Inappropriate use of progression-free survival in cancer drug approvals

BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m770
Author(s):  
Huseyin Naci ◽  
Courtney Davis
2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18385-e18385
Author(s):  
Ryan Huey ◽  
Seerat Anand ◽  
Jane Rogers ◽  
Arvind Dasari ◽  
Gauri Rajani Varadhachary ◽  
...  

e18385 Background: Value based drug pricing is emerging as an imperative health care precept in recognition of the ever-increasing drug costs, especially in oncology. Though novel therapies are regularly approved based on benefit, they are often associated with physical and financial toxicities to patients. We aimed to assess the value of FDA approved oncology drugs defined as their expected clinical benefit compared to their toxicities and costs. Methods: We reviewed all new cancer drug approvals by the FDA from 7/2008-6/2018. Current analysis was restricted to approvals based on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Data regarding approval indication, effect size, and toxicity were collected from FDA website and publications. Toxicity was estimated as adverse events ≥ grade 3 (or serious adverse events) as reported. Micromedex RED BOOK was used to estimate the total drug price using 2018 average wholesale prices. Price was estimated over 3 months to account for difference in drug regimens. Results: Among the 231 trials used by FDA for approvals in oncology, 115 had OS or PFS as their primary endpoint. Median patients per trial was 539. Of 79 trials with a PFS endpoint, the median HR was 0.50 (range: 0.15 - 0.91); median 3-month drug price was $45,903.72. Compared to the control arm, median toxicity for new drugs was 7% higher (range: -34.4 - 55%). Correlation of HR benefit to 3-month price was 0.06 (95% CI: -0.17 - 0.28, P = 0.61). Correlation of net toxicities to 3-month price was 0.01 (95% CI: -0.25 - 0.26, P = 0.94). Of 43 trials with an OS endpoint, the median HR was 0.72 (range: 0.37 - 0.94); median 3-month price was $43,523.46. Relative to control arm, median toxicity for new drugs was 4% higher (range: -34.4 - 45.8%). Correlation of HR benefit to 3-month price was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.08 - 0.62, P = 0.012). Correlation of net toxicities to 3-month price was -0.12 (95% CI: -0.45 - 0.24, P = 0.50). Conclusions: Drug approvals in oncology come with a high cost and drug prices have very little correlation with estimated benefit in outcomes and toxicities. As policies evolve to promote higher value in health care, attention should be paid to benefits of drugs in relation to pricing and using biomarker-based patient selection to maximize benefits and minimize toxicities.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Dongdong Xiao ◽  
Yujie Zhou ◽  
Xuan Wang ◽  
Hongyang Zhao ◽  
Chuansheng Nie ◽  
...  

Background. Ferroptosis is a recently identified cell death pathway, and the susceptibility to ferroptosis inducers varies among cancer cell types. There have been recent attempts to clarify the mechanisms implicated in ferroptosis, glioma invasion, and the immune microenvironment but little is known about ferroptosis regulation in GBM. Methods. Screening ferroptosis-related genes from published reports and existing databases, we constructed an integrated model based on the RNA-sequencing data in GBM. The association of FRGPRS and overall survival is identified and validated across several different datasets. Genomic and clinical characteristics, immune infiltration, enriched pathways, pan-cancer, drug resistance, and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy are compared among various FRGPRS subgroups. Results. We identified and confirmed the influences of five ferroptosis key hub genes in the FRGPRS model. The FRGPRS model could serve to predict overall survival and progression-free survival in GBM patients, and high FRGPRS was associated with comparatively stronger immunity, higher proportions of tumour tissue, and good cytolytic immune and chemotherapeutics response in GBM patients. Conclusions. The five ferroptosis key hub genes constituting the FRGPRS model could serve to predict overall survival and progression-free survival in patients with GBM and help guide timely and efficacious therapeutic strategies customised and optimised for each individual patient. This discovery may lay the foundation for the development and optimisation of other iterations of this model for the improved forecasting, detection, and treatment of other malignancies notorious for their drug resistance and immune escape.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 115-115
Author(s):  
Ryan Huey ◽  
Seerat Anand ◽  
Jane Elizabeth Rogers ◽  
Arvind Dasari ◽  
Gauri Rajani Varadhachary ◽  
...  

115 Background: Value based drug pricing is emerging as an imperative health care precept in recognition of the ever-increasing drug costs, especially in oncology. Though novel therapies are regularly approved based on benefit, they are often associated with physical and financial toxicities to patients. We aimed to assess the value of FDA approved oncology drugs defined as their expected clinical benefit compared to their toxicities and costs. Methods: We reviewed all new cancer drug approvals by the FDA from 7/2008-6/2018. Current analysis was restricted to approvals based on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Data regarding approval indication, effect size, and toxicity were collected from FDA website and publications. Toxicity was estimated as adverse events ≥ grade 3 (or serious adverse events) as reported. Micromedex RED BOOK was used to estimate the total drug price using 2018 average wholesale prices. Price was estimated over 3 months to account for difference in drug regimens. Results: Among the 231 trials used by FDA for approvals in oncology, 115 had OS or PFS as their primary endpoint. Median patients per trial was 539. Of 79 trials with a PFS endpoint, the median HR was 0.50 (range: 0.15 - 0.91); median 3-month drug price was $45,903.72. Compared to the control arm, median toxicity for new drugs was 7% higher (range: -34.4 - 55%). Correlation of HR benefit to 3-month price was 0.06 (95% CI: -0.17 - 0.28, P = 0.61). Correlation of net toxicities to 3-month price was 0.01 (95% CI: -0.25 - 0.26, P = 0.94). Of 43 trials with an OS endpoint, the median HR was 0.72 (range: 0.37 - 0.94); median 3-month price was $43,523.46. Relative to control arm, median toxicity for new drugs was 4% higher (range: -34.4 - 45.8%). Correlation of HR benefit to 3-month price was 0.38 (95% CI: 0.08 - 0.62, P = 0.012). Correlation of net toxicities to 3-month price was -0.12 (95% CI: -0.45 - 0.24, P = 0.50). Conclusions: Drug approvals in oncology come with a high cost and drug prices have very little correlation with estimated benefit in outcomes and toxicities. As policies evolve to promote higher value in health care, attention should be paid to benefits of drugs in relation to pricing and using biomarker-based patient selection to maximize benefits and minimize toxicities.


2020 ◽  
pp. 75-80
Author(s):  
S.A. Lyalkin ◽  
◽  
L.A. Syvak ◽  
N.O. Verevkina ◽  
◽  
...  

The objective: was to evaluate the efficacy of the first line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Materials and methods. Open randomized study was performed including 122 patients with metastatic TNBC. The efficacy and safety of the first line chemotherapy of regimens АТ (n=59) – group 1, patients received doxorubicine 60 мг/м2 and paclitaxel 175 мг/м2 and ТР (n=63) – group 2, patients received paclitaxel 175 мг/м2 and carboplatin AUC 5 were evaluated. Results. The median duration of response was 9.5 months (4.5–13.25 months) in patients received AT regimen and 8.5 months (4.7–12.25 months), in TP regimen; no statistically significant differences were observed, р=0.836. The median progression free survival was 7 months (95% CI 5–26 months) in group 1 and 7.5 months (95% CI 6–35 months) in group 2, p=0.85. Both chemotherapy regimens (AT and TP) had mild or moderate toxicity profiles (grade 1 or 2 in most patients). No significant difference in gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. The incidence of grade 3–4 neutropenia was higher in patients of group 2 (TP regimen): 42.8% versus 27% (р<0.05). Conclusions. Both regimens of chemotherapy (AT and TP) are appropriate to use in the first line setting in patients with metastatic TNBC. Key words: metastatic triple negative breast cancer, chemotherapy, progression free survival, chemotherapy toxicity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document