Strategies to decrease inequalities in cancer therapeutics, care and prevention: Proceedings on a conference organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the European Academy of Cancer Sciences, Vatican City, February 23-24, 2023.

Analyses of inequalities related to prevention and cancer therapeutics/care show disparities between countries with different economic standing, and within countries with high Gross Domestic Product. The development of basic technological and biological research provides clinical and prevention opportunities that make their implementation into healthcare systems more complex, mainly due to the growth of Personalized/Precision Cancer Medicine (PCM). Initiatives like the USA-Cancer Moonshot and the EU-Mission on Cancer and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan are initiated to boost cancer prevention and therapeutics/care innovation and to mitigate present inequalities. The conference organized by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in collaboration with the European Academy of Cancer Sciences discussed the inequality problem, dependent on the economic status of a country, the increasing demands for infrastructure supportive of innovative research and its implementation in healthcare and prevention programs. Establishing translational research defined as a coherent cancer research continuum is still a challenge. Research has to cover the entire continuum from basic to outcomes research for clinical and prevention modalities. Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs) are of critical importance for integrating research innovations to preclinical and clinical research, as for ensuring state-of-the-art patient care within healthcare systems. International collaborative networks between CCCs are necessary to reach the critical mass of infrastructures and patients for PCM research, and for introducing prevention modalities and new treatments effectively. Outcomes and health economics research are required to assess the cost-effectiveness of new interventions, currently a missing element in the research portfolio. Data sharing and critical mass are essential for innovative research to develop PCM. Despite advances in cancer research, cancer incidence and prevalence is growing. Making cancer research infrastructures accessible for all patients, considering the increasing inequalities, requires science policy actions incentivizing research aimed at prevention and cancer therapeutics/care with an increased focus on patients' needs and cost-effective healthcare.

European Groundshot-addressing Europe's cancer research challenges: a Lancet Oncology Commission.

Cancer research is a crucial pillar for countries to deliver more affordable, higher quality, and more equitable cancer care. Patients treated in research-active hospitals have better outcomes than patients who are not treated in these settings. However, cancer in Europe is at a crossroads. Cancer was already a leading cause of premature death before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the disastrous effects of the pandemic on early diagnosis and treatment will probably set back cancer outcomes in Europe by almost a decade. Recognising the pivotal importance of research not just to mitigate the pandemic today, but to build better European cancer services and systems for patients tomorrow, the Lancet Oncology European Groundshot Commission on cancer research brings together a wide range of experts, together with detailed new data on cancer research activity across Europe during the past 12 years. We have deployed this knowledge to help inform Europe's Beating Cancer Plan and the EU Cancer Mission, and to set out an evidence-driven, patient-centred cancer research roadmap for Europe. The high-resolution cancer research data we have generated show current activities, captured through different metrics, including by region, disease burden, research domain, and effect on outcomes. We have also included granular data on research collaboration, gender of researchers, and research funding. The inclusion of granular data has facilitated the identification of areas that are perhaps overemphasised in current cancer research in Europe, while also highlighting domains that are underserved. Our detailed data emphasise the need for more information-driven and data-driven cancer research strategies and planning going forward. A particular focus must be on central and eastern Europe, because our findings emphasise the widening gap in cancer research activity, and capacity and outcomes, compared with the rest of Europe. Citizens and patients, no matter where they are, must benefit from advances in cancer research. This Commission also highlights that the narrow focus on discovery science and biopharmaceutical research in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as prevention and early diagnosis; treatment modalities such as radiotherapy and surgery; and a larger concentration on developing a research and innovation strategy for the 20 million Europeans living beyond a cancer diagnosis. Our data highlight the important role of comprehensive cancer centres in driving the European cancer research agenda. Crucial to a functioning cancer research strategy and its translation into patient benefit is the need for a greater emphasis on health policy and systems research, including implementation science, so that the innovative technological outputs from cancer research have a clear pathway to delivery. This European cancer research Commission has identified 12 key recommendations within a call to action to reimagine cancer research and its implementation in Europe. We hope this call to action will help to achieve our ambitious 70:35 target: 70% average 10-year survival for all European cancer patients by 2035.

Towards Better Pharmaceutical Provision in Europe-Who Decides the Future?

Significant progress has been achieved in human health in the European Union in recent years. New medicines, vaccines, and treatments have been developed to tackle some of the leading causes of disease and life-threatening illnesses. It is clear that investment in research and development (R&D) for innovative medicines and treatments is essential for making progress in preventing and treating diseases. Ahead of the legislative process, which should begin by the end of 2022, discussions focus on how Europe can best promote the huge potential benefits of new science and technology within the regulatory framework. The challenges in European healthcare were spelled out by the panellists at the roundtable organised by European Alliance for Personalised Medicine (EAPM). Outcomes from panellists' discussions have been summarized and re-arranged in this paper under five headings: innovation, unmet medical need, access, security of supply, adapting to progress, and efficiency. Some of the conclusions that emerged from the panel are a call for a better overall holistic vision of the future of pharmaceuticals and health in Europe and a collaborative effort among all stakeholders, seeing the delivery of medicines as part of a broader picture of healthcare.

The Porto European Cancer Research Summit 2021.

Key stakeholders from the cancer research continuum met in May 2021 at the European Cancer Research Summit in Porto to discuss priorities and specific action points required for the successful implementation of the European Cancer Mission and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan (EBCP). Speakers presented a unified view about the need to establish high-quality, networked infrastructures to decrease cancer incidence, increase the cure rate, improve patient's survival and quality of life, and deal with research and care inequalities across the European Union (EU). These infrastructures, featuring Comprehensive Cancer Centres (CCCs) as key components, will integrate care, prevention and research across the entire cancer continuum to support the development of personalized/precision cancer medicine in Europe. The three pillars of the recommended European infrastructures - namely translational research, clinical/prevention trials and outcomes research - were pondered at length. Speakers addressing the future needs of translational research focused on the prospects of multiomics assisted preclinical research, progress in Molecular and Digital Pathology, immunotherapy, liquid biopsy and science data. The clinical/prevention trial session presented the requirements for next-generation, multicentric trials entailing unified strategies for patient stratification, imaging, and biospecimen acquisition and storage. The third session highlighted the need for establishing outcomes research infrastructures to cover primary prevention, early detection, clinical effectiveness of innovations, health-related quality-of-life assessment, survivorship research and health economics. An important outcome of the Summit was the presentation of the Porto Declaration, which called for a collective and committed action throughout Europe to develop the cancer research infrastructures indispensable for fostering innovation and decreasing inequalities within and between member states. Moreover, the Summit guidelines will assist decision making in the context of a unique EU-wide cancer initiative that, if expertly implemented, will decrease the cancer death toll and improve the quality of life of those confronted with cancer, and this is carried out at an affordable cost.

Towards a cancer mission in Horizon Europe: recommendations.

A comprehensive translational cancer research approach focused on personalized and precision medicine, and covering the entire cancer research-care-prevention continuum has the potential to achieve in 2030 a 10-year cancer-specific survival for 75% of patients diagnosed in European Union (EU) member states with a well-developed healthcare system. Concerted actions across this continuum that spans from basic and preclinical research through clinical and prevention research to outcomes research, along with the establishment of interconnected high-quality infrastructures for translational research, clinical and prevention trials and outcomes research, will ensure that science-driven and social innovations benefit patients and individuals at risk across the EU. European infrastructures involving comprehensive cancer centres (CCCs) and CCC-like entities will provide researchers with access to the required critical mass of patients, biological materials and technological resources and can bridge research with healthcare systems. Here, we prioritize research areas to ensure a balanced research portfolio and provide recommendations for achieving key targets. Meeting these targets will require harmonization of EU and national priorities and policies, improved research coordination at the national, regional and EU level and increasingly efficient and flexible funding mechanisms. Long-term support by the EU and commitment of Member States to specialized schemes are also needed for the establishment and sustainability of trans-border infrastructures and networks. In addition to effectively engaging policymakers, all relevant stakeholders within the entire continuum should consensually inform policy through evidence-based advice.

Advanced therapy medicinal products and health technology assessment principles and practices for value-based and sustainable healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are beginning to reach European markets, and questions are being asked about their value for patients and how healthcare systems should pay for them. OBJECTIVES: To identify and discuss potential challenges of ATMPs in view of current health technology assessment (HTA) methodology-specifically economic evaluation methods-in Europe as it relates to ATMPs, and to suggest potential solutions to these challenges. METHODS: An Expert Panel reviewed current HTA principles and practices in relation to the specific characteristics of ATMPs. RESULTS: Three key topics were identified and prioritised for discussion-uncertainty, discounting, and health outcomes and value. The panel discussed that evidence challenges linked to increased uncertainty may be mitigated by collection of follow-on data, use of value of information analysis, and/or outcomes-based contracts. For discount rates, an international, multi-disciplinary forum should be established to consider the economic, social and ethical implications of the choice of rate. Finally, consideration of the feasibility of assessing the value of ATMPs beyond health gain may also be key for decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: ATMPs face a challenge in demonstrating their value within current HTA frameworks. Consideration of current HTA principles and practices with regards to the specific characteristics of ATMPs and continued dialogue will be key to ensuring appropriate market access. CLASSIFICATION CODE: I.

Productivity improvements in hepatitis C treatment: impact on efficacy, cost, cost-effectiveness and quality of life.

OBJECTIVE: The treatment of chronic hepatitis C has advanced considerably during the past 15 years. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of different key developments from a health-economic perspective. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Costs and health-related quality-of-life data from a follow-up of Swedish patients treated for hepatitis C in clinical practice were used together with clinical trial data and natural history data in order to create a mathematical model that could be used to evaluate the advancement in hepatitis C therapy. The efficacy of treatment, costs and cost-effectiveness were evaluated for both current as well as proposed treatment strategies. A sensitivity analysis was used to assess how results were affected when key variables changed. RESULTS: Current genotype-guided pegylated interferon and ribavirin is a cost-effective treatment strategy. A proposed treatment strategy involving a reduction in the length of treatment for certain patient subgroups with genotypes 1, 2 and 3, as well as an increase in the length of treatment for patients with genotype 1 and slow virological response was estimated to be a cost-effective future treatment alternative. These results were insensitive to changes in costs and risks associated with chronic hepatitis. CONCLUSION: Although the costs for treatment of hepatitis C have increased significantly over the past decade, the improvements have provided the health-care system with cost-effective options in the treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C.

Cost-effectiveness of high-dose atorvastatin compared with regular dose simvastatin.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of high-dose atorvastatin when compared with generic simvastatin for secondary prevention in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden based on the recently completed IDEAL trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The IDEAL trial showed that high-dose treatment with atorvastatin was associated with fewer non-fatal myocardial infarctions (MI) or coronary heart disease death (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.78-1.01) and major cardiovascular events by (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77-0.98) or any coronary event (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76-0.91) than simvastatin with no significant difference in the number of serious adverse events. Costs during the trial period was estimated based on the trial data and a Markov model was constructed where the risk of MIs and revascularization procedures and the long-term costs, quality of life, and mortality associated with these events was simulated. Costs were based on resource consumptions recorded in the trial multiplied with recent unit costs from each country. Both direct health care costs and indirect costs (costs from lost production due to work absence) were included. Intervention lasted for the duration of the trial (4.8 years) while health-effects and costs are predicted for the lifespan of the patient. The main outcome was quality adjusted life-years (QALY) gained. High-dose treatment was predicted to lead to a mean increase in survival of 0.049 years per patient and 0.033 QALYs gained. The cost to gain one QALY was predicted to 47,197euro (Denmark), 62,639euro (Finland), 35,210euro (Norway), and 43,667euro (Sweden), with cost-effectiveness ratio decreasing with higher risk. CONCLUSION: In the prevention of cardiovascular events among patients with a previous MI, high-dose atorvastatin appears to be a cost-effective strategy when compared with generic simvastatin 20-40 mg in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. In Finland, it is cost-effective in high-risk patients. The key driver of the cost-effectiveness is the price-difference between 80 mg atorvastatin and generic simvastatin.

Protein adsorption onto silica nanoparticles: conformational changes depend on the particles' curvature and the protein stability.

We have analyzed the adsorption of protein to the surfaces of silica nanoparticles with diameters of 6, 9, and 15 nm. The effects upon adsorption on variants of human carbonic anhydrase with differing conformational stabilities have been monitored using methods that give complementary information, i.e., circular dichroism (CD), nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC), and gel permeation chromatography. Human carbonic anhydrase I (HCAI), which is the most stable of the protein variants, establishes a dynamic equilibrium between bound and unbound protein following mixture with silica particles. Gel permeation and AUC experiments indicate that the residence time of HCAI is on the order of approximately 10 min and slowly increases with time, which allows us to study the effects of the interaction with the solid surface on the protein structure in more detail than would be possible for a process with faster kinetics. The effects on the protein conformation from the interaction have been characterized using CD and NMR measurements. This study shows that differences in particle curvature strongly influence the amount of the protein's secondary structure that is perturbed. Particles with a longer diameter allow formation of larger particle-protein interaction surfaces and cause larger perturbations of the protein's secondary structure upon interaction. In contrast, the effects on the tertiary structure seem to be independent of the particles' curvature.

Cost-effectiveness of primary prevention of coronary heart disease through risk factor intervention in 60-year-old men from the county of Stockholm--a stochastic model of exercise and dietary advice.

BACKGROUND: Recent screenings show a high prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in the county of Stockholm. Primary prevention may be a way to lower the risk burden of coronary heart disease, but we must establish that preventive programs are cost-effective. METHODS: Through the use of a stochastic Markov model, which predicts reduction in coronary heart disease events based on risk factor reductions, this study evaluates the results of a previous controlled trial in middle-aged men comparing dietary advice, exercise, and the combination of both applied to an observed cohort of 60-year-old men in the county of Stockholm. RESULTS: The model predicts lower costs and higher effectiveness for dietary advice compared to the alternatives. Assuming a declining effect of the intervention, dietary advice saves 0.0228 life-years compared to no intervention. If no decline is assumed, the corresponding figure is 0.0997 life-years. From the societal perspective, the added costs are 2,892 Swedish Kronor (SEK) and 14,106 SEK for the two modeling assumptions, resulting in a cost-effectiveness of 127,065 SEK per life-year gained (LYG) and 141,555 SEK/LYG. These figures are below what is generally thought of as cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Based on the model, dietary advice appears to be the most cost-effective of the studied interventions.