The high cost of cancer drugs and what we can do about it

Health services costs for cancer care in Australia: Estimates from the 45 and Up Study

Background

Cancer care represents a substantial and rapidly rising healthcare cost in Australia. Our aim was to provide accurate population-based estimates of the health services cost of cancer care using large-scale linked patient-level data.

Methods

We analysed data for incident cancers diagnosed 2006–2010 and followed to 2014 among 266,793 eligible participants in the 45 and Up Study. Health system costs included Medicare and pharmaceutical claims, inpatient hospital episodes and emergency department presentations. Costs for cancer cases and matched cancer-free controls were compared, to estimate monthly/annual excess costs of cancer care by cancer type, before and after diagnosis and by phase of care (initial, continuing, terminal). Total costs incurred in 2013 were also estimated for all people diagnosed in Australia 2009–2013.

Results

7624 participants diagnosed with cancer were matched with up to three controls. The mean excess cost of care per case was AUD$1,622 for the year before diagnosis, $33,944 for the first year post-diagnosis and $8,796 for the second year post-diagnosis, with considerable variation by cancer type. Mean annual cost after the initial treatment phase was $4,474/case and the mean cost for the last year of life was $49,733/case. In 2013 the cost for cancers among people in Australia diagnosed during 2009–2013 was ~$6.3billion (0.4% of Gross Domestic Product; $272 per capita), with the largest costs for colorectal cancer ($1.1billion), breast cancer ($0.8billion), lung cancer ($0.6billion) and prostate cancer ($0.5billion).

Conclusions

The cost of cancer care is substantial and varies by cancer type and time since diagnosis. These findings emphasise the economic importance of effective primary and secondary cancer prevention strategies.

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

The increasing efficacy of cancer therapeutics means that the timespan of cancer therapy administration is undergoing a transition to increasingly long-term settings. Unfortunately, chronic therapy-related adverse health events are an unintended, but not infrequent, outcome of these life-saving therapies. Historically, the cardio-oncology field has evolved as retrospective effort to understand the scope, mechanisms, and impact of treatment-related toxicities that were already impacting patients. This review explores whether current systemic approaches to detecting, reporting, tracking, and communicating AEs are better positioned to provide more proactive or concurrent information to mitigate the impact of AE's on patient health and quality of life. Because the existing tools and frameworks for capturing these effects are not specific to cardiology, this study looks broadly at the landscape of approaches and assumptions. This review finds evidence of increasing focus on the provision of actionable information to support long-term health and quality of life for survivors and those on chronic therapy. However, the current means to assess and support the impact of this burden on patients and the healthcare system are often of limited relevance for an increasingly long-lived survivor and patient population.

Availability and affordability of biologic versus non-biologic anticancer medicines: a cross-sectional study in Punjab, Pakistan

OBJECTIVES

Prime focus of this study was to evaluate the availability and affordability of originator brands (OBs) and lowest price generics (LPGs) of prescribed biologic and non-biologic anticancer medicines.

DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 22 cancer-care hospitals (18 public hospitals and 4 private hospitals) and 44 private pharmacies in Punjab, Pakistan. Sampling population consisted of 4483 patients with cancer aged ≥18 years. The availability was determined by classifying anticancer medicines in four categories: absent/unavailability (medicines not present in any surveyed facility), low availability (medicines present in <50% of surveyed facilities), fairly high availability (medicines present in 50%-74% of surveyed facilities) and high availability (medicines present in >75% of surveyed facilities). Medicines were affordable if overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines were 20% of the household capacity to pay. Data were analysed by using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, V.21.0).

RESULTS

A total of 5060 patients with cancer were approached out of which 4483 patients were included in the survey. Overall, 10 103 anticancer drugs were prescribed. Among them, 96.3% were non-biologics and 3.7% were biologics. Oncologists were reluctant to prescribe biologics due to high prices. 58.1% of non-biologics were affordable; whereas, the affordability of biologics was 3.3%. A total of 43.9% of both biologic and non-biologic OBs were available; whereas, their affordability was 44.2%. On the other hand, the availability of LPGs was 21.3%, and their affordability was 66.1%. For low-income patients, the affordability of non-biologics was 31.6% and the affordability of biologics was 1.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the patients with cancer were prescribed non-biologics due to their low price and better affordability. In contrast to OBs, LPGs of both biologics and non-biologics had less availability but more affordability.

Paying for Cures: How Can We Afford It? Managed Care Pharmacy Stakeholder Perceptions of Policy Options to Address Affordability of Prescription Drugs

BACKGROUND

High-priced medications with curative potential, such as the newer hepatitis C therapies, have contributed to the recent growth in pharmaceutical expenditure. Despite the obvious benefits, health care decision makers are just beginning to grapple with questions of how to value and pay for curative therapies that may feature large upfront cost, followed by health benefits that are reaped over a patient's lifespan. Alternative policy options have been proposed to promote high value and financially sustainable use of these therapies. It is unclear which policy options would be most acceptable to health care payer and biomedical manufacturer stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) briefly review pharmaceutical policy options to address health system affordability and (b) assess the acceptability of alternative policy options to health care payers and biomedical manufacturers before and after an Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy (AMCP) continuing pharmacy education (CPE) session.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Cochran databases for pharmaceutical policy options addressing affordability. With input from a focus group of managed care professionals, we developed CPE session content and an 8-question survey focusing on the most promising policy options. We fielded the survey before and after the CPE session, which occurred as part of the 2016 AMCP Annual Meeting. We first conducted a chi-squared goodness-of-fit test to assess response distributions. Next, we tested how responses differed before and after by using an ordered logit and a multinomial logit to model Likert scale and unordered responses, respectively.

RESULTS

Although risk-sharing payments over time remained the most favorable choice before (37%) and after (35%) the CPE session, this choice was closely followed by HealthCoin after the session, which increased in favorability from 4% to 33% of responses (P = 0.001). About half of the respondents (54%) indicated that legislative change is the most significant barrier to the implementation of any policy.

CONCLUSIONS

As high-cost curative drugs reach the market, managed care stakeholders need information from a balanced education source regarding alternative policies to address affordability. We found that after the AMCP CPE session, risk-sharing payments over time and HealthCoin were the most favorable options.

DISCLOSURES

No funding was provided for this research. Carlson reports consulting fees from Genentech, Pfizer, and Seattle Genetics. The other authors have nothing to disclose. Study concept and design were contributed by Yeung, Garrison, and Carlson. Yeung collected the data, which were interpreted by Yeung and Basu. The manuscript was written by Yeung, Suh, and Bansal and revised by Yeung. A portion of this research was presented at the Academy of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting as a continuing education session entitled "Paying for Cures: How Can We Afford It?" on April 20, 2016, in San Francisco, California.

Public Health Care Financing and the Costs of Cancer Care: A Cross-National Analysis

Expenditure and financing aspects in the healthcare system in general, and in cancer care in particular, are subjects of increasing concern to the medical community. Nowadays, it is imperative for the healthcare system to respond to the challenge of universal access to quality healthcare, by measuring the financial resources within the healthcare sector. The purpose of this review is to highlight the major gaps in the healthcare expenditures for all types of care, as well as on cancer and anti-cancer drugs across 28 European Union member states. The indicators taken into account are divided into two major groups: (1) healthcare expenditures for all types of care, and (2) healthcare expenditures on cancer and anti-cancer drugs. The programs used for our analysis are SPSS Statistics V20.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA) and Stat World Explorer. The overall picture confirms that there are considerable disparities between the 28 countries in relation to their expenditures on health. The trend in public expenditures for all types of care, compared to the share of healthcare expenditures as a percentage of the GDP, shows the increase of health expenses between 2010 and 2014, but a lower rise compared to the total GDP increase. Healthcare expenditure on cancer (%THE) is rather low, despite the high cost associated with anti-cancer drugs. New treatments and drugs development will be increasingly difficult to achieve if the share devoted to cancer does not increase, and the lack of funds may act as a barrier in receiving high-quality care.

Clinical, technological, and economic issues associated with developing new lung surfactant therapeutics

Discovery of lung surfactant deficiency as a main cause of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS) has influenced a steep increase in lung surfactant research. Although this has yielded impactful scientific discoveries, much of the basic research on lung surfactants has failed to translate into clinical practices. This is attributed to insufficient information covering the entire lung surfactant ecosystem, from the basic science to economics surrounding the development and clinical practices. In this manuscript, developments related to improving therapeutic lung surfactant as well as the degree of unmet need are analyzed from both technical and economic perspectives. Two potential opportunities are emphasized: (1) aerosolized lung surfactants to treat NRDS infants, and (2) synthetic lung surfactants for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients. Each has a modestly projected US market size of $120 million and $4 billion, well enough to make up for the high development costs associated with investigational drug development. Both opportunities have been pursued in the past, but to date these attempts have met with no success mainly due to technical limitations. With the recent advancements in both fields, technology improvements have created opportunities to solve both decades-old problems.

New tools for old drugs: Functional genetic screens to optimize current chemotherapy

Despite substantial advances in the treatment of various cancers, many patients still receive anti-cancer therapies that hardly eradicate tumor cells but inflict considerable side effects. To provide the best treatment regimen for an individual patient, a major goal in molecular oncology is to identify predictive markers for a personalized therapeutic strategy. Regarding novel targeted anti-cancer therapies, there are usually good markers available. Unfortunately, however, targeted therapies alone often result in rather short remissions and little cytotoxic effect on the cancer cells. Therefore, classical chemotherapy with frequent long remissions, cures, and a clear effect on cancer cell eradication remains a corner stone in current anti-cancer therapy. Reliable biomarkers which predict the response of tumors to classical chemotherapy are rare, in contrast to the situation for targeted therapy. For the bulk of cytotoxic therapeutic agents, including DNA-damaging drugs, drugs targeting microtubules or antimetabolites, there are still no reliable biomarkers used in the clinic to predict tumor response. To make progress in this direction, meticulous studies of classical chemotherapeutic drug action and resistance mechanisms are required. For this purpose, novel functional screening technologies have emerged as successful technologies to study chemotherapeutic drug response in a variety of models. They allow a systematic analysis of genetic contributions to a drug-responsive or −sensitive phenotype and facilitate a better understanding of the mode of action of these drugs. These functional genomic approaches are not only useful for the development of novel targeted anti-cancer drugs but may also guide the use of classical chemotherapeutic drugs by deciphering novel mechanisms influencing a tumor’s drug response. Moreover, due to the advances of 3D organoid cultures from patient tumors and in vivo screens in mice, these genetic screens can be applied using conditions that are more representative of the clinical setting. Patient-derived 3D organoid lines furthermore allow the characterization of the “essentialome”, the specific set of genes required for survival of these cells, of an individual tumor, which could be monitored over the course of treatment and help understanding how drug resistance evolves in clinical tumors. Thus, we expect that these functional screens will enable the discovery of novel cancer-specific vulnerabilities, and through clinical validation, move the field of predictive biomarkers forward. This review focuses on novel advanced techniques to decipher the interplay between genetic alterations and drug response.

The Role of Compounds Derived from Natural Supplement as Anticancer Agents in Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Review

Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) is the most prominent kidney cancer derived from renal tubules and accounts for roughly 85% of all malignant kidney cancer. Every year, over 60,000 new cases are registered, and about 14,000 people die from RCC. The incidence of this has been increasing significantly in the U.S. and other countries. An increased understanding of molecular biology and the genomics of RCC has uncovered several signaling pathways involved in the progression of this cancer. Significant advances in the treatment of RCC have been reported from agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that target these pathways. These agents have become drugs of choice because they demonstrate clinical benefit and increased survival in patients with metastatic disease. However, the patients eventually relapse and develop resistance to these drugs. To improve outcomes and seek approaches for producing long-term durable remission, the search for more effective therapies and preventative strategies are warranted. Treatment of RCC using natural products is one of these strategies to reduce the incidence. However, recent studies have focused on these chemoprevention agents as anti-cancer therapies given they can inhibit tumor cell grow and lack the severe side effects common to synthetic compounds. This review elaborates on the current understanding of natural products and their mechanisms of action as anti-cancer agents. The present review will provide information for possible use of these products alone or in combination with chemotherapy for the prevention and treatment of RCC.

Constraint-based perturbation analysis with cluster Newton method: a case study of personalized parameter estimations with irinotecan whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic model

Background

Drug development considering individual varieties among patients becomes crucial to improve clinical development success rates and save healthcare costs. As a useful tool to predict individual phenomena and correlations among drug characteristics and individual varieties, recently, whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic (WB- PBPK) models are getting more attention. WB-PBPK models generally have a lot of drug-related parameters that need to be estimated, and the estimations are difficult because the observed data are limited. Furthermore, parameter estimation in WB-PBPK models may cause overfitting when applying to individual clinical data such as urine/feces drug excretion for each patient in which Cluster Newton Method (CNM) is applicable for parameter estimation. In order to solve this issue, we came up with the idea of constraint-based perturbation analysis of the CNM. The effectiveness of our approach is demonstrated in the case of irinotecan WB-PBPK model using common organ-specific tissue-plasma partition coefficients (Kp) among the patients as constraints in WB-PBPK parameter estimation.

Results

We find strong correlations between age, renal clearance and liver functions in irinotecan WB-PBPK model with personalized physiological parameters by observing the distributions of optimized values of strong convergence drug-related parameters using constraint-based perturbation analysis on CNM. The constraint-based perturbation analysis consists of the following three steps: (1) Estimation of all drug-related parameters for each patient; the parameters include organ-specific Kp. (2) Fixing suitable values of Kp for each organ among all patients identically. (3) Re-estimation of all drug-related parameters other than Kp by using the fixed values of Kp as constraints of CNM.

Conclusions

Constraint-based perturbation analysis could yield new findings when using CNM with appropriate constraints. This method is a new technique to find suitable values and important insights that are masked by CNM without constraints.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12918-017-0513-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Access to Guideline-Recommended Pharmacogenomic Tests for Cancer Treatments: Experience of Providers and Patients

Genomic tests are the fastest growing sector in medicine and medical science, yet there remains a dearth of research on access to pharmacogenomic tests and medications. The objective of this study is to explore providers' and patients' experiences and views on test access as well as strategies used for gaining access. We interviewed clinicians who prescribed medications that should be guided by pharmacogenomic testing and patients who received those prescriptions. We organized the themes into the four dimensions suggested by the World Health Organization framework on access to medications and health technologies. Guideline-recommended pharmacogenomic tests for cancer care are generally available, although the timeliness of return of test results is sometimes suboptimal. Accessibility of pharmacogenomic tests is made challenging by the process of ordering pharmacogenomic tests, which is time-consuming. Affordability is a barrier to some patients as expressed by both providers and patients, who noted that the cost of pharmacogenomic tests and medications is high. Acceptability of the tests is high as both providers and patients view the tests positively. Understanding challenges to accessing pharmacogenomic tests will allow policymakers to develop policies that streamline access to genomics-based technologies to improve population health.

Apoptosis in human liver carcinoma caused by gold nanoparticles in combination with carvedilol is mediated via modulation of MAPK/Akt/mTOR pathway and EGFR/FAAD proteins

In cancers, apoptosis signaling pathways and cell survival and growth pathways responsible for resistance to conventional treatments, such as Pi3K/Akt/mTOR and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) become dysregulated. Recently, alternative treatments to promote tumor cell death have become important. The present study reports on the antitumor and cytoprotective action of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) and carvedilol in combination and in isolated application. Apoptosis was analyzed by FITC/propidium iodide staining flow cytometry; caspase-3, caspase-8, Bcl-2 and MAPK/ERK activity by immunofluorescence microscopy; gene expression of proteins related to cell death as Akt, mTOR, EGFR, MDR1, survivin, FADD and Apaf, by the real-time PCR; and western blot analysis for MAPK/ERK, Akt and mTOR. Oxidative stress evaluation was performed by reduced glutathione (GSH) and malondialdehyde (MDA) levels. Intracellular GNPs targets were identified by transmission electron microscopy. After exposure to a combination of GNPs (6.25 µg/ml) and carvedilol (3 µM), death as promoted by apoptosis was detected using flow cytometry, for expression of pro-apoptotic proteins FADD, caspase-3, caspase-8 and sub-regulation of anti-apoptotic MAPK/ERK, Akt, mTOR, EGFR and MDR1 resistance. Non-tumor cell cytoprotection with GSH elevation and MDA reduction levels was detected. GNPs were identified within the cell near to the nucleus when combined with carvedilol. The combination of GNP and carvedilol promoted downregulation of anti-apoptotic and drug resistance genes, over-regulation of pro-apoptotic proteins in tumor cells, as well as cytoprotection of non-tumor cells with reduction of apoptosis and oxidative stress.

Cancer Prevention and Treatment by Wholistic Nutrition

Cancer is traditionally considered a genetic disease. It starts with a gene mutation, often caused by environmental carcinogens that are enzymatically activated to metabolites that covalently bind to DNA. If these now-damaged carcinogen-DNA adducts are not repaired before the cell replicates, they result in a mutation, which is inherited by daughter cells and their subsequent progeny. Still more mutations are added that are thought to advance cellular independence, metastasis, and drug resistance, among other characteristics typically observed for advanced cancer. The stages of initiation, promotion and progression of cancer by mutations infer irreversibility because back mutations are exceedingly rare. Thus, treatment protocols typically are designed to remove or kill cancer cells by surgery, chemotherapy, immunotherapy and/or radiotherapy. However, empirical evidence has existed to show a fundamentally different treatment option. For example, the promotion of cancer growth and development in laboratory animals initiated by a powerful mutagen/carcinogen can be repetitively turned on and off by non-mutagenic mechanisms, even completely, by modifying the consumption of protein at relevant levels of intake. Similar but less substantiated evidence also exists for other nutrients and other cancer types. This suggests that ultimate cancer development is primarily a nutrition-responsive disease rather than a genetic disease, with the understanding that nutrition is a comprehensive, wholistic biological effect that reflects the natural contents of nutrients and related substances in whole, intact food. This perspective sharply contrasts with the contemporary inference that nutrition is the summation of individual nutrients acting independently. The spelling of 'holism' with the 'w' is meant to emphasize the empirical basis for this function. The proposition that wholistic nutrition controls and even reverses disease development suggests that cancer may be treated by nutritional intervention.

Repurposing itraconazole as an anticancer agent

Itraconazole, a common anti-fungal agent, has demonstrated potential anticancer activity, including reversing chemoresistance mediated by P-glycoprotein, modulating the signal transduction pathways of Hedgehog, mechanistic target of rapamycin and Wnt/β-catenin in cancer cells, inhibiting angiogenesis and lymphangiogenesis, and possibly interfering with cancer-stromal cell interactions. Clinical trials have suggested the clinical benefits of itraconazole monotherapy for prostate cancer and basal cell carcinoma, as well as the survival advantage of combination chemotherapy for relapsed non-small cell lung, ovarian, triple negative breast, pancreatic and biliary tract cancer. As drug repurposing is cost-effective and timesaving, a review was conducted of preclinical and clinical data focusing on the anticancer activity of itraconazole, and discusses the future directions for repurposing itraconazole as an anticancer agent.

Do patient access schemes for high-cost cancer drugs deliver value to society?-lessons from the NHS Cancer Drugs Fund

BACKGROUND

The NHS Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) was established in 2010 to reduce delays and improve access to cancer drugs, including those that had been previously appraised but not approved by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence). After 1.3 billion GBP expenditure, a UK parliamentary review in 2016 rationalized the CDF back into NICE.

METHODS

This paper analyses the potential value delivered by the CDF according to six value criteria. This includes validated clinical benefits scales, cost-effectiveness criteria as defined by NICE and an assessment of real-world data. The analysis focuses on 29 cancer drugs approved for 47 indications that could be prescribed through the CDF in January 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 47 CDF approved indications, only 18 (38%) reported a statistically significant OS benefit, with an overall median survival of 3.1 months (1.4-15.7 months). When assessed according to clinical benefit scales, only 23 (48%) and 9 (18%) of the 47 drug indications met ASCO and ESMO criteria, respectively. NICE had previously rejected 26 (55%) of the CDF approved indications because they did not meet cost-effectiveness thresholds. Four drugs-bevacizumab, cetuximab, everolimus and lapatinib-represented the bulk of CDF applications and were approved for a total of 18 separate indications. Thirteen of these indications were subsequently delisted by the CDF in January 2015 due to insufficient evidence for clinical benefit-data which were unchanged since their initial approval.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude the CDF has not delivered meaningful value to patients or society. There is no empirical evidence to support a 'drug only' ring fenced cancer fund relative to concomitant investments in other cancer domains such as surgery and radiotherapy, or other noncancer medicines. Reimbursement decisions for all drugs and interventions within cancer care should be made through appropriate health technology appraisal processes.

Defining and Measuring the Affordability of New Medicines: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

In many healthcare systems, affordability concerns can lead to restrictions on the use of expensive efficacious therapies. However, there does not appear to be any consensus as to the terminology used to describe affordability, or the thresholds used to determine whether new drugs are affordable.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate how affordability is defined and measured in healthcare.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and EconLit databases (2005-July 2016) were searched using terms covering affordability and budget impact, combined with definitions, thresholds and restrictions, to identify articles describing a definition of affordability with respect to new medicines. Additional definitions were identified through citation searching, and through manual searches of European health technology assessment body websites.

RESULTS

In total, 27 definitions were included in the review. Of these, five definitions described affordability in terms of the value of a product; seven considered affordability within the context of healthcare system budgets; and 15 addressed whether products are affordable in a given country based on economic factors. However, there was little in the literature to indicate that the price of medicines is considered alongside both their value to individual patients and their budget impact at a population level.

CONCLUSIONS

Current methods of assessing affordability in healthcare may be limited by their focus on budget impact. A more effective approach may involve a broader perspective than is currently described in the literature, to consider the long-term benefits of a therapy and cost savings elsewhere in the healthcare system, as well as cooperation between healthcare payers and the pharmaceutical industry to develop financing models that support sustainability as well as innovation.

From Composition to Cure: A Systems Engineering Approach to Anticancer Drug Carriers

The molecular complexity and heterogeneity of cancer has led to a persistent, and as yet unsolved, challenge to develop cures for this disease. The pharmaceutical industry focuses the bulk of its efforts on the development of new drugs, but an alternative approach is to improve the delivery of existing drugs with drug carriers that can manipulate when, where, and how a drug exerts its therapeutic effect. For the treatment of solid tumors, systemically delivered drug carriers face significant challenges that are imposed by the pathophysiological barriers that lie between their site of administration and their site of therapeutic action in the tumor. Furthermore, drug carriers face additional challenges in their translation from preclinical validation to clinical approval and adoption. Addressing this diverse network of challenges requires a systems engineering approach for the rational design of optimized carriers that have a realistic prospect for translation from the laboratory to the patient.

Opportunities to significantly reduce expenditure associated with cancer drugs

Aim: To identify cancer drugs amenable to strategies for reducing expenditure and avoiding drug wastage. Methods: Information was sourced from product information in 20 countries on parenteral cytotoxic agents, and cancer and noncancer monoclonal antibodies. Data were collected on vial sizes, overage, stability and presentation forms. Results: Vial size availability varied significantly between countries, with often only single vial sizes for numerous medications. Overage was poorly reported. Stability data were inconsistent and variable between countries, with most drugs only having a 24 h expiry. Three cancer-indicated monoclonal antibodies, thought suitable for prefilled syringe administration, were only available as vials. Conclusion: Many expensive cancer drugs are suitable for global cost-reduction strategies. Collaboration is vital to affecting change and reducing expenditure.

Rising Cost of Anticancer Medications in the United States

With more than 1.6 million new cases of cancer occurring each year, anticancer medications are in high demand. Escalating prescription drug prices have become a significant concern. Anticancer medications are among the most expensive prescription medications, many of them exceeding $100 000 a year. The survival benefits of certain newer anticancer medications may be a few months more than that from the existing treatment but at a much higher price tag. Drug cost may play a substantial role in making treatment choices. Multiple factors leading to high prices and some potential solutions to lower them have been highlighted.

Between January 2009 and April 2016, 134 novel anticancer therapies were approved: what is the level of knowledge concerning the clinical benefit at the time of approval?

Objective

In the last decade an increasing number of high-priced, new cancer treatments received marketing authorisation in Europe. What is actually known about the clinical benefit of those therapies at the time of approval needs to be elucidated in order to inform decisions about the use and reimbursement of these novel treatment options. Thus, the aim of the current analysis was to systematically investigate oncological therapies approved between January 2009 and April 2016 and extract as well as quantify the level of knowledge of the clinical benefit at the time of marketing authorisation.

Methods

To assess the benefit of new interventions as well as expanded indications, we extracted the median gain of the two study end points: progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Information is based on approval documents provided by the European Medicines Agency and assessments from the Austrian Horizon Scanning programme. We included all cancer therapies approved in Europe between 2009 (January 1) and 2016 (April 15).

Results

Cancer drugs for 134 new indications approved since 2009 were identified. In the case of 37 indications (27%), no data were available for PFS or for OS. A positive difference in median OS was reached by 76 licensed indications (55.5%); 22 (16%) of them showed a difference of more than 3 months. Regarding the study end point PFS, an improvement was shown in 90 indications (65.2%).

Conclusion

Scarce knowledge regarding the clinical benefit of anticancer therapies is available at the time of approval. In addition, the survival benefit of the approved indications is less than 3 months in the majority of approved therapies.

Cost-effectiveness research in cancer therapy: a systematic review of literature trends, methods and the influence of funding

OBJECTIVE

To perform a first-time analysis of the cost-effectiveness (CE) literature on chemotherapies, of all types, in cancer, in terms of trends and change over time, including the influence of industry funding.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

A wide range of cancer-related research settings within healthcare, including health systems, hospitals and medical centres.

PARTICIPANTS

All literature comparative CE research of drug-based cancer therapies in the period 1986 to 2015.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes are the literature trends in relation to journal subject category, authorship, research design, data sources, funds and consultation involvement. An additional outcome measure is the association between industry funding and study outcomes.

ANALYSIS

Descriptive statistics and the χ2, Fisher exact or Somer's D tests were used to perform non-parametric statistics, with a p value of <0.05 as the statistical significance measure.

RESULTS

Total 574 publications were analysed. The drug-related CE literature expands over time, with increased publishing in the healthcare sciences and services journal subject category (p<0.001). The retrospective data collection in studies increased over time (p<0.001). The usage of prospective data, however, has been decreasing (p<0.001) in relation to randomised clinical trials (RCTs), but is unchanging for non-RCT studies. The industry-sponsored CE studies have especially been increasing (p<0.001), in contrast to those sponsored by other sources. While paid consultation involvement grew throughout the years, the declaration of funding for this is relatively limited. Importantly, there is evidence that industry funding is associated with favourable result to the sponsor (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates clear trends in how the CE cancer research is presented to the practicing community, including in relation to journals, study designs, authorship and consultation, together with increased financial sponsorship by pharmaceutical industries, which may be more influencing study outcomes than other funding sources.

Clinical Pathways and the Patient Perspective in the Pursuit of Value-Based Oncology Care

The art of practicing oncology has evolved substantially in the past 5 years. As more and more diagnostic tests, biomarker-directed therapies, and immunotherapies make their way to the oncology marketplace, oncologists will find it increasingly difficult to keep up with the many therapeutic options. Additionally, the cost of cancer care seems to be increasing. Clinical pathways are a systematic way to organize and display detailed, evidence-based treatment options and assist the practitioner with best practice. When selecting which treatment regimens to include on a clinical pathway, considerations must include the efficacy and safety, as well as costs, of the therapy. Pathway treatment regimens must be continually assessed and modified to ensure that the most up-to-date, high-quality options are incorporated. Value-based models, such as the ASCO Value Framework, can assist providers in presenting economic evaluations of clinical pathway treatment options to patients, thus allowing the patient to decide the overall value of each treatment regimen. Although oncologists and pathway developers can decide which treatment regimens to include on a clinical pathway based on the efficacy of the treatment, assessment of the value of that treatment regimen ultimately lies with the patient. Patient definitions of value will be an important component to enhancing current value-based oncology care models and incorporating new, high-quality, value-based therapeutics into oncology clinical pathways.

Therapeutic use of monoclonal antibodies: general aspects and challenges for drug delivery

Monoclonal antibodies are routinely used in several fields but the great challenge has been their use as therapeutic agents for the treatment of diseases, such as breast cancer, leukemia, asthma, macular degeneration, arthritis, Crohn’s disease, and transplants, among others.

Monoclonal antibodies are protein molecules made in the laboratory from hybridoma cells by recombinant DNA technology.

Important advances have been made over the past decade to improve some critical points, such as safety and efficacy of the first generation of therapeutic antibodies.

This type of molecules presents a significant challenge from the pharmaceutical point of view due to their characteristics, such as molecular size, stability, and solubility. In this chapter we have attempted to identify the major issues associated with therapeutic approaches, formulating drawbacks and delivering antibody drugs, particularly focused on the challenges and opportunities that these present for the future.

Managing Expectations in the Transition to Proof of Concept Studies

BACKGROUND

As we move away from the traditional chemotherapy era to targeted therapy, the validity of old assessment paradigms associated with therapeutics are being raised in the context of immunotherapy. The old paradigm required elaborating on the toxicity assessment, with no expectation of efficacy in early phase trials. Safety data from Phase 1 and 2 studies with many immunotherapeutics show limited toxicities and draw attention to the need to demonstrate efficacy in the early evaluation of new agents.

METHODS

Literature searches indicate that molecular oncology mechanistic-based agents are being linked with molecular disease status and clinical benefit. Biomarkers and other endpoints are being employed to accomplish this. Perspectives for a meaningful context of integrating biomarkers and clinical trial design are reviewed.

RESULTS

The design and conduct of clinical trials have not been fully adjusted to the new era of personalized oncology, and so we are in transition. A part of this transition is the management of expectations and trial designs that need to be considered relative to preclinical experience in the development of therapeutics. For example, pathological complete response is now considered a surrogate marker for favorable prognosis in breast cancer patients who are treated in the neoadjuvant setting. This surrogate marker is tied to novel agents' mechanistic characteristics with no preclinical counterpart.

CONCLUSION

The old paradigm considers patients equal with similar chances to respond to treatments, but the new paradigm considers patient's heterogeneity, a major fact that informs the design of clinical trials. By linking every treatment to a mechanism of action and to the presence of a specific biomarker, new trials are going to have more subjects who are likely to respond to the treatment.

Rising Cost of Cancer Pharmaceuticals: Cost Issues and Interventions to Control Costs

The rising cost of pharmaceuticals and, in particular, cancer drugs has made headline news in recent years. Several factors contribute to increasing costs and the burden this places on the health care system and patients. Some of these factors include costly cancer pharmaceutical research and development, longer clinical trials required to achieve drug approval, manufacturing costs for complex compounds, and the economic principles surrounding oncology drug pricing. Strategies to control costs have been proposed, and some have already been implemented to mitigate cancer drug costs such as the use of clinical treatment pathways and tools to facilitate cost discussions with patients. In this article, we briefly review some of the potential factors contributing to increasing cancer pharmaceutical costs and interventions to mitigate costs, and touch on the role of health care providers in addressing this important issue.

Variation of Cost among Anti-cancer Drugs Available in Indian Market

INTRODUCTION

Although cancer remains a major health problem all over the world, its treatment is limited by affordability of patients in a developing country like India. Information generated from cost analysis studies will be helpful for both the doctors in choosing the correct medicine for their patients and also for policy makers in successfully utilizing the meager resources that are available.

AIM

The aim of the present observational study was to analyse the price variations of anti-cancer drugs available in India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The cost of a particular anti-cancer drug being manufactured by different companies, in the same dose and dosage form, was obtained from latest issue of "Current Index of Medical Specialties" (CIMS) January-April, 2016. The difference between the maximum and minimum prices of various brands of the same drug was analysed and percentage variation in the prices was calculated. The results of the study were expressed as absolute numbers and percentages.

RESULTS

Overall, the price of a total of 23 drugs belonging to 6 different categories available in 52 different formulations were analysed. Among alkylating agents, oxaliplatin (50mg; injection) showed the maximum price variation of 125.02%. In anti-metabolites, methotrexate (2.5mg; tablet) showed the maximum price variation of 75.30%. The maximum price variation among natural products was seen with paclitaxel (260 mg; injection) of 146.98%, among hormonal drugs, was seen with flutamide (250mg; tablet) of 714.24%, among targeted drugs was seen with imatinib mesylate (100mg; film coated tablet) of 5.56% and among supportive drugs, granisetron (1mg; tablet) showed the maximum price variation of 388.68%.

CONCLUSION

The average percentage variations of different brands of the same anti-cancer drug in same dose and dosage form manufactured in India is very wide. The government and drug manufacturing companies must direct their efforts in reducing the cost of anti-cancer drugs and minimizing the economic burden on the patients.

Perceptions of Oncologists, Healthcare Policy Makers, Patients and the General Population on the Value of Pharmaceutical Treatments in Oncology

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to explore the main factors explaining the relative weight of the different attributes that determine the value of oncologic treatments from the different perspectives of healthcare policy makers (HCPM), oncologists, patients and the general population in Spain.

Methods

Structured interviews were conducted to assess: (1) the importance of the attributes on treatment choice when comparing a new cancer drug with a standard cancer treatment; (2) the importance of survival, quality of life (QoL), costs and innovation in cancer; and (3) the most worrying side effects related to cancer drugs.

Results

A total of 188 individuals participated in the study. For all participants, when choosing treatments, the best rated characteristics were greater efficacy, greater safety, treatment adaptation to patients’ individual requirements and the rapid reincorporation of patients to their daily activities. There were important differences among participants in their opinion about survival, QoL and cost. In general, oncologists, patients, and the general population gave greater value to gains in QoL than healthcare policy makers. Compared to other participants healthcare policy makers gave greater importance to the economic impact related to oncology treatments.

Conclusions

Gains in QoL, survival, safety, cost and innovation are perceived differently by different groups of stakeholders. It is recommended to consider the perspective of different stakeholders in the assessment of a new cancer drugs to obtain more informed decisions when deciding on the most appropriate treatment to use.

Funding

Eli Lilly & Co, Madrid (Spain).

Next-generation multiple myeloma treatment: a pharmacoeconomic perspective

Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma have come at a rapid pace, especially with several new drugs entering the market in the last few years. However, access to and affordability of new treatments poses a major challenge, both in the United States and around the world. High costs of life-saving drugs are detrimental to both the personal finances of the individual patient, as well as society which must bear the increasing costs in terms of increased health insurance premiums, taxes, or both. The challenges are not unique to myeloma, but are commonly encountered in several other cancers as well. But to some extent these pharmacoeconomic concerns are amplified in myeloma due to the need for multidrug regimens that combine 2 or more expensive new drugs, continuous therapy, and the prolonged disease course in most patients. We examine current myeloma therapy from a pharmacoeconomic perspective, and discuss the costs involved. We outline the underlying reasons why cancer drugs are so expensive, the measures that are required to lower cost, and propose potential ways in which costs can be reduced while still delivering high-quality care.

Existing FDA pathways have potential to ensure early access to, and appropriate use of, specialty drugs

Specialty drugs are notable among prescription drugs in that they offer the possibility of substantial clinical improvement, come with important risks of adverse events and mortality, can be complex to manufacture or administer, and are usually extremely costly. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) plays a critical role in ensuring that patients who could benefit from specialty drugs have access to them in a timely fashion. In this article we review the different strategies that the FDA can use to approve and influence the post-approval prescribing of specialty drugs. When specialty drugs show promise in early clinical trials, the FDA can expedite the drugs' availability to patients through expanded access programs and expedited approval pathways that speed regulatory authorization. After approval, to ensure that specialty drugs are directed to the patients who are most likely to benefit from them, the FDA can limit the scope of the drugs' indications, encourage the development of companion diagnostic tests to indicate which patients should receive the drugs, or require that manufacturers subject them to Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies to ensure that their use is appropriately limited to a restricted population that is aware of the drugs' risks and benefits. Implementing these existing regulatory approaches can promote timely patient access to specialty drugs while preventing expensive and potentially inappropriate overuse.

Epigallocatechin Gallate Nanodelivery Systems for Cancer Therapy

Cancer is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality all over the world. Conventional treatments, such as chemotherapy, are generally expensive, highly toxic and lack efficiency. Cancer chemoprevention using phytochemicals is emerging as a promising approach for the treatment of early carcinogenic processes. (−)-Epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG) is the major bioactive constituent in green tea with numerous health benefits including anti-cancer activity, which has been intensively studied. Besides its potential for chemoprevention, EGCG has also been shown to synergize with common anti-cancer agents, which makes it a suitable adjuvant in chemotherapy. However, limitations in terms of stability and bioavailability have hampered its application in clinical settings. Nanotechnology may have an important role in improving the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics of EGCG. Indeed, several studies have already reported the use of nanoparticles as delivery vehicles of EGCG for cancer therapy. The aim of this article is to discuss the EGCG molecule and its associated health benefits, particularly its anti-cancer activity and provide an overview of the studies that have employed nanotechnology strategies to enhance EGCG’s properties and potentiate its anti-tumoral activity.

The Cost of Oncology Drugs: A Pharmacy Perspective, Part I

Even in the VA, the high cost of oncology medications are forcing health care providers to confront the economic impact of cancer care.