OBJECTIVES To analyze oncologists’, payers’, patients’, and general population´ views on the cost and value of new cancer treatments.  METHODS An electronic self-administered questionnaire was developed and randomly distributed, to assess participants’ attitudes towards new cancer treatment outcomes and costs during reimbursement decisions. Among the questions asked were two hypothetical scenarios. First, participants were asked to indicate the minimum survival benefit that a new treatment, that cost €50,000 more than the standard therapy, should have to be funded by the Spanish National Health System (NHS). Second, participants were requested to state the highest costs to be afforded by the NHS for a medication increasing patient’s quality of life (QoL) twofold with no changes in survival. Responses were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). RESULTS CONCLUSIONS All the estimated ICER values were higher than the thresholds usually described in the literature (€20,000-30,000/QALY), with relevant differences among the groups. In both scenarios, payers were less prone to pay for therapeutic improvements compared to the rest of the participants. On the other hand, oncologists were the ones that most valued gains in survival for a new treatment while patients assigned a higher value for money to a treatment that enhanced the quality of life.