Pem and the cost of multicycle maintenance

Access to essential and innovative anti-cancer medicines: a longitudinal study in Nanjing, China

PURPOSE

To evaluate the availability, cost, affordability of anti-cancer medicines in Nanjing, Jiangsu.

METHODS

A longitudinal tracking investigation study was performed to collect information about 24 essential anti-cancer medicines (EAMs) and 17 innovative anti-cancer medicines (IAMs) in 26 healthcare institutions in Nanjing from 2016 to 2020. The availability, cost, drug utilization and affordability of EAMs and IAMs were investigated.

RESULTS

The availability of EAMs showed no significant changes in Nanjing, but the availability of IAMs showed a significant increase in 2018 and 2019 and tended to stabilize in 2020. For EAMs, the DDDc(Defined Daily Dose cost) of LPGs (Lowest-Priced Generics) showed no significant changes, and the DDDc of OBs (Originator Brands) and IAMs significantly decreased. The DDDs(Defined Daily Doses) of EAMs (LPGs) showed a decreasing trend since 2016 and rose again in 2019. Overall, the DDDs of EAMs (LPGs) decreased by 25.18% between 2016 and 2020, but the proportion selected for clinical treatment remained at 67.35% in 2020. The DDDs of EAMs (OBs) and IAMs both showed an increasing trend year by year, with a proportional increase of 207.72% and 652.68%, respectively; but the proportion selected for clinical treatment was only 16.09% and 16.56% respectively in 2020. EAMs (LPGs) had good affordability for urban residents but poor affordability for rural residents; the affordability of EAMs (OBs) and IAMs was poor for both urban and rural residents.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant changes in the availability and cost of EAMs (LPGs), whose lower prices showed better affordability. Although their relative change in drug utilization showed a decreasing trend, they still dominated clinical treatment. Driven by the national drug price negotiation (NDPN) policy, the availability of IAMs was on the rise. It is necessary to further develop and strengthen policies for essential medicines procurement assessment to improve the accessibility of EAMs.

Availability, Price and Affordability of Anticancer Medicines: Evidence from Two Cross-Sectional Surveys in the Jiangsu Province, China

Objectives: With the increasing incidence of cancer, poor access to affordable anticancer medicines has been a serious public health problem in China. To help address this issue, we assessed the availability, price and affordability of pharmacotherapy for cancer in public hospitals in the Jiangsu Province, China. Methods: In 2012 and 2016, anticancer medicine availability and price information in the capital and five other cities was collected. A total of six cancer care hospitals, 26 tertiary general hospitals and 28 secondary general hospitals were sampled, using an adaptation of the World Health Organization/Health Action International methodology. Data was collected for the anticancer medicines in stock at the time of the surveys. Prices were expressed as inflation-adjusted median unit prices (MUPs). Medicine was affordable if the overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines was less than 20% of the household’s capacity to pay. We used generalized estimating equations to estimate the significance of differences in availability from 2012 to 2016 and the Wilcoxon rank test to estimate the significance of differences in MUPs. Multivariate logistic regression was computed to measure predictors of affordability. Results: From 2012 to 2016 there was a significant decrease in the mean availability of originator brands (OBs) (from 7.79% to 5.71%, p = 0.012) and lowest-priced generics (LPGs) (36.29% to 32.67%, p = 0.009). The mean availability of anticancer medicines in secondary general hospitals was significantly lower than the cancer care, as well as in tertiary general hospitals. The MUPs of OBs (difference: −21.29%, p < 0.01) and their LPGs (−22.63%, p < 0.01) decreased significantly from 2012 to 2016. The OBs (16.67%) of all the anticancer medicines were found to be less affordable than LPGs (34.62% for urban residents and 30.77% for rural residents); their affordability varied among the different income regions. From 2012 to 2016, the proportion of LPGs with low availability and low affordability dropped from 30.77% to 19.23% in urban areas and 34.62% to 26.92% in rural areas, respectively. Generic substitution and medicine covered by basic medical insurance are factors facilitating affordability. Conclusion: There were concerning decreases in the availability of anticancer medicines in 2016 from already low availability in 2012. Anticancer medicines were more affordable for the patients in high-income regions than the patients in low-income regions. Governments should consider using their bargaining power to reduce procurement prices and abolish taxes on anticancer medicines. Policy should focus on the special health insurance plan for low-income patients with cancer. The goal of drug policy should ensure that first-line generic drugs are available for cancer patients and preferentially prescribed.

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.

A Primer on Health Economic Evaluations in Thoracic Oncology

There is growing interest for economic evaluation in oncology to illustrate the value of multiple new diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. As these analyses have started to move from specialist publications into mainstream medical literature, the wider medical audience consuming this information may need additional education to evaluate it appropriately. Here we review standard practices in economic evaluation, illustrating the different methods with thoracic oncology examples where possible. When interpreting and conducting health economic studies, it is important to appraise the method, perspective, time horizon, modeling technique, discount rate, and sensitivity analysis. Guidance on how to do this is provided. To provide a method to evaluate this literature, a literature search was conducted in spring 2015 to identify economic evaluations published in the Journal of Thoracic Oncology. Articles were reviewed for their study design, and areas for improvement were noted. Suggested improvements include using more rigorous sensitivity analyses, adopting a standard approach to reporting results, and conducting complete economic evaluations. Researchers should design high-quality studies to ensure the validity of the results, and consumers of this research should interpret these studies critically on the basis of a full understanding of the methodologies used before considering any of the conclusions. As advancements occur on both the research and consumer sides, this literature can be further developed to promote the best use of resources for this field.

Role of Gemcitabine and Pemetrexed as Maintenance Therapy in Advanced NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Gemcitabine and pemetrexed have been used as maintenance therapy. However, few systematic reviews and meta-analyses have assessed their effects in the newest studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the role of gemcitabine and pemetrexed in the maintenance treatment of non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).

Methods

We performed a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases from their inceptions to September 16, 2015. We also searched the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) databases from 2008 to 2015. Two authors independently extracted the data. The Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias graph was used to assess the risk of bias. The GRADE system was used to assess the grading of evidence, and a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 11.0 software.

Results

Eleven randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies were collected. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis and divided into the following 4 groups: gemcitabine vs. best supportive care (BSC)/observation, pemetrexed vs. BSC/placebo, pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab and pemetrexed vs. bevacizumab. Gemcitabine exhibited significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with BSC (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, p = 0.000). Pemetrexed exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.54, p = 0.000) and OS (HR = 0.75, p = 0.000) compared with BSC. Pemetrexed + bevacizumab almost exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.71, p = 0.051) compared with bevacizumab. Pemetrexed exhibited no improvement in PFS or overall survival (OS) compared with bevacizumab. Regarding the grade, the GRADE system indicated that the gemcitabine group was "MODERATE", the pemetrexed group was "HIGH", and both the pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab groups and pemetrexed vs. B groups were "LOW".

Conclusions

Gemcitabine or pemetrexed compared with BSC/observation/placebo significantly improved PFS or OS. Whether pemetrexed + bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab alone significantly improves PFS requires further investigation.

Ramucirumab for Colon Cancer and the Problem of Rising Prices Independent of Benefits

The discussion of value has moved from the philosophical, in which “value” was held out as an amorphous “eye of the beholder” concept, to an operationalized construct that is now directly affecting prescribing decisions. This is appropriate, given the large differences in price that seem disassociated from value.

Maintenance treatment after induction therapy in non-small cell lung cancer: latest evidence and clinical implications

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer death in the industrialized world. Despite significant progress in early stage disease, survival rates for advanced disease remain low. Maintenance therapy is a treatment strategy that has been investigated extensively in NSCLC. Therapies that have been studied in this setting in randomized trials to date include chemotherapy and molecularly targeted agents. Following the development of multiple new agents that show activity in NSCLC and have a tolerable side-effect profile, there has been increasing interest in utilizing them to maintain response to initial therapy after treatment with platinum-based doublets. Two effective strategies have evolved: continuation and switch maintenance. Despite improvements in progression-free survival and often overall survival on multiple clinical trials, there remains considerable controversy around this treatment paradigm. Here, we briefly outline the evolution of this treatment strategy and examine the available data, including recently updated data from the PARAMOUNT, AVAPERL, and PointBreak maintenance trials. Ultimately, the decision to use maintenance chemotherapy requires a nuanced discussion between the patient and physician that adequately assesses benefits of prolonged therapy and impact in terms of toxicity, quality of life, and financial cost.

Chemotherapy and targeted therapeutics as maintenance of response in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains the most common cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Survival for patients with advanced disease remains meager with standard platinum-based doublet therapy even given initially. Improved efficacy and tolerability of third-generation chemotherapies and small-molecule inhibitors has prompted the evaluation of these agents in the maintenance setting in order to enhance current outcomes. Two separate strategies have evolved: the introduction of a non-cross-resistant drug immediately following first-line or induction chemotherapy (switch maintenance), or the continuation of the non-platinum partner initially introduced during induction (continuation maintenance). Here we review the available clinical trial data evaluating both maintenance strategies, and offer our assessment of their contemporary clinical implications and cost-effectiveness.

Maintenance chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: new life for an old idea

Although well established for the treatment of certain hematologic malignancies, maintenance therapy has only recently become a treatment paradigm for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Maintenance therapy, which is designed to prolong a clinically favorable state after completion of a predefined number of induction chemotherapy cycles, has two principal paradigms. Continuation maintenance therapy entails the ongoing administration of a component of the initial chemotherapy regimen, generally the nonplatinum cytotoxic drug or a molecular targeted agent. With switch maintenance (also known as sequential therapy), a new and potentially non-cross-resistant agent is introduced immediately on completion of first-line chemotherapy. Potential rationales for maintenance therapy include increased exposure to effective therapies, decreasing chemotherapy resistance, optimizing efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents, antiangiogenic effects, and altering antitumor immunity. To date, switch maintenance therapy strategies with pemetrexed and erlotinib have demonstrated improved overall survival, resulting in US Food and Drug Administration approval for this indication. Recently, continuation maintenance with pemetrexed was found to prolong overall survival as well. Factors predicting benefit from maintenance chemotherapy include the degree of response to first-line therapy, performance status, the likelihood of receiving further therapy at the time of progression, and tumor histology and molecular characteristics. Several aspects of maintenance therapy have raised considerable debate in the thoracic oncology community, including clinical trial end points, the prevalence of second-line chemotherapy administration, the role of treatment-free intervals, quality of life, economic considerations, and whether progression-free survival is a worthy therapeutic goal in this disease setting.

Maintenance therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: ready for clinical practice?

The treatment paradigm for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer has changed in recent years with the importance of histological subtyping for the choice of chemotherapy, and the use of molecular markers to select patients for targeted therapy. Maintenance therapy (MT) is another focus of interest. The potential benefit of MT for the patient is that it prolongs tumor control reached with first-line chemotherapy in order to improve overall survival with little added toxicity. Historical studies have never reached this goal, as the agents used for MT were too poorly tolerated. We review the data of the two types of recent MT studies, 'continuation' and 'switch' or 'consolidation' MT. We comment on how the benefits demonstrated in these studies may change clinical practice and reflect on factors that may identify subgroups of patients who derive the greatest benefit from MT in general, as this will help in a rational use of MT.

Improving quality and addressing the rising costs of cancer care: two birds, one stone

The authors discuss the current state of Medicare reimbursement policy and outline their recently published model to link improvements in the quality of cancer care to reductions in overall cost.

Cross-market cost-effectiveness analysis of erlotinib as first-line maintenance treatment for patients with stable non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Platinum-doublet, first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is limited to 4-6 cycles. An alternative strategy used to prolong the duration of first-line treatment and extend survival in metastatic NSCLC is first-line maintenance therapy. Erlotinib was approved for first-line maintenance in a stable disease population following results from a randomized, controlled Phase III trial comparing erlotinib with best supportive care. We aimed to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of erlotinib 150 mg/day versus best supportive care when used as first-line maintenance therapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and stable disease.

METHODS

An economic decision model was developed using patient-level data for progression-free survival and overall survival from the SATURN (SequentiAl Tarceva in UnResectable NSCLC) study. An area under the curve model was developed; all patients entered the model in the progression-free survival health state and, after each month, moved to progression or death. A time horizon of 5 years was used. The model was conducted from the perspective of national health care payers in France, Germany, and Italy. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Treatment with erlotinib in first-line maintenance resulted in a mean life expectancy of 1.39 years in all countries, compared with a mean 1.11 years with best supportive care, which represents 0.28 life-years (3.4 life-months) gained with erlotinib versus best supportive care. In the base-case analysis, the cost per life-year gained was €39,783, €46,931, and €27,885 in France, Germany, and Italy, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Erlotinib is a cost-effective treatment option when used as first-line maintenance therapy for locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.