Developing a Framework for the Health Technology Assessment of Histology-independent Precision Oncology Therapies.

The arrival of precision oncology is challenging the evidence standards under which technologies are evaluated for regulatory approval as well as for health technology assessment (HTA) purposes. Several key concepts are discussed to highlight the source of the challenges in evaluating these products, particularly those impacting the HTA of histology-independent therapies. These include the basket trial design, high uncertainty in (potentially substantial) benefits for histology-independent therapies, and the inability to identify and quantify benefits of standard of care in daily practice when the biomarker is not currently used in practice. There is little precedent for a technology with the unique mixture of challenges for HTA of histology-independent therapies and they will be evaluated using standard HTA, as there currently is no evidence suggesting the standard HTA framework is not appropriate. A number of questions proposed to help guide HTA bodies when assessing the appropriateness of local processes to optimally evaluate histology-independent therapies. Pragmatic solutions are further proposed to decrease uncertainty in the benefits of histology independent therapies as well as fill gaps in comparative evidence. The proposed solutions ensure a consistent and streamlined approach to evaluation across histology-independent products, although with varying strengths and limitations. Alongside these solutions, sponsors should engage early with HTA bodies/payers and regulatory agencies through parallel/joint scientific advice to facilitate the integration of both regulatory and HTA perspectives into one clinical development programme, potentially reconciling evidence requirements.

Sorafenib and everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors and KRAS-mutated NSCLC: A phase I trial with early pharmacodynamic FDG-PET assessment.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with solid tumors and KRAS mutations remains disappointing. One option is the combined inhibition of pathways involved in RAF-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT-mTOR. METHODS: Patients with relapsed solid tumors were treated with escalating doses of everolimus (E) 2.5-10.0 mg/d in a 14-day run-in phase followed by combination therapy with sorafenib (S) 800 mg/d from day 15. KRAS mutational status was assessed retrospectively in the escalation phase. Extension phase included KRAS-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) only. Pharmacokinetic analyses were accompanied by pharmacodynamics assessment of E by FDG-PET. Efficacy was assessed by CT scans every 6 weeks of combination. RESULTS: Of 31 evaluable patients, 15 had KRAS mutation, 4 patients were negative for KRAS mutation, and the KRAS status remained unknown in 12 patients. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was not reached. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as 7.5 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S due to toxicities at previous dose level (10 mg/d E + 800 mg/d S) including leucopenia/thrombopenia III° and pneumonia III° occurring after the DLT interval. The metabolic response rate in FDG-PET was 17% on day 5 and 20% on day 14. No patient reached partial response in CT scan. Median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.25 and 5.85 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of patients with relapsed solid tumors with 7.5 mg/d E and 800 mg/d S is safe and feasible. Early metabolic response in FDG-PET was not confirmed in CT scan several weeks later. The combination of S and E is obviously not sufficient to induce durable responses in patients with KRAS-mutant solid tumors.

Economic evaluation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia from a hospital management perspective.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is currently undergoing dramatic changes. We analyzed economic risks in hospitalized patients with CLL from a management perspective. METHODS: One hundred and twelve patients with CLL hospitalized in 2013 and 2014 at the University Hospital of Cologne were analyzed. To assess profit margins (PMs) per case, diagnosis-related group (DRG) reimbursement data were merged with an internal cost accounting scheme depending on age, prognostic factors, and DRG key performance indicators. RESULTS: In 112 patients, 284 cases coded by 19 different DRG with strongly fluctuating cost revenue ratios were found with an overall negative PM of €137 147. The DRG R61H was identified as the one most commonly coded (174 cases, 61.3%) with a deficit per case of €814. Subanalysis demonstrated that the payments were not cost covering due to excessive length of stay and staff costs. Significant differences in PM per case concerning age, length of stay and number of operation and procedure key (OPS) codes (P < 0.05) were found. CONCLUSION: In our research-driven tertiary care hospital, inpatient treatment of patients with CLL is not cost covering. This analysis demonstrates the need for novel care/reimbursement structures in CLL. From a hospital management perspective, cost revenue controlling is crucial to avoid major economic risks.

A Modeling and Simulation Framework for Adverse Events in Erlotinib-Treated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

Treatment with erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor used for treating non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and other cancers, is frequently associated with adverse events (AE). We present a modeling and simulation framework for the most common erlotinib-induced AE, rash, and diarrhea, providing insights into erlotinib toxicity. We used the framework to investigate the safety of high-dose erlotinib pulses proposed to limit acquired resistance while treating NSCLC. Continuous-time Markov models were developed using rash and diarrhea AE data from 39 NSCLC patients treated with erlotinib (150 mg/day). Exposure and different covariates were investigated as predictors of variability. Rash was also tested as a survival predictor. Models developed were used in a simulation analysis to compare the toxicities of different regimens, including the previously mentioned pulsed strategy. Probabilities of experiencing rash or diarrhea were found to be highest early during treatment. Rash, but not diarrhea, was positively correlated with erlotinib exposure. In contrast with some common understandings, radiotherapy decreased transitioning to higher rash grades by 81% (p < 0.01), and experiencing rash was not correlated with positive survival outcomes. Model simulations predicted that the proposed pulsed regimen (1600 mg/week + 50 mg/day remaining week days) results in a maximum of 20% of the patients suffering from severe rash throughout the treatment course in comparison to 12% when treated with standard dosing (150 mg/day). In conclusion, the framework demonstrated that radiotherapy attenuates erlotinib-induced rash, providing an opportunity to use radiotherapy and erlotinib together, and demonstrated the tolerability of high-dose pulses intended to address acquired resistance to erlotinib.

A cost calculation model for specialist palliative care for patients with non-small cell lung cancer in a tertiary centre.

GOALS OF WORK: Five-year survival of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is below 15%. Therefore, an early integration of palliative care according to the 2002 WHO definition is indispensable. In this paper, we describe methodical and financial aspects of prospective pricing of palliative care within a concept of integrated care for patients with NSCLC in Germany. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four structures of palliative care services were defined (hospital support, home care, day care and in-patient care). Prospectively, resource use was estimated, using real cost data from the finance department of the University Hospital. Resource use was forecasted on the basis of operating experience, data of the national core documentation of palliative care patients and recommendations from the European Commission. RESULTS: Expected average hospital support team services were priced at 483 euros and budgeted for 10% (stage 1) to 90% (stage 4) of patients. Home care (60 visits, 4,573 euros) and day-care (5 visits) services were budgeted for between 5% (stage 1) and 30% (stage 4). The resulting prospective reimbursements range from 393 euros (stage 1) to 2,503 euros (stage 4). In-patient care was excluded from the prospective payments and reimbursed separately. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, global reimbursements covering palliative care hospital support, home care and day care for patients with NSCLC were prospectively calculated and successfully negotiated. The contractual specification of palliative care services may contribute to transparency and quality in cancer care.