Economic impact of using risk models for eligibility selection to the International lung screening Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Using risk models as eligibility criteria for lung screening can reduce race and sex-based disparities. We used data from the International Lung Screening Trial(ILST; NCT02871856) to compare the economic impact of using the PLCOm2012 risk model or the US Preventative Services' categorical age-smoking history-based criteria (USPSTF-2013). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cost-effectiveness of using PLCOm2012 versus USPSTF-2013 was evaluated with a decision analytic model based on the ILST and other screening trials. The primary outcomes were costs in 2020 International Dollars ($), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and incremental net benefit (INB, in $ per QALY). Secondary outcomes were selection characteristics and cancer detection rates (CDR). RESULTS: Compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria, the PLCOm2012 risk model resulted in $355 of cost savings per 0.2 QALYs gained (INB=$4294 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $20 000/QALY (95 %CI: $4205-$4383). Using the risk model was more cost-effective in females at both a 1.5 % and 1.7 % 6-year risk threshold (INB=$6616 and $6112, respectively), compared with males ($5221 and $695). The PLCOm2012 model selected more females, more individuals with fewer years of formal education, and more people with other respiratory illnesses in the ILST. The CDR with the risk model was higher in females compared with the USPSTF-2013 criteria (Risk Ratio = 7.67, 95 % CI: 1.87-31.38). CONCLUSION: The PLCOm2012 model saved costs, increased QALYs and mitigated socioeconomic and sex-based disparities in access to screening.

A perspective on life-cycle health technology assessment and real-world evidence for precision oncology in Canada.

Health technology assessment (HTA) can be used to make healthcare systems more equitable and efficient. Advances in precision oncology are challenging conventional thinking about HTA. Precision oncology advances are rapid, involve small patient groups, and are frequently evaluated without a randomized comparison group. In light of these challenges, mechanisms to manage precision oncology uncertainties are critical. We propose a life-cycle HTA framework and outline supporting criteria to manage uncertainties based on real world data collected from learning healthcare systems. If appropriately designed, we argue that life-cycle HTA is the driver of real world evidence generation and furthers our understanding of comparative effectiveness and value. We conclude that life-cycle HTA deliberation processes must be embedded into healthcare systems for an agile response to the constantly changing landscape of precision oncology innovation. We encourage further research outlining the core requirements, infrastructure, and checklists needed to achieve the goal of learning healthcare supporting life-cycle HTA.

Defining a Core Data Set for the Economic Evaluation of Precision Oncology.

OBJECTIVES: Precision oncology is generating vast amounts of multiomic data to improve human health and accelerate research. Existing clinical study designs and attendant data are unable to provide comparative evidence for economic evaluations. This lack of evidence can cause inconsistent and inappropriate reimbursement. Our study defines a core data set to facilitate economic evaluations of precision oncology. METHODS: We conducted a literature review of economic evaluations of next-generation sequencing technologies, a common application of precision oncology, published between 2005 and 2018 and indexed in PubMed (MEDLINE). Based on this review, we developed a preliminary core data set for informal expert feedback. We then used a modified-Delphi approach with individuals involved in implementation and evaluation of precision medicine, including 2 survey rounds followed by a final voting conference to refine the data set. RESULTS: Two authors determined that variation in published data elements was reached after abstraction of 20 economic evaluations. Expert consultation refined the data set to 83 unique data elements, and a multidisciplinary sample of 46 experts participated in the modified-Delphi process. A total of 68 elements (81%) were selected as required, spanning demographics and clinical characteristics, genomic data, cancer treatment, health and quality of life outcomes, and resource use. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness analyses will fail to reflect the real-world impacts of precision oncology without data to accurately characterize patient care trajectories and outcomes. Data collection in accordance with the proposed core data set will promote standardization and enable the generation of decision-grade evidence to inform reimbursement.

FDA Accelerated Approval for Malignant Hematology and Oncology Indications in the Canadian Environment.

Accelerated approval (AA) by the FDA enables earlier access to promising new therapies. Health Canada has a similar process. Canada implemented a national health technology assessment (HTA) for reimbursement decisions in 2011. This study evaluated regulatory and funding timelines and decisions for FDA AA cancer therapies in Canada. The FDA's AA of malignant hematology and oncology from January 2000-December 2019 was reviewed. Dates from Health Canada, HTA decisions and provincial listings were collected. There were 94 FDA AAs, two of which were subsequently withdrawn. Of the 92 AAs, 70 received full (46)/conditional (24) Health Canada approval, and 22 were not filed. Since the introduction of HTA, 31 out of 45 of Health Canada's approved indications underwent HTA review: 18 received a positive recommendation conditional on cost-effectiveness, 8 were not recommended and 5 were withdrawn/suspended. The median time from the AA to any Health Canada approval is 9.4 months, from any Health Canada approval to HTA decision is 5.8 months and from HTA decision to the first formulary listing is 12.0 months. The access and timeline for the first formulary listing differences were observed between the USA and Canada due to the decision of pharmaceutical companies to submit (or not) to regulatory/HTA bodies, national procedural delays with different healthcare delivery models and submission timelines. This study demonstrates that there is delayed access to promising new therapies in Canada.

Readiness of Healthcare Systems to Generate Real-World Evidence: Reliability of CT Radiographic End Points for Evaluation of First-Line Systemic Treatment.

PURPOSE: Regulatory agencies such as the US Food and Drug Administration and health technology assessment bodies are increasingly using real-world evidence (RWE). The ability of healthcare systems to reliably generate response rate and progression-free survival from real-world data is unknown. We examined the capacity of a single-payer system to provide RWE by evaluating the frequency of computed tomography (CT) imaging during standard first-line metastatic systemic treatment of breast, colorectal, and lung cancer. METHODS: A 1-year cohort of patients with metastatic-at-diagnosis breast, colorectal, and lung cancer treated with first-line systemic therapy (excluding hormone therapy) referred to BC Cancer in 2016 was retrospectively reviewed for first-line treatment and CT imaging. Duration of first-line treatment was calculated from the first to the last dose of therapy. CT imaging was counted from the start of therapy to 8 weeks after the last therapy dose. RESULTS: A cohort of 664 patients was identified from the BC Cancer Registry. Distribution of metastatic disease at diagnosis was breast (n = 82), colorectal (n = 214), and lung (n = 368) cancer. For breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, there was a baseline CT within 4 weeks of treatment initiation in 59%, 51%, and 48% of patients, with median duration of first-line treatment of 14.6, 25.3, and 11.9 weeks and median CT imaging interval of 9.1, 9.0, and 6.1 weeks. CONCLUSION: In our publicly funded healthcare system, availability of baseline CT imaging was 48% to 59% and the frequency of assessment ranged from 6.1 to 9.1 weeks, subject to patterns of practice and resource availability. Our system was not capable of providing RWE for image-based end points. Alternative end points should be considered to capitalize on the wealth of real-world data.

Emotional distress and psychosocial needs in patients with breast cancer in British Columbia: younger versus older adults.

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the prevalence of emotional distress and psychosocial needs in young adult (YA, age 18-39) patients at the time of their breast cancer diagnosis compared to older patients. METHODS: Through a province-wide program, BC Cancer patients complete the PsychoSocial Scan for CANcer-Revised (PSSCAN-R) questionnaire, which screens for the presence of symptoms of anxiety and depression and assesses psychosocial needs using the Canadian Problem Checklist (CPC). The study population comprised all breast cancer patients who completed the questionnaire within 6 months of their cancer diagnosis between 2011 and 2016. Clinical information was retrospectively collected from electronic health records. Univariate and multivariate analyses using the X2, Fisher's exact test, and logistical regression were used to compare patient age groups. RESULTS: The cohort included 10,734 breast cancer patients: median age 62, 4% YA, 99% female, and 96% presented with non-metastatic disease. After adjusting for clinical and demographic variables, YA patients were more likely to report depression (33.6% vs. 25.5%, OR 1.47, p = 0.001) and anxiety symptoms (58.6% vs. 35.7%, OR 2.49, p < 0.001) than older patients. Psychosocial needs regarding work/school (OR 3.79, p < 0.001), intimacy/sexuality (OR 2.82, p < 0.001), and finances (OR 2.78, p < 0.001) were more common among YA than older adults. CONCLUSIONS: After a breast cancer diagnosis, YAs have higher levels of emotional distress compared to older patients. Differences in specific psychosocial needs likely reflect differences in life stage between these age groups. The data suggest that YAs warrant specific attention with respect to early psychosocial assessment and tailored intervention.

Assessing the psychosocial needs of newly diagnosed patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer: Identifying factors associated with distress.

OBJECTIVE: The Psychosocial Screen for Cancer (PSSCAN-R) questionnaire is a validated screening tool used to identify the psychosocial needs of patients with cancer. It assesses patients' perceived social supports and psychosocial needs, and the presence of symptoms of depression and anxiety. The study goals were to assess the prevalence and factors associated with distress in patients with newly diagnosed nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: All patients with NSCLC referred to BC Cancer centers from 2011 to 2015, who completed a prospective PSSCAN-R questionnaire at the time of their first visit, were included in the study. Demographics and baseline disease characteristics were collected retrospectively. The chi-squared test, Fisher exact test, and logistical regression analysis were used to compare factors associated with the presence of distress based on sex, age, stage of disease, and performance status (PS). RESULTS: A total of 4281 NSCLC patients completed the PSSCAN-R questionnaire. Baseline characteristics: 70% were greater than or equal to 65, 50% female, 52% metastatic disease, 47% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) greater than or equal to two. Patients who were female, less than 65, have metastatic disease and poor PS were more likely to report subclinical or clinical symptoms of anxiety. Symptoms of depression were associated with younger, female, poor PS patients, and social isolation. CONCLUSIONS: Newly diagnosed patients with NSCLC are likely to report clinical symptoms of anxiety and depression and have a high number of concerns in multiple psychosocial domains. Resource development for lung cancer patients should be based on their care needs with careful consideration of patients' age, gender, stage, and social situation to optimally support their psychosocial needs during treatment and follow-up.

Maintenance chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC: a population-based assessment of eligibility.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance chemotherapy has been incorporated into treatment paradigms for advanced NSCLC. Eligibility criteria include stable disease/partial response and PS 0-1 after a first line platinum doublet. In practice, maintenance can be difficult to deliver due to patient factors and preferences. We propose to examine the proportion of patients eligible for maintenance and factors associated with the delivery of subsequent lines of chemotherapy. METHODS: The BC Cancer Agency provides care to a population of 4.5 million. A retrospective review was conducted of all referred Stage IIIB/IV patients in 2009 who received first line systemic therapy. Baseline characteristics, PS and response after first line and subsequent systemic therapy details were recorded. Patients were deemed potentially maintenance eligible or not based on clinical trial criteria; however maintenance therapy was not delivered to these patients as it was not yet available. RESULTS: 330 patients were identified; 98 were potentially maintenance eligible. The reason for maintenance ineligibility in n = 232; no upfront doublet (n = 41), PS ≥ 2 (n = 38), progressive disease (PD) (n = 53), PS ≥ 2 and PD (n = 62), PS ≥ 2 and unknown response (n = 35), PD and unknown PS (n = 3). Further chemotherapy (2nd line or beyond) was administered in maintenance eligible 68% vs ineligible 56%. Reasons for no further chemotherapy were predominantly decline in PS and brain metastasis. Median OS: 7 m for 1st line only versus 16.8m for ≥ 2 nd line (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our population based study, 30% of advanced NSCLC patients were eligible to receive maintenance chemotherapy based on the clinical trial criteria. Despite a good initial PS and disease control only 68% of maintenance eligible patients received subsequent therapy. A clear survival benefit was seen with ≥ 2 nd line treatment. Maintenance therapy or initiation of early second line therapy should be considered for advanced NSCLC patients to improve survival outcomes.