Off-label use of anticancer drugs in eastern Switzerland: a population-based prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: Prevalence data on the off-label use (OLU) of anticancer drugs are limited despite OLU being controversial for medical, pharmaco-economic, and ethical reasons. We therefore quantified and characterized the OLU of anticancer drugs and compared OLU based on the national drug label with international treatment recommendations. METHODS: We prospectively collected data on patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy between October and December 2012 at hospitals affiliated with the Eastern Switzerland Oncology Network. Individual data on patient characteristics, tumor disease, and systemic treatment were collected, and each individual treatment was compared with the national drug label and international treatment guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 985 consecutive patients receiving 1,737 anticancer drug treatments were included in the study. Overall, 32.4 % of all patients received at least one off-label drug, corresponding to 27.2 % of all anticancer drugs administered. Major reasons for OLU were the lack of approval for the specific disease entity (15.7 %) and modified application of the anticancer drug (10 %). OLU that was unsupported by the current European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) treatment recommendations was rare (6.6 %) but higher for bevacizumab (29.6 %) due to its use in treating advanced ovarian cancer beyond the second-line setting and advanced breast cancer beyond the first-line setting and for lenalidomide (22.6 %) due to its use in treating Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. CONCLUSIONS: Based on data collected on our patient cohort, OLU of anticancer drugs in a European clinical setting applies to one-third of all cancer patients. ESMO-unsupported use of chemotherapies or molecularly-targeted drugs is rare, opposing concerns that the off-label use of newer anticancer drugs is a substantial clinical problem.

Addition of cetuximab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adding cetuximab to standard chemotherapy results in a moderate increase of overall survival in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but the cost-effectiveness is unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was constructed based on the results of the First-Line ErbituX in lung cancer randomized trial, adding cetuximab to cisplatin-vinorelbine first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of adding cetuximab, expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and relative to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €60 000/QALY. The impact of cetuximab intermittent dosing schedules on the ICER was also evaluated. RESULTS: Adding cetuximab to standard chemotherapy leads to a gain of 0.07 QALYs per patient at an additional cost of €26 088. The ICER for adding cetuximab to chemotherapy was €376 205 per QALY gained. Intermittent cetuximab dosing schedules resulted in ICERs per QALY gained between €31 300 and €83 100, under the assumption of equal efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: From a health economic perspective, the addition of cetuximab to standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor-expressing advanced NSCLC cannot be recommended to date, due to a high ICER compared with other health care interventions. Treatment schedules resulting in more favorable cost-utility ratios should be evaluated.