had to have the strong potential for significant onco-related clinical impact at some point in the next decade and offer significant patient benefit in comparison to current practices. The innovation may also have had a significant benefit to the delivery/efficiency of oncologic related health care.

Criteria 2
Nominated oncologic-related innovations had to have a high probability of successful commercial deployment—e.g., payers will be expected to support it.

Criteria 3
The innovation must be on the market sometime before April 2026. Ideally, the final group selected would involve a blend of disruptive technologies coming to market in the next three to four years as well as ones that will come to market later in the decade.

The Selection Ranking Process

Round 1
The initial pass of the 34 nominations by the selection committee eliminated all technologies that didn’t meet the criteria or didn’t have a realistic potential of being ranked in the top 15. The moderators named each technology and asked panel members to vote “yes” or “no” to move the technology to the next round. One “yes” vote is enough to advance the technology.

Round 2
The moderators described the candidate technology, pointing out salient points, and then asked for comments from committee members. After a discussion of the pros and cons of the technology, panel members voted A, B, or C with a raise of the hand. Innovation staff recorded the voting.

A. It’s highly probable that the technology will significantly influence oncology care before 2026.
B. It’s probable that the technology will significantly influence oncology care before 2026.
C. It’s not likely that the technology will significantly influence oncology care before 2026.

Round 3
Each surviving technology earned a score with overall rank tied to the size of the score—i.e., the higher the score, the better. Innovation staff reported this initial ranking of all technologies.

Final Scores and Announcement

Selection committee members jointly ranked the innovations from 1 to 12 using the initial scoring and further discussion. The selection committee ranking was final and was announced on April 27, 2016 in a one-hour panel at the World Medical Innovation Forum. The session was moderated by Monica Bertagnolli, MD, and Daniel Haber, MD, PhD, and featured 12 faculty members selected to briefly comment on each technology.