Anticancer drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for gastrointestinal malignancies: Clinical benefit and price considerations.

BACKGROUND: The cost of new anticancer drugs is rising. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit and price of anti-cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for advanced gastrointestinal cancers. METHODS: Drugs approved between 2006 and 2017 for advanced GI malignancies were identified from FDA.gov, and their updated supporting trial data were searched. Incremental clinical benefit was quantified by using ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (grade 0-5) and ASCO Value Framework version 2 (score range -20 to 180). Higher scores indicate larger net benefit, and substantial benefit was defined as score 4 or 5 by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The Micromedex REDBOOK was used to estimate the monthly average wholesale price (AWP) and total drug price (TDP) over the median treatment duration per patient. Clinical benefit, AWP and TDP of each drug class were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 16 GI cancer drugs received FDA approval for 24 indications, including five monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), five oral targeted therapies (TT), two immunotherapeutics (IO), three cytotoxic chemotherapies (CT), and one recombinant fusion protein (aflibercept). Most supporting trials (82%) reported overall survival benefit of less than 3 months and no significant improvement in quality of life. Only five agents (including one TT and one IO) with 21% the of approved indications met the ESMO's threshold of substantial clinical benefit. Median incremental benefit scores of TT and IO were comparable to other drug classes. However their median TDP was much higher at $153 402 and $98 208, respectively, compared to $30 330 USD per patient for CT. The estimated TDP did not correlate with clinical benefit scores. CONCLUSION: Most FDA-approved gastrointestinal cancer drugs do not meet the ESMO threshold of substantial clinical benefit. TT and IO are estimated to carry significant drug costs, and further cost analysis of these drugs is urgently needed.

Medical management of gastric cancer: a 2017 update.

Gastric cancer remains a considerable health burden throughout the world. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) analysis has recently unveiled 4 genotypes of gastric cancer with data not ready to change treatment strategy yet. A multimodality approach to therapy is the cornerstone of screening, diagnosing, staging, treating and supporting patients with gastric cancer. The evidence-based approach to localized gastric cancer (>cT1b) is to use an either preoperative or postoperative strategy to maximize the benefit of surgery. The focus of future research is to optimize chemotherapy regimens, determine the role of radiation therapy and investigate the effect of treatment timing. In metastatic gastric cancer, biologic therapies have been introduced targeting markers shown to be prognostic. The results of ongoing randomized controlled phase 3 trials using targeted and immunotherapy agents, either in combination or alone, have the potential to alter the current treatment landscape of advanced gastric cancer.

Patterns of relapse in patients with localized gastric adenocarcinoma who had surgery with or without adjunctive therapy: costs and effectiveness of surveillance.

PURPOSE: After therapy of localized gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) patients, the costs of surveillance, relapse patterns, and possibility of salvage are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 246 patients, who after having a negative peritoneal staging, received therapy (any therapy which included surgery) and were surveyed (every 3-6 months in the first 3 years, then yearly; ∼10 CTs and ∼7 endoscopies per patient). We used the 2016 Medicare dollars reimbursed as the "costs" for surveillance. RESULTS: Common features were: Caucasians (57%), men (60%), poorly differentiated histology (76%), preoperative chemotherapy (74%), preoperative chemoradiation (59%), and had surgery (100%). At a median follow-up of 3.7 years (range, 0.1 to 18.3), the median overall survival (OS) was 9.2 years (95% CI, 6.0 to 11.2). Tumor grade (p = 0.02), p/yp stage (p < 0.001), % residual GAC (p = 0.05), the R status (p = 0.01), total gastrectomy (p = 0.001), and relapse type (p = 0.02) were associated with OS. Relapse occurred in 79 (32%) patients (only 8% were local-regional) and 90% occurred within 36 months of surgery. P/yp stage (p < 0.001) and total gastrectomy (p = 0.01) were independent prognosticators for OS in the multivariate analysis. Only 1 relapsed patient had successful salvage therapy. The estimated reimbursement for imaging studies and endoscopies was $1,761,221.91 (marked underestimation of actual costs). CONCLUSIONS: The median OS of localized GAC patients was excellent with infrequent local-regional relapses. Rigorous surveillance had a low yield and high "costs". Our data suggest that less frequent surveillance intervals and limiting expensive investigations to symptomatic patients may be warranted.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment in patients with gastric and gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma undergoing gastrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify clinical and geriatric assessment variables associated with outcome in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma who have undergone gastrectomy. METHODS: We reviewed demographic, clinical, and geriatric assessment variables, including recent falls, pain, performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, assistive device use, comorbidity, polypharmacy, and weight change, for patients undergoing gastrectomy between 2005 and 2014. Outcome variables included morbidity, mortality, hospital length of stay, and readmission. RESULTS: Of 279 patients, 133 (48%) underwent total gastrectomy. The 90-day major morbidity rate was 24% and the mortality rate was 1%. Length of hospital stay ≥ 14 days occurred in 38%, with readmission within 30 days in 13%. On multivariate analysis, gastroesophageal junction involvement, (odds ratio [OR] 2.5, 95% confidence interval [1.1-5.8]), additional organ resection, (OR 3.2, [1.6-6.3]), pain score >0 (OR 3.8, [1.6-8.7]), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status >0, (OR 2.3, [1.2-4.6]), and polypharmacy (OR 2.4, [1.1-5.2]) were associated with major morbidity. Hospital stay ≥ 14 days was associated with age ≥ 75 years (OR 3.9, [1.7-9.2]), total gastrectomy (OR 3.5, [2.0-6.3]), performance status >0 (OR 1.8, [1.0-3.2]), and preoperative chemotherapy (OR 0.3, [0.2-0.7]). CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are needed to identify methods to improve performance status, as this may improve postoperative complications and resource utilization.

Anti-angiogenic agent ramucirumab: meaningful or marginal?

Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B) targets VEGFR-2. Ramucirumab is being investigated in many malignancies including gastric cancer. The Phase III trial in patients with advanced breast cancer failed to improve the primary end point The REGARD trial, a Phase III study, in patients with advanced gastric cancer in the second line setting, had a marginal improvement in overall survival but did not achieve the expected hazard ratio target (of 0.69) and the median duration of therapy with ramucirumab was meager 8 weeks (only 2 weeks longer than the placebo's). Other notable agents in the second line setting are docetaxel and irinotecan. Preliminary results of the RAINBOW trial suggest that ramucirumab may be providing more than marginal advantage. In this review, we briefly summarize the process of angiogenesis and address the emerging cost-benefit issues that surround all newly developed agents including ramucirumab.