Epidemiology and Evidence-Based Medicine
tensions and corrections for the realization of the right to oncological health in Brazil’s SUS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62530/rbdc25p122Keywords:
Right to health, Unified Health System, Epidemiology, Evidence-Based Medicine, OncologyAbstract
ABSTRACT: Contextualization: the realization of the right to health in Brazil requires reconciling scientific rigor and social justice. Problem: this article critically analyzes the relationship between epidemiology, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), and the Unified Health System (SUS), with emphasis on oncology. Objectives: to demonstrate that EBM, although necessary, is insufficient when applied in isolation, and that only when articulated with epidemiology – a structuring principle established in Article 7 of Law No. 8,080/1990 – can it support equitable and legally legitimate decisions. Methods: the study adopts a qualitative and descriptive approach, with bibliographic and documentary analysis of legal norms, technical reports, and national and international scientific literature between 1990 and 2025. Results: three critical points emerge: (i) the low external validity of oncological clinical trials when applied to the SUS context; (ii) the predominance of budgetary impact in CONITEC decisions over ethical and social aspects; and (iii) the contradiction between high-cost biomedical innovation and the epidemiological priorities of vulnerable populations. Cost-effectiveness evidence of interventions on social determinants of health, such as screening programs and community support, shows robust gains at reduced costs, in contrast with oncological therapies of marginal benefit. Conclusions: the integration of EBM and epidemiology is a necessary condition to materialize constitutional universality and equity, preventing scientific evidence from becoming an exclusionary technicism and ensuring its role as a criterion of distributive justice.
References
AVELLAR, L. M. C. et al. Clinical cancer research in South America: current status, challenges, and opportunities. ecancermedicalscience, v. 17, p. 1-15, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2023.1572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3332/ecancer.2023.1572
BRASIL. Constituição (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Brasília, DF: Senado, 1988. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicao.htm. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.
BRASIL. Lei nº 8.080, de 19 de setembro de 1990. Dispõe sobre as condições para a promoção, proteção e recuperação da saúde, a organização e o funcionamento dos serviços correspondentes. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L8080.htm. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.
BRASIL. Lei nº 12.401, de 28 de abril de 2011. Altera a Lei nº 8.080, de 19 de setembro de 1990, para dispor sobre a assistência terapêutica e a incorporação de tecnologia em saúde. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/lei/L12401.htm. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.
BRASIL. Decreto nº 7.646, de 21 de dezembro de 2011. Dispõe sobre a Comissão Nacional de Incorporação de Tecnologias no Sistema Único de Saúde – CONITEC. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/decreto/D7646.htm. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.
BRIZ, Teodoro. Epidemiologia: os olhos e a linguagem da saúde pública. Revista Brasileira de Epidemiologia, v. 12, n. 2, p. 136-144, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-790X2009000200001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-790X2009000200001
CAMPOLINA, A. G. et al. Avaliação de tecnologias em saúde no Brasil: análise das recomendações da CONITEC (2012–2018). Cadernos de Saúde Pública, v. 38, n. 4, p. 1-14, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00012321.
CARMO, Rafael Luis Moura Lima do. Análise de custo-efetividade do sorafenibe para o tratamento do carcinoma hepatocelular avançado da perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde brasileiro (SUS). 2019. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências, área de Oncologia) – Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2019. Disponível em: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12733/1638653.
CHI, Heem Wong; KIEN, Weisiah; LO, Andrew W. Estimation of clinical trial success rates and related parameters. Biostatistics, v. 20, n. 2, p. 273-286, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxx069. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxx069
COMISSÃO NACIONAL SOBRE DETERMINANTES SOCIAIS DA SAÚDE (CNDSS). As causas sociais das iniquidades em saúde no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2008. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/causas_sociais_iniquidades.pdf.
CONASS. Financiamento do SUS: desafios e perspectivas. Brasília: Conselho Nacional de Secretários de Saúde, 2024. Disponível em: https://www.conass.org.br/biblioteca/financiamento-do-sus-desafios-e-perspectivas/.
DELDUQUE, Maria Célia. Direito à saúde: regulação sanitária e política pública. Brasília: Editora Fiocruz, 2019. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.7476/9786557080281.
GREENHALGH, Trisha et al. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? BMJ, v. 348, g3725, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3725. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g3725
HERBERT, R. D. et al. Is evidence-based medicine being hijacked? Medical Journal of Australia, v. 174, n. 5, p. 260-261, 2001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2001.tb143212.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2001.tb143212.x
INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER (IARC). World cancer report: cancer research for cancer prevention. Lyon: IARC, 2019. Disponível em: https://publications.iarc.fr/586.
KAHNEMAN, Daniel. Rápido e devagar: duas formas de pensar. Rio de Janeiro: Objetiva, 2012.
KRIEGER, Nancy. Epidemiology and the people’s health: theory and context. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195383874.001.0001
KRIEGER, Nancy. Ecosocial theory, embodied truths, and the people’s health. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019.
LLOVET, J. M. et al. Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. New England Journal of Medicine, v. 359, n. 4, p. 378–390, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0708857. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0708857
MARMOT, Michael. The health gap: the challenge of an unequal world. London: Bloomsbury, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00150-6
MARMOT, Michael. Social inequalities, global public health, and cancer. In: VACCARELLA, Salvatore; LORTET-TIEULENT, Joannie; SARACCI, Rodolfo; CONWAY, David I.; STRAIF, Kurt; WILD, Christopher P. (ed.). Reducing social inequalities in cancer: evidence and priorities for research. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2019. cap. 2. Disponível em: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK566212/. Acesso em: 24 set. 2025.
MOHAN, Ashwini; CHATTOPADHYAY, Sanjib. Cost-effectiveness of patient navigation programs for cancer care in the United States: a systematic review. JAMA Oncology, v. 6, n. 2, p. 241-249, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2019.5292. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.1460
OECD. Health at a glance 2023: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/4dd50c09-en. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/4dd50c09-en
RIBEIRO, J. P.; PEREIRA, R. A. Oncologia e equidade no SUS: desafios da integralidade. Revista de Saúde Pública, v. 58, n. 1, p. 1-9, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/s1518-8787.2024058000123.
SACKETT, David L. et al. Evidence-based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ, v. 312, n. 7023, p. 71-72, 1996. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
WANG, Daniel. Judicialização da saúde e regulação: desafios para o direito sanitário. Revista de Direito Sanitário, v. 9, n. 2, p. 65-84, 2008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9044.v9i2p65-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2316-9044.v9i2p65-72
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO). World health statistics 2023: monitoring health for the SDGs, sustainable development goals. Geneva: WHO, 2023. Disponível em: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240074326.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
There was no data availability