Cost-effectiveness analysis of using innovative therapies for the management of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis in Spain.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tofacitinib in comparison to vedolizumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (UC) after failure or intolerance to conventional therapy (bio-naive) or first-line biologic treatment (bio-experienced), from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A lifetime Markov model with eight-week cycles was developed including five health states: remission, response, active UC, remission after surgery, and death. Response and remission probabilities (for induction and maintenance periods) were obtained from a multinomial network meta-analysis. Drug acquisition - biosimilar prices included - (ex-factory price with mandatory deductions), administration, surgery, patient management, and adverse event management costs (€, year 2019) were considered. A 3% discount rate (cost/outcomes) was applied. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted. RESULTS: Tofacitinib was dominant versus vedolizumab (both in bio-naive and bio-experienced patients) entailing total cost savings of €23,816 (bio-naïve) and €11,438 (bio-experienced). Differences in quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) were smaller than 0.1 for both populations. PSA results showed that tofacitinib has a high probability of being cost-effective (bio-naïve: 82.5%; bio-experienced: 90.6%) versus vedolizumab. CONCLUSIONS: From the Spanish NHS perspective, tofacitinib could be a dominant treatment (less costly and more effective) in comparison to vedolizumab, with relevant cost savings and similar QALY gains.

Current Attitudes toward Unfunded Cancer Therapies among Canadian Medical Oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Despite successes in the development of innovative anticancer therapies, the fiscal and capacity restraints of the Canadian public healthcare system result in challenges with drug access. A meaningful proportion of systemic therapies ultimately do not receive public funding despite supporting clinical evidence. In this study, we assessed Canadian medical oncologists' current attitudes toward discussing publicly unfunded cancer treatments with patients and predictors of different practices. METHODS: A web-based survey consisting of multiple choice and case-based scenarios was distributed to medical oncologists identified through the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada directory. RESULTS: A total of 116 responses were received. Almost all respondents reported discussing publicly unfunded treatments, including those who did so for Health Canada (HC) approved treatments (50%) and those who discussed off-label treatments (i.e., not HC approved) as guided by national guidelines (48%). Respondents in practice for over 15 years versus less than 5 years (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.50, p = 0.002) and those who worked in a community practice versus comprehensive cancer center (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.91, p = 0.04) were significantly less likely to discuss off-label treatment options with their patients. Almost half of respondents (47%) indicated that their institution did not permit the administration of unfunded treatments. CONCLUSIONS: There is variability in medical oncologists' practices when it comes to discussing unfunded therapies. Given the limitations within Canada's publicly funded healthcare system, physicians are faced with the challenge of navigating an increasingly complex balance between patient care and available resources. Engagement of relevant stakeholders and policy makers is crucial in the continued evaluation of Canada's drug funding process.

Adaptive innovations to provide services to children with developmental disabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Children with developmental disabilities are experiencing significant challenges to service access due to suspension of in-person assessments during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Telehealth is rapidly becoming the new service delivery model, which presents a unique opportunity for innovation in care that could be beneficial in the post-pandemic period. For example, using a combination of in-home video and telehealth options could form the first step in developmental assessment, allowing children to receive the necessary supports without delay. Recent telehealth funding is welcome but additional Medicare items for joint consultations including general practitioners (GPs), and paediatric, mental health and allied health professionals is critical.

Establishment and implementation of Cancer Genomic Medicine in Japan.

Approximately 1 in 2 Japanese people are estimated to be diagnosed with cancer during their lifetime. Cancer still remains the leading cause of death in Japan, therefore the government of Japan has decided to develop a better cancer control policy and launched the Cancer Genomic Medicine (CGM) program. The Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (MHLW) held a consortium at their headquarters with leading academic authorities and the representatives of related organizations to discuss ways to advance CGM in Japan. Based on the report of the consortium, the CGM system under the national health insurance system has gradually been realized. Eleven hospitals were designated in February 2018 as core hospitals for CGM; subsequently, the MHLW built the Center for Cancer Genomics and Advanced Therapeutics (C-CAT) as an institution to aggregate and manage genomic and clinical information on cancer patients, and support appropriate secondary use of the aggregated information to develop research aimed at medical innovation. As the first step in Japan's CGM in routine practice, in June 2019 the MHLW started reimbursement of 2 types of tumor profiling tests for advanced solid cancer patients using the national insurance system. Japan's CGM has swiftly been spreading nationwide with the collaboration of 167 hospitals and patients. The health and research authorities are expected to embody personalized cancer medicine and promote CGM utilizing state-of-the-art technologies.

[Gene-based therapies of spinal muscular atrophy: a piece of history of medicine]. / Thérapies géniques de l'amyotrophie spinale infantile - Un morceau d'histoire de la médecine.

It is worth stating that a generation is needed to bring about a new family of drugs. After the deciphering of the genetic cause in 1995, two innovative classes of therapeutics are now available for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA): the repeated administration of antisens oligonucleotides and the one-shot administration of a scAAV9-SMN as a gene therapy. By addressing the genetic mechanisms of the disease, these drugs fundamentally change its course. These major advances in an extremely severe disease, often fatal before the age of 18 months in the type 1 form (50% of patients), pave the way for the treatment of other serious pathologies of the nervous or neuromuscular system, and provide unambiguous evidence of the effectiveness of these new classes of drugs called to address a number of genetic or acquired diseases. These breakthroughs raise also new scientific and technological questions (limited production yields of gene therapy drugs) but also ethical issues (access of patients to these innovative therapies) that resonate beyond this disease alone.

TITLE: Thérapies géniques de l'amyotrophie spinale infantile - Un morceau d'histoire de la médecine. ABSTRACT: On convient de dire qu'une génération est nécessaire pour faire émerger une nouvelle famille de médicaments. L'amyotrophie spinale infantile (SMA), après l'élucidation du gène causal en 1995, dispose depuis peu de deux classes innovantes de thérapeutiques : l'administration répétée d'oligonucléotides antisens et l'administration unique d'une thérapie génique par scAAV9-SMN. En s'adressant aux mécanismes génétiques de la maladie, elles en modifient fondamentalement le cours. Ces avancées majeures dans une maladie extrêmement sévère, mortelle souvent avant l'âge de 18 mois dans les formes de type 1 (50 % des malades), ouvrent la voie pour d'autres pathologies graves du système nerveux ou neuromusculaire, et apportent une preuve déterminante de l'efficacité de ces classes nouvelles de produits appelés à s'adresser à de nombreuses maladies génétiques ou acquises. Elles génèrent aussi de nouvelles questions d'ordre scientifique et technologique (capacités limitées de production des quantités nécessaires en thérapie génique) mais également d'ordre éthique (conditions d'accès des malades à ces thérapies innovantes), qui résonnent au-delà de cette seule maladie.

Use of Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation in Upper Extremity Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Decision analysis allows clinicians to apply evidence-based medicine to guide objective decisions in uncertain scenarios. There is no comprehensive review summarizing the various decision analysis tools used. The authors aimed to appraise and review the decision analytic models used in hand surgery. METHODS: A search of English articles on the PubMed, Ovid, and Embase databases was performed. All articles, regardless of date of publishing, were considered. Two reviewers, based on strict inclusion criteria, independently assessed each article. RESULTS: The search resulted in 5525 abstracts, which yielded 30 studies that met inclusion criteria. Included studies were grouped according to medical indications, with scaphoid fractures (n = 6) and carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 5) being the most commonly reported. Included articles used decision analysis (n = 15) and/or economic analyses (n = 23) to discuss diagnostic strategies or compare treatments. The three most common outcomes reported were utility (n = 12), cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 16), and quality-adjusted life-years (n = 16). The decision analysis models compared diagnostic strategies, management options, and novel treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Decision analysis is increasingly popular in hand surgery. It is useful for comparing surgical strategies through evaluation of quality-of-life outcomes and costing data. The most common model was a simple decision tree. The quality of decision analysis models can be improved with the addition of sensitivity analysis. Surgeons should be familiar with the principles of decision analysis, so that complex decisions can be evaluated using rigorous probabilistic models that combine risks and benefits of multiple strategies.

What Is the Value of Innovative Pharmaceutical Therapies in Oncology and Hematology? A Willingness-to-Pay Study in Bulgaria.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the views of Bulgarian oncologists and hematologists regarding the value of innovative pharmaceutical treatments in their clinical area. METHODS: Physicians were invited to review a life-prolonging scenario and to indicate what minimum improvement in median survival a new treatment would have to generate for them to recommend it over the standard of care. Respondents were also asked to state the highest cost at which they would recommend a new therapy that would improve patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) but would have no impact on survival. In addition, physicians were asked whether they would consider different responses under certain circumstances. Responses were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each scenario. RESULTS: In the life-prolonging scenario, participants required a median of 12-month improvement in the survival to reimburse a new therapy at an incremental cost of €50 000, implying a willingness-to-pay of €50 000 per QALY gained. In the HRQoL-enhancing scenario, respondents indicated a €100 000 median cost per QALY gained. We observed a significant variation in responses. Although the median ICER for better HRQoL was twice as high as the median ICER for longer survival, 5% trimmed mean values were almost equal. Physicians did not believe that a higher ICER should be used for the treatment of children or for rare diseases. CONCLUSIONS: We found a high willingness-to-pay for innovative drugs in oncology and hematology. The wide range of responses observed, however, indirectly implies a lack of consensus on the use of explicit ICER thresholds in Bulgaria.

Update of survival and cost of metastatic melanoma with new drugs: Estimations from the MelBase cohort.

PURPOSE: Since 2011, significant progress was observed in metastatic melanoma (MM), with the commercialisation of seven immunotherapies or targeted therapies, which showed significant improvement in survival. In France, in 2004, the cost of MM was estimated at €1634 per patient; this cost has not been re-estimated since. This study provided an update on survival and cost in real-life clinical practice. METHODS: Clinical and economic data (treatments, hospitalisations, radiotherapy sessions, visits, imaging and biological exams) were extracted from the prospective MelBase cohort, collecting individual data in 955 patients in 26 hospitals, from diagnosis of metastatic disease until death. Survival was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Costs were calculated from the health insurance perspective using French tariffs. For live patients, survival and costs were extrapolated using a multistate model, describing the 5-year course of the disease according to patient prognostic factors and number of treatment lines. RESULTS: Since the availability of new drugs, the mean survival time of MM patients has increased to 23.6 months (95%confidence interval [CI] :21.2;26.6), with 58% of patients receiving a second line of treatment. Mean management costs increased to €269,682 (95%CI:244,196;304,916) per patient. Drugs accounted for 80% of the total cost. CONCLUSION: This study is the first that evaluated the impact of immunotherapies and targeted therapies both on survival and cost in real-life conditions. Alongside the introduction of breakthrough therapies in the first and subsequent lines, MM has been associated with a significant increase in survival but also in costs, raising the question of financial sustainability.

Cost Estimate of Immune-Related Adverse Reactions Associated with Innovative Treatments of Metastatic Melanoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Immuno-oncology therapies represent a new treatment opportunity for patients affected by metastatic melanoma. The purpose of this study was to estimate the costs of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with the new anti-PD1 immuno-oncology therapies, with the anti-CTLA-4 immuno-oncology therapy and with the combined therapy (CTLA4 + anti-PD1) in patients affected by metastatic melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A probabilistic cost-of-illness (COI) model was developed to estimate the management costs of grade ≥ 3 adverse events associated with the new anti-PD1 therapies (pembrolizumab and nivolumab), the anti-CTLA-4 therapy (ipilimumab) and the combined therapy CTLA4 + anti-PD1 (nivolumab + ipilimumab) for the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma from the National Health Service (NHS) perspective in Italy. Identification of the epidemiological and cost parameters was carried out through a systematic literature review (SLR). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty and variation in the model results. RESULTS: The model estimated a cost associated with the management of grade ≥ 3 immune-related adverse events in patients with metastatic melanoma equal to €176.2 (95% CI 63.5-335.0) for anti-CTLA-4 therapy, €48.6 (95% CI 40.1-58.5) for the new anti-PDI therapies and €276.8 (95% CI 240.4-316.2) for the combined therapy. Among the innovative therapies for the considered metastatic melanoma, the combined therapy was the most expensive innovative treatment in terms of event management of immune-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events. CONCLUSION: This study may represent a useful tool to understand the economic burden associated with the management of irAEs associated with patients affected by metastatic melanoma.

Multi-indication and Combination Pricing and Reimbursement of Pharmaceuticals: Opportunities for Improved Health Care through Faster Uptake of New Innovations.

Many pharmaceuticals are effective in multiple indications and the degree of effectiveness may differ. A product-based pricing and reimbursement system with a single price per product is insufficient to reflect the variable values between different indications. The objective of this article is to present examples of actual pricing and reimbursement decisions using current value-based pricing in Sweden and to discuss their implications and possible solutions. The value of several cancer drugs was estimated for various indications based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of 1 million SEK (EUR 104,000) per QALY gained. For some drugs, the estimated value was higher than the drug acquisition cost in several indications, whilst in others, the estimated value was lower than the drug acquisition cost. Drugs used in combination present a special case. If a drug prolongs survival and consequently also a continued use of the anchor drug, the combination use may not be cost effective even at a zero price. In a product-based pricing and reimbursement system, patients may not get access to drugs or access may be delayed and manufacturers may be discouraged to invest in future indications. To overcome these issues, there are several approaches to link price and value. One approach is a "weighted-average" price based on an average of the value across all indications. Another is "multi-indication pricing," which enables price differentiation between indications. However, there are several barriers for applying multi-indication pricing and reimbursement schemes. One barrier is the lack of existing administrative infrastructure to track patients' indications.

[A pragmatic approach to managing expensive therapies]. / Une approche pragmatique pour gérer les traitements onéreux - Chroniques génomiques.

Inflated drug prices necessarily raise the issue of rational allocation of health care resources. The system operated by the NICE agency in the UK attempts to do this by calculating the cost per quality-adjusted life year gained (QALY) and recommending funding only for drugs whose cost per QALY falls under a certain threshold. The whole process is documented in detail and easily accessible, and often results in significant discounts on drug prices. Given that some kind of rationing of health care is inevitable, the rational and transparent process followed by NICE has a number of positive features.

More than 5000 patients with metastatic melanoma in Europe per year do not have access to recommended first-line innovative treatments.

BACKGROUND: Despite the efficacy of innovative treatments for metastatic melanoma, their high costs has led to disparities in cancer care among different European countries. We analysed the availability of these innovative therapies in Europe and estimated the number of patients without access to first-line recommended treatment per current guidelines of professional entities such as the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and European Dermatology Forum (EDF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Web-based online survey was conducted in 30 European countries with questions about the treatment schedules from 1st May 2015 to 1st May 2016: number of metastatic melanoma patients, registration and reimbursement of innovative medicines (updated data, as of 1st October 2016), percentage of patients treated and availability of clinical studies and compassionate-use programmes. RESULTS: The recommended BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) + MEK inhibitor (MEKi) combination was both registered and fully reimbursed in 9/30 (30%) countries, and in 13/30 (43%) (all from Eastern Europe) not reimbursed. First-line immunotherapy with anti-PD1 antibodies was registered and fully reimbursed in 14/30 (47%) countries, while in 13/30 (43%) (all from Eastern Europe) not reimbursed. It was estimated that in Europe 19,600 patients with metastatic melanoma are treated, and 5238 (27%) do not have access to recommended first-line therapy. Significant correlation was found between human development index (HDI, UNDP report 2015), (r = 0.662; p < 0.001), health expenditure per capita (r = 0.695; p < 0.001) and the Mackenbach score of health policy performance (r = 0.765; p < 0.001) with the percentage of patients treated with innovative medicines and a number of reimbursed medicines. CONCLUSIONS: Great discrepancy exists in metastatic melanoma treatment across Europe. It is crucial to increase the awareness of national and European policymakers, oncological societies, melanoma patients' associations and pharma industry.

Putting a price tag on novel autologous cellular therapies.

Cell therapies, especially autologous therapies, pose significant challenges to researchers who wish to move from small, probably academic, methods of manufacture to full commercial scale. There is a dearth of reliable information about the costs of operation, and this makes it difficult to predict with confidence the investment needed to translate the innovations to the clinic, other than as small-scale, clinician-led prescriptions. Here, we provide an example of the results of a cost model that takes into account the fixed and variable costs of manufacture of one such therapy. We also highlight the different factors that influence the product final pricing strategy. Our findings illustrate the need for cooperative and collective action by the research community in pre-competitive research to generate the operational models that are much needed to increase confidence in process development for these advanced products.