OBJECTIVES: Leading medical professional societies (eg, ASCO, ESMO, NCCN) have recently released frameworks to facilitate discussions on the value of cancer therapies. This literature review summarizes recent trends on the concept of evaluating value in cancer care, using mCRC as an example. METHODS: Relevant publications were identified using predetermined search criteria in Medline (01/01/2005-12/31/2015) and abstracts presented at key conferences (01/01/2015- 12/31/2015). Publications were reviewed if they addressed the following topics: providers/prescriber oncology value frameworks, factors influential for payer/reimbursement decision making in oncology, and components of “value assessment” in oncology. RESULTS: From 13,914 unique results, 322 described mCRC-related pharmacotherapies; 90 met the inclusion criteria (46 in Europe and 39 in US; some covered >1 country). Value evaluations published as journal articles increased more steadily across the review timeframe in Europe: 23% in 2005-2008, 29% in 2009-2012, and 49% in 2013-2015, while US-based articles were more concentrated in recent years (84% in 2011-2015). The majority of all publications were economic models (62%; primarily cost-effectiveness analyses) followed by retrospective database studies (22%). The publication types varied by country; the majority of European publications were economic models (76%), while US publications were split between database studies (44%) and models (44%). Overall, many of the recent (2010-2015) publications evaluated the value of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in mCRC (35 of 65). Of the mAb publications, 71% (25/35) were models and 63% (22/35) were in the first-line setting.  CONCLUSIONS: Despite the substantial amount of publications, many focused on cost-effectiveness of mCRC therapies in the first-line setting. Cost-effectiveness is only one component of “value assessment.” The value frameworks by oncology medical societies and individual payers/health systems include other important factors (eg, disease rarity, quality of life, affordability, disease burden, drug novelty) into the overall value assessment. However, most of these evaluations do not take line-of-therapy into consideration.