Health technology assessment (HTA) in England, France and Germany: what do matched drug pairs tell us about recommendations by national HTA agencies?

Aims: To explore health technology assessment (HTA) outcomes of matched drug pairs by national agencies in Germany (Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss, GBA), France (Haute Autorité de Santé, HAS) and England and Wales (NICE). Methods: We considered published GBA decisions, HAS reports and NICE guidance from January 2011 to June 2018. HTAs of matched pairs were compared overall, and for non-cancer and cancer drugs separately. We further analyzed the role of additional attributes related to cancer therapies. Results: Matched pairs show higher concordance for GBA/HAS than for GBA/NICE and HAS/NICE. Overall, NICE evaluated technologies more favorably than GBA and HAS. GBA appraisals of cancer drugs, however, tended to be more positive than cancer-related recommendations by NICE and HAS. Conclusion: The findings indicate substantial variations in HTAs, although cancer-related outcomes seem to diverge less than non-cancer results.

The impact of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation on the mortality of poor-risk non-Hodgkin lymphoma: an intent-to-transplant analysis.

Purpose of this single-centre retrospective study was to assess the outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) for relapsed/refractory (r/r) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) by intent-to-transplant (ITT). Included were all consecutive patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) for whom a donor search was performed between 2004 and 2018. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) measured from search initiation. A donor search was initiated for 189 patients (DLBCL 61, FL 32, MCL 43, and PTCL 53), with 76% of the patients having active disease. OS at 5 years after search initiation for DLBCL, FL, MCL, and PTCL was 26%, 44%, 52%, and 50%, respectively. AlloHCT was performed in 137 patients (72%; DLBCL 64%). Main reason for not undergoing alloHCT was disease progression, whereas donor unavailability accounted for only 4% of pretransplantation failures. These results suggest that survival of patients with r/r NHL entering the alloHCT route may be overestimated by a factor of 1.2-1.4 if based on actually transplanted patients only. This effect should be taken into account when using alloHCT as benchmark for new therapeutic approaches for the treatment of poor-risk NHL.

CAR T cells or allogeneic transplantation as standard of care for advanced large B-cell lymphoma: an intent-to-treat comparison.

CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell treatment has evolved as standard of care (SOC) for multiply relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). However, its potential benefit over allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) remains unclear. We compared outcomes with both types of cellular immunotherapy (CI) by intention to treat (ITT). Eligble were all patients with R/R LBCL and institutional tumor board decision recommending SOC CAR T-cell treatment between July 2018 and February 2020, or alloHCT between January 2004 and February 2020. Primary end point was overall survival (OS) from indication. Altogether, 41 and 60 patients for whom CAR T cells and alloHCT were intended, respectively, were included. In both cohorts, virtually all patients had active disease at indication. CI was recommended as part of second-line therapy for 21 alloHCT patients but no CAR T-cell patients. Median OS from indication was 475 days with CAR T cells vs 285 days with alloHCT (P = .88) and 222 days for 39 patients for whom alloHCT beyond second line was recommended (P = .08). Of CAR T-cell and alloHCT patients, 73% and 65%, respectively, proceeded to CI. After CI, 12-month estimates for nonrelapse mortality, relapse incidence, progression-free survival, and OS for CAR T cells vs alloHCT were 3% vs 21% (P = .04), 59% vs 44% (P = .12), 39% vs 33% (P = .97), and 68% vs 54% (P = .32), respectively. In conclusion, CAR T-cell outcomes were not inferior to alloHCT outcomes, whether measured by ITT or from CI administration, supporting strategies preferring CAR T cells over alloHCT as first CI for multiply R/R LBCL.