Development and economic trends in anticancer drugs licensed in the UK from 2015 to 2019.

Analysis of new anticancer drugs licensed in the UK found that 44 new therapies were approved from 2015 to 2019. No other 5-year period has produced as many new therapies. Most new drugs are kinase inhibitors (KIs, N=18) and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs, N=16) with only one classical cytotoxic chemotherapy (CC) licensed. The average median treatment duration has risen by 55 days to 318 days (263 days in 2010-2014). Drug costs have escalated; an average treatment course now costs £62 343, compared to £35 383 in 2010-2014. New drugs are delivering significant clinical benefits with longer treatment durations. However, the financial burden is greater, heralding economic challenges for healthcare providers.

Cancer Drugs: An International Comparison of Postlicensing Price Inflation.

PURPOSE: The cost of cancer drugs forms a rising proportion of health care budgets worldwide. A number of studies have examined international comparisons of initial cost, but there is little work on postlicensing price increases. To examine this, we compared cancer drug prices at initial sale and subsequent price inflation in the United States and United Kingdom and also reviewed relevant price control mechanisms. METHODS: The 10 top-selling cancer drugs were selected, and their prices at initial launch and in 2015 were compared. Standard nondiscounted prices were obtained from the relevant annual copies of the RED BOOK and the British National Formulary. RESULTS: At initial marketing, prices were on average 42% higher in the United States than in the United Kingdom. After licensing in the United States, all 10 drugs had price rises averaging an overall annual 8.8% (range, 1.4% to 24.1%) increase. In comparison, in the United Kingdom, six drugs had unchanged prices, two had decreased prices, and two had modest price increases. The overall annual increase in the United Kingdom was 0.24%. CONCLUSION: Cancer drug prices are rising substantially, both at their initial marketing price and, in the United States, at postlicensing prices. In the United Kingdom, the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme, an agreement between the government and the pharmaceutical industry, controls health care costs while allowing a return on investment and funds for research. The increasing costs of cancer drugs are approaching the limits of sustainability, and a similar government-industry agreement may allow stability for both health care provision and the pharmaceutical industry in the United States.

Activity of eribulin mesylate in heavily pretreated breast cancer granted access via the Cancer Drugs Fund.

AIM: Eribulin mesylate is a synthetic analog of halichondrin B and is licensed for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that has progressed following treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes. It was not deemed to be cost effective based on a cost analysis by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England and therefore it is not funded routinely by the National Health Service. The establishment of the Cancer Drugs Fund in England subsequently enabled access. As with any new chemotherapy drug that enters clinical practice for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) it is often used in heavily pretreated patients and the experience in a routine clinical setting can differ from that in a clinical study. We therefore present the experience of the first 25 cases treated at our institution via the Cancer Drugs Fund. MATERIALS & METHODS: A total of 25 patients were treated and in the 22 assessable cases the objective response rate was 18% (four out of 22), with a clinical benefit rate of 41.0% (9 out of 22). RESULTS: The median time-to-progression and overall survival were 4.08 months and 5.89 months, respectively. There was a significant difference in clinical benefit rate (odds ratio: 0.065; 95% CI: 0-0.529; p = 0.0055), as well as time-to-progression (hazard ratio: 9.18; 95% CI: 2.26-37.38; p = 0.002 adjusted for age at diagnosis and interval between initial MBC diagnosis and commencing eribulin) favoring those patients who had not been rechallenged. There was no significant difference in overall survival (hazard ratio: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.44-3.05; p = 0.770 adjusted for age at diagnosis and interval between initial diagnosis of MBC and commencing eribulin). CONCLUSION: Eribulin mesylate shows clinical activity; however, there appears to be differences in terms of benefit in patients based on whether patients have been rechallenged with an anthracycline and/or a taxane. These data require confirmation in larger patient groups.