Endocrine-metabolic assessment checklist for cancer patients treated with immunotherapy: A proposal by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists (AMD), Italian Society of Diabetology (SID), Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE) and Italian Society of Pharmacology (SIF) multidisciplinary group.

Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) is increasingly employed in oncology. National and international endocrine and oncologic scientific societies have provided guidelines for the management of endocrine immune-related adverse events. However, guidelines recommendations differ according to the specific filed, particularly pertaining to recommendations for the timing of endocrine testing. In this position paper, a panel of experts of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM), Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists (AMD), Italian Society of Diabetology (SID), Italian Society of Endocrinology (SIE), and Italian Society of Pharmacology (SIF) offers a critical multidisciplinary consensus for a clear, simple, useful, and easily applicable endocrine-metabolic assessment checklist for cancer patients on immunotherapy.

Access to Oncology Medicines in Canada: Consensus Forum for Recommendations for Improvement.

Patient access to new oncology drugs in Canada is only possible after navigating multiple sequential systemic checkpoints for national regulatory approval, health technology assessment (HTA) and collective government price negotiation. These steps delay access and prevent health care providers from being able to prescribe optimal therapy. Eighteen Canadian oncology clinicians from the medicine, nursing and pharmacy professions met to develop consensus recommendations for defining reasonable government performance standards around process and timeliness to improve Canadian cancer patients' access to best care. A modified Delphi methodology was used to identify consensus on 30 questions involving five themes: accountability, disparities, endpoints, timeliness, and cost-effectiveness. It was agreed that greater transparency is required across regulatory and HTA processes. Health professionals in oncology are frustrated for their patients because they are unable to deliver the modern guideline-supported therapies they want to provide due to delays in approval or funding. Canadian health care providers request improvements in timely access to life-saving therapeutics in line with other comparator countries. Clinicians expect urgent improvements in Canadian health systems to give our patients their best chance of survival.

Application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Studies for Health Technology Management: Outcomes and Lessons Learned by the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration.

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a value assessment tool designed to help support complex decision-making by incorporating multiple factors and perspectives in a transparent, structured approach. We developed an MCDA rating tool, consisting of seven criteria evaluating the importance and feasibility of conducting potential real-world evidence (RWE) studies aimed at addressing uncertainties stemming from initial cancer drug funding recommendations. In collaboration with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health's Provincial Advisory Group, a validation exercise was conducted to further evaluate the application of the rating tool using RWE proposals varying in complexity. Through this exercise, we aimed to gain insight into consensus building and deliberation processes and to identify efficiencies in the application of the rating tool. An experienced facilitator led a multidisciplinary committee, consisting of 11 Canadian experts, through consensus building, deliberation, and prioritization. A total of nine RWE proposals were evaluated and prioritized as low (n = 4), medium (n = 3), or high (n = 2) priority. Through an iterative process, efficiencies and recommendations to improve the rating tool and associated procedures were identified. The refined MCDA rating tool can help decision-makers prioritize important and feasible RWE studies for research and can enable the use of RWE for the life-cycle evaluation of cancer drugs.

Impact of Early Access Reform on Oncology Innovation in France: Approvals, Patients, and Costs.

BACKGROUND: An ambitious reform of the early access (EA) process was set up in July 2021 in France, aiming to simplify procedures and accelerate access to innovative drugs. OBJECTIVE: This study analyzes the characteristics of oncology drug approvals through the EA process and its impact on real-life data for oncology patients. METHODS: The number and characteristics of EA demands concerning oncology drugs submitted to the National Health Authority (HAS, Haute Autorité de Santé) were reviewed until 31 December 2022. A longitudinal retrospective study on patients treated with an EA oncology drug between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2022 was also performed using the French nationwide claims database (Systeme National des Données de Santé [SNDS]) to assess the impact of the reform on the number of indications and patients, and the costs. RESULTS: Among 110 published decisions, the HAS granted 88 (80%) EA indications within 70 days of assessment on average, including 46 (52%) in oncology (67% in solid tumors and 33% in hematological malignancies). Approved indications were mostly supported by randomized phase III trials (67%), whereas refused EA relied more on non-randomized (57%) trials. Overall survival was the primary endpoint of 28% of EA approvals versus none of denied EAs. In the SNDS data, the annual number of patients with cancer treated with an EA drug increased from 3137 patients in 2019 to 18,341 in 2022 (+ 484%), whereas the number of indications rose from 12 to 62, mainly in oncohematology (n = 17), lung (n = 12), digestive (n = 9) and breast cancer (n = 9). Reimbursement costs for EA treatments surged from €42 to €526 million (+ 1159%). CONCLUSION: The French EA reform contributed to enabling rapid access to innovations in a wide range of indications for oncology patients. However, the findings highlight ongoing challenges in financial sustainability, warranting continued evaluation and adjustments.

Impact of concurrent medications on clinical outcomes of cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: analysis of Health Insurance Review and Assessment data.

PURPOSE: Medications regulating immune homeostasis and gut microbiota could affect the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). This study aimed to investigate the impact of concurrent medications on the clinical outcomes of patients with cancer receiving ICI therapy in South Korea. METHODS: We identified patients newly treated with ICI for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), urothelial carcinoma (UC), and malignant melanoma (MM) between August 2017 and June 2020 from a nationwide database in Korea. The effect of concurrent antibiotics (ATBs), corticosteroids (CSs), proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), and opioids prescribed within 30 days before ICI initiation on the treatment duration and survival was assessed. RESULTS: In all, 8870 patients were included in the ICI cohort (NSCLC, 7,128; UC, 960; MM, 782). The patients were prescribed ATBs (33.8%), CSs (47.8%), PPIs (28.5%), and opioids (53.1%) at the baseline. The median overall survival durations were 11.1, 12.2, and 22.1 months in NSCLC, UC, and MM subgroups, respectively, since starting the ICI mostly as second-line (NSCLC and UC) and first-line (MM) therapy. Early progression was observed in 34.2% of the patients. Opioids and CS were strongly associated with poor survival across all cancer types. A high number of concurrent medications was associated with early progression and short survival. Opioid and CS use was associated with poor prognosis in all patients treated with ICIs. However, ATBs and PPIs had a cancer-specific effect on survival. CONCLUSION: A high number of concurrent medications was associated with poor clinical outcomes.

Impact of Systemic Delays for Patient Access to Oncology Drugs on Clinical, Economic, and Quality of Life Outcomes in Canada: A Call to Action.

Canada has one of the most complex and rigorous drug approval and public reimbursement processes and is, unfortunately, one of the countries with the longest delays in drug access. To assess the overall impact of systemic delays in access to cancer therapy, a targeted literature review (TLR) was performed to identify studies associated with the clinical, economic, and quality of life impacts of delayed access to oncology drugs. Using MEDLINE/PubMed databases and snowballing, four unique records met the eligibility criteria. Results revealed that clinical outcomes were the most impacted by systemic delays in access to oncology drugs (e.g., life years lost, overall survival, and progression-free survival). The four articles retrieved by the TLR specifically illustrated that a substantial number of life years could potentially be saved by increasing systemic efficiency regarding the development, approval, and reimbursement processes of new drugs for advanced malignancies. It is imperative that initiatives are put in place to improve the performance and speed of Canadian drug regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) processes, especially for new cancer therapeutics. The proposed solutions in this paper include better coordination between HTA and Canadian payers to harmonize coverage decisions, international collaborations, information sharing, and national standards for timeliness in oncology drug access.

Cost and value of cancer medicines in a single-payer public health system in Ontario, Canada: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The financial impact of cancer medicines on health systems is not well known. We describe temporal trends in expenditure on cancer medicines within the single-payer health system of Ontario, Canada, and the extent of clinical benefit these treatments offer. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we identified cancer medicines and expenditures from formularies and costing databases (the New Drug Funding Program, Ontario Drug Benefit Program, and The High-Cost Therapy Funding Program) during 10 consecutive years (April 1, 2012, to March 31, 2022) in Ontario, Canada. For intravenous medicines, we applied the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) to identify expenditures associated with substantial clinical benefit. We also identified treatments associated with improved overall survival or quality of life. FINDINGS: 69 intravenous and 98 oral or injectable medicines were funded during 2012-22. Annual expenditure on cancer medicines increased by approximately 15% per year during 2012-22; the increase was more rapid in the most recent 4 years. Total expenditure on cancer medicines in the 2021-22 financial year was CA$1·7 billion. Immune checkpoint inhibitors were the single biggest expense by class ($284 million), representing 17% of the entire cancer medicine annual budget. Drugs with the highest individual costs were lenalidomide ($178 million) and pembrolizumab ($163 million), each accounting for around 10% of the entire budget. 29 (76%) of 38 indications eligible for ESMO-MCBS scoring met the threshold for substantial clinical benefit. Eight (21%) indications had no randomised trial evidence of improved overall survival, and only four (11%) were associated with improved QOL. $346 million (67% of the expenditure on intravenous cancer medicines) was spent on drugs that improved median overall survival by more than 6 months, $82 million (16%) was spent on medicines with overall survival gains of 3-6 months, and $32 million (6%) was spent on medicines with overall survival gains of less than 3 months. $53 million (10%) was spent on medicines with no established improvement in overall survival. INTERPRETATION: Costs of cancer medicines to the Canadian health system are increasing rapidly. Most funded indications met thresholds for substantial clinical benefit and two-thirds of the expenditure were for medicines that improve survival by more than 6 months. Whether this cost trajectory can be maintained in a sustainable, equitable, high-quality health system is unclear. Efforts are needed to ensure the price of medicines with substantial benefit is affordable and funding of treatments with very modest benefit might need to be re-assessed, particularly when alternative supportive and palliative therapies are available. FUNDING: None.

Gold standard assessment of immunogenic cell death induced by photodynamic therapy: From in vitro to tumor mouse models and anti-cancer vaccination strategies.

The discovery of the concept of immunogenic cell death (ICD) is a cornerstone in the development of novel anti-cancer immunotherapeutic approaches. Induction of the ICD pathway by specific anti-cancer therapeutic regimens can eliminate cancer cells by directly killing them during therapy and by activation of strong and specific anti-cancer immunity, leading to a long-lasting immunological memory that prevents cancer recurrence. ICD encompasses different forms of regulated cell death and can be triggered by many anti-cancer treatment modalities, including photodynamic therapy (PDT). PDT is a multistep procedure involving the accumulation of a light-sensitive dye known as a photosensitizer (PS) in tumor cells, followed by its activation by irradiation with a light of an appropriate wavelength. In the presence of molecular oxygen, the irradiated PS leads to the generation of cytotoxic reactive oxygen species, which can lead to ICD induction in the cancer cells. Here, we first describe in vitro methods to help optimize the PDT procedure for a specific PS. We also provide a collection of protocols and techniques for assessing ICD in vitro, including analysis of the emission of damage associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), efferocytosis, and the maturation and activation state of antigen presenting cells. Next, we describe in detail protocols for diverse tumor mouse models for assessing and characterizing ICD in vivo, such as murine tumor vaccination models. Finally, as an immunotherapeutic vaccine, we suggest using either PDT-induced dead cancer cells, preferably undergoing ICD, or dendritic cells loaded with lysates of PDT-induced cancer cells in a syngeneic orthotopic glioma model. Overall, this methodological article provides a quantitative, comprehensive set of validated tools that can be successfully used, with some adaptations, to identify, optimize and validate novel PSs in vitro and in vivo for the efficient induction of ICD during photodynamic treatment.

Medical Economic Effect of Pharmaceutical Interventions by Board-Certified Pharmacists in Palliative Pharmacy for Patients with Cancer Using Medical Narcotics in Japan: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The Japanese Society for Pharmaceutical Palliative Care and Sciences specializes in pharmacology in the field of palliative medicine. More than 700 board-certified pharmacists in palliative pharmacy (BCPPP) are actively involved in palliative pharmacotherapy at various hospitals and pharmacies. The purpose of this study was to determine the economic effect of pharmaceutical interventions by BCPPPs. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study included 27 medical centers and analyzed the medical economic effect of interventions by BCPPPs (17 pharmacists) and non-BCPPPs (24 pharmacists) on patients using medical narcotics for cancer pain in September 2021. RESULTS: The percentage of patients who received a pharmaceutical intervention and whose drug costs were reduced by pharmacist intervention was significantly higher in the BCPPP group than in the non-BCPPP group. Although there was no significant difference between the two groups in drug cost reduction per patient per month (BCPPP group: $0.89 [-$64.91 to $106.76] vs. non-BCPPP group $0.00 [-$1,828.95 to $25.82]; P = 0.730), the medical economic benefit of pharmacist intervention in avoiding or reducing adverse drug reactions was higher in the BCPPP group ($103.18 [$0.00 to $628.03]) than in the non-BCPPP group ($0.00 [$0.00 to $628.03]) (P = 0.070). The total medical economic benefit-the sum of these-was significantly higher in the BCPPP group ($88.82 [-$14.62 to $705.37]) than in the non-BCPPP group ($0.66 [-$1,200.93 to $269.61]) (P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Pharmacological intervention for patients with cancer using medical narcotics may have a greater medical economic benefit when managed by BCPPPs than by non-certified pharmacists in Japan.

Cost sharing for oral lenvatinib among commercially insured patients.

OBJECTIVE: To use a nationwide pharmaceutical claims database to evaluate cost-sharing trends for commercially insured patients with cancer who were prescribed lenvatinib (Lenvima). STUDY DESIGN: IBM MarketScan databases were used to evaluate lenvatinib costs for patients with employer-based commercial insurance, and for patients 65 years and older, Medicare claims for fee-for-service plans. METHODS: Patients were included if they had least 1 outpatient pharmaceutical claim for lenvatinib paid on a noncapitated basis from 2015 to 2019. Median and IQR costs were estimated and inflation adjusted to 2019 US$ for 30-day supplies and reported as total, insurance liability, coordination of benefits, and out-of-pocket costs. RESULTS: A total of 685 patients had at least 1 pharmaceutical claim for lenvatinib, which included patients with thyroid (n = 251; 36.6%), renal cell (n = 202; 29.5%), hepatocellular (n = 160; 23.4%), and endometrial (n = 48; 7.0%) cancer. The median (IQR) number of prescriptions per patient was 3 (2-7), and the median (IQR) total days of supply was 90 (45-210) days. The median (IQR) 30-day cost of lenvatinib was $17,253 ($15,597-$18,120). Median (IQR) 30-day insurance liability was $16,847 ($15,000-$17,981). Median (IQR) 30-day coordination of benefits was $0 ($0-$0). Median (IQR) 30-day patient out-of-pocket cost was $32 ($0-$100). However, the maximum 30-day out-of-pocket cost in our patient cohort was $12,538. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, insurance was liable for the majority of total lenvatinib drug costs, and 75% of patients paid $100 or less per month out of pocket. This information can be used by care teams to counsel insured patients. Health systems and drug manufacturers must identify patients with high out-of-pocket costs and provide convenient access to financial assistance programs so that patients are not forced to forgo the benefits of these drugs due to financial barriers. Value-based payment models and drug pricing reform are also needed to address underlying drivers of high drug costs.

Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs: Safety assessment in a European Comprehensive Cancer Centre using the risk matrix approach.

AIMS: The purpose of this work was to assess failures in the advanced prescription of parenteral anticancer agents in an adult day oncology care unit with more than 100 patients per day. METHODS: An a priori descriptive analysis was carried out by using the risk matrix approach. After defining the scope in a multidisciplinary meeting, we determined at each step the failure modes (FMs), their effects (E) and their associated causes (C). A severity score (S) was assigned to all effects and a probability of occurrence (O) to all causes. These S and O indicators, were used to obtain a criticality index (CI) matrix. We assessed the risk control (RC) of each failure in order to define a residual criticality index (rCI) matrix. RESULTS: During risk analysis, 14 FMs were detected, and 61 scenarios were identified considering all possible effects and causes. Nine situations (15%) were highlighted with the maximum CI, 18 (30%) with a medium CI, and 34 (55%) with a negligible CI. Nevertheless, among all these critical situations, only three (5%) had an rCI to process (i.e., missed dose adjustment, multiple prescriptions and abnormal biology data); the others required monitoring only. Clinicians' and pharmacists' knowledge of these critical situations enables them to manage the associated risks. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs appears to be a safe practice for patients when combined with risk management. The major risks identified concerned missed dose adjustment, prescription duplication and lack of consideration for abnormal biology data.

In Vitro Assessment of Antimicrobial Activity of Novel Fluoroquinolone, Levonadifloxacin (WCK 771) Against Multi-Drug-Resistant Clinical Isolates from Cancer Patients in India.

Introduction: Rapid increase in antimicrobial-resistance is leading to urgent need for newer broad-spectrum antimicrobials. Therefore, we have evaluated the antimicrobial résistance spectrum of India-discovered novel antibiotics (levonadifloxacin) against clinical isolates recovered from cancer patients. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted in the microbiology department, over a period of 1 year between May 2021 and June 2022 and 374 consecutive and nonduplicate Gram-positive (GPC) and MDR Gram Negative Bacteria (GNB) isolate were analyzed from 3,880 cancer patients in study. The identification and antimicrobial sensitivities of bacterial isolates were performed according to standard laboratory protocols by using automated identification system (VITEK-2-8.01; BioMérieux, Germany). The activity of levonadifloxacin and comparator antibiotics was evaluated using disk diffusion methods as per Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute 2022 guidelines. Results: The mean age of the patients were 51.6 ± 14.59 years with male: female ratio of 1.2:1. The prevalence of GPC was 167 (44.65%) and MDR-GNB was 207 (55.34%). The most common GPC was Staphylococcus aureus; 97 (58.08%) followed by Enterococcus species 66 (39.52%). In GNB, Escherichia coli; 93 (44.92%) was the most common followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae; 45 (21.73%). Levonadifloxacin susceptibility was present in 98.7% methicillin-resistant S. aureus and 96% methicillin-susceptible S. aureus and 77.1% Enterococcus-species. Additionally, all the fluoroquinolones-resistant S. aureus isolates were susceptible to levonadifloxacin (WCK-771) except one isolate. Also, levonadifloxacin-(WCK-771) exhibits 100% susceptibility fluoroquinolone susceptible GNB, such as E. coli, K. pneumoniae, Pseudomonas species, and Acinetobacter species. Interestingly, all fluoroquinolones-resistant Salmonella species and Stenotrophomonas maltophilla exhibited 100% susceptibility to levonadifloxacin (WCK-771). Conclusion: Levonadifloxacin (WCK-771) possesses potent activity against all the MDR Gram-positive pathogens including the coverage of susceptible Enterobacterales and MDR S. maltophilla and Burkholderia cepacia suggesting its potential utility in the management of polymicrobial infections.

Added benefit and revenues of oncology drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 1995 and 2020: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the added benefit and revenues of oncology drugs, explore their association, and investigate potential discrepancies between added benefit and revenues across different approval pathways of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Oncology drugs and their indications approved by the EMA between 1995 and 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Added benefit was evaluated using ratings published by seven organisations: health technology assessment agencies from the United States, France, Germany, and Italy, two medical oncology societies, and a drug bulletin. All retrieved ratings were recategorised using a four point ranking scale to indicate negative or non-quantifiable, minor, substantial, or major added benefit. Revenue data were extracted from publicly available financial reports and compared with published estimates of research and development (R&D) costs. Finally, the association between added benefit and revenue was evaluated. All analyses were performed within the overall study cohort, and within subgroups based on the EMA approval pathway: standard marketing authorisation, conditional marketing authorisation, and authorisation under exceptional circumstances. RESULTS: 131 oncology drugs with 166 indications were evaluated for their added benefit by at least one organisation within the required timeframe, yielding a total of 458 added benefit ratings; 189 (41%) were negative or non-quantifiable. The median time to offset the median R&D costs ($684m, £535m, €602m, adjusted to 2020 values) was three years; 50 of 55 (91%) drugs recovered these costs within eight years. Drugs with higher added benefit ratings generally had greater revenues. Negative or non-quantifiable added benefit ratings were more frequent for conditional marketing authorisations and authorisations under exceptional circumstances than for standard marketing authorisations (relative risk 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.89). Conditional marketing authorisations generated lower revenues and took longer to offset R&D costs than standard marketing authorisations (four years compared with three years). CONCLUSIONS: While revenues seem to align with added benefit, most oncology drugs recover R&D costs within a few years despite providing little added benefit. This is particularly true for drugs approved through conditional marketing authorisations, which inherently appear to lack comprehensive evidence. Policy makers should evaluate whether current regulatory and reimbursement incentives effectively promote development of the most effective drugs for patients with the greatest needs.

Interventions to Mitigate Financial Toxicity in Adult Patients with Cancer in the United States: A Scoping Review.

Financial toxicity adversely affects quality of life and treatment outcomes for patients with cancer. This scoping review examined interventions aimed at mitigating financial toxicity in adult patients with cancer and their effectiveness. We utilized five bibliographical databases to identify studies that met our inclusion criteria. The review included studies conducted among adult patients with cancer in the United States and published in English between January 2011 to March 2023. The review identified eight studies that met the inclusion criteria. Each of the studies discussed the implementation of interventions at the patient/provider and/or health system level. Collectively, the findings from this scoping review highlight both the limited number of published studies that are aimed at mitigating financial toxicity and the need to create and assess interventions that directly impact financial toxicity in demographically diverse populations of adult patients with cancer.

Cost-Effectiveness and the Economics of Genomic Testing and Molecularly Matched Therapies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of precision oncology can help guide value-driven care. Next-generation sequencing is increasingly cost-efficient over single gene testing because diagnostic algorithms require multiple individual gene tests to determine biomarker status. Matched targeted therapy is often not cost-effective due to the high cost associated with drug treatment. However, genomic profiling can promote cost-effective care by identifying patients who are unlikely to benefit from therapy. Additional applications of genomic profiling such as universal testing for hereditary cancer syndromes and germline testing in patients with cancer may represent cost-effective approaches compared with traditional history-based diagnostic methods.

Biomarker risk assessment model identified high-risk patients with cancer who benefit from thromboprophylaxis.

SOURCE CITATION: Alexander M, Harris S, Underhill C, et al. Risk-directed ambulatory thromboprophylaxis in lung and gastrointestinal cancers: the TARGET-TP randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2023;9:1536-1545. 37733336.

Assessment of human leukocyte antigen-based neoantigen presentation to determine pan-cancer response to immunotherapy.

Despite the central role of human leukocyte antigen class I (HLA-I) in tumor neoantigen presentation, quantitative determination of presentation capacity remains elusive. Based on a pooled pan-cancer genomic dataset of 885 patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), we developed a score integrating the binding affinity of neoantigens to HLA-I, as well as HLA-I allele divergence, termed the HLA tumor-Antigen Presentation Score (HAPS). Patients with a high HAPS were more likely to experience survival benefit following ICI treatment. Analysis of the tumor microenvironment indicated that the antigen presentation pathway was enriched in patients with a high HAPS. Finally, we built a neural network incorporating factors associated with neoantigen production, presentation, and recognition, which exhibited potential for differentiating cancer patients likely to benefit from ICIs. Our findings highlight the clinical utility of evaluating HLA-I tumor antigen presentation capacity and describe how ICI response may depend on HLA-mediated immunity.

Integrated budget impact model to estimate the impact of introducing selpercatinib as a tumor-agnostic treatment option for patients with RET-altered solid tumors in the US.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the potential budget impact on US third party payers (commercial or Medicare) associated with addition of selpercatinib as a tumor-agnostic treatment for patients with Rearranged during Transfection (RET)-altered solid tumors. METHODS: An integrated budget impact model (iBIM) with 3-year (Y) time horizon was developed for 19 RET-altered tumors. It is referred to as an integrated model because it is a single model that integrated results across multiple tumor types (as opposed to tumor-specific models developed traditionally). The model estimated eligible patient populations and included tumor-specific comparator treatments for each tumor type. Estimated annual total costs (2022USD, $) included costs of drug, administration, supportive care, and toxicity. For a one-million-member plan, the number of patients with RET-altered tumors eligible for treatment, incremental total costs, and incremental per-member per-month (PMPM) costs associated with introduction of selpercatinib treatment were estimated. Uncertainty associated with model parameters was assessed using various sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Commercial perspective estimated 11.68 patients/million with RET-altered tumors as treatment-eligible annually, of which 7.59 (Y1), 8.17 (Y2), and 8.76 (Y3) patients would be selpercatinib-treated (based on forecasted market share). The associated incremental total and PMPM costs (commercial) were estimated to be: $873,099 and $0.073 (Y1), $2,160,525 and $0.180 (Y2), and $2,561,281 and $0.213 (Y3), respectively. The Medicare perspective estimated 55.82 patients/million with RET-altered tumors as treatment-eligible annually, of which 36.29 (Y1), 39.08 (Y2), and 41.87 (Y3) patients would be selpercatinib-treated. The associated incremental total and PMPM costs (Medicare) were estimated to be: $4,447,832 and $0.371 (Y1), $11,076,422 and $0.923 (Y2), and $12,637,458 and $1.053 (Y3), respectively. One-way sensitivity analyses across both perspectives identified drug costs, selpercatinib market share, incidence of RET, and treatment duration as significant drivers of incremental costs. CONCLUSIONS: Three-year incremental PMPM cost estimates suggest a modest impact on payer-budgets associated with introduction of tumor-agnostic selpercatinib treatment.