Can precision medicine be integrated into routine therapeutic decisions at the bedside of patients?

Therapeutic strategies are shifting from a "one-size-fits-all" population-based approach to a stratified approach targeting groups with similar characteristics, or even individuals, tailoring treatments to the unique characteristics of each patient. Since such strategies rely on increasingly complex knowledge and healthcare technologies, along with an understanding of the tools of precision medicine, the appropriate dissemination and use of these strategies involves a number of challenges for the medical community. Having evaluation methodologies that have been jointly designed with the institutional, industrial, academic stakeholders, and also patients, like streamlining the processes and externally validating performances, could enhance the relevance of the "evaluation" aspect of precision medicine. Creating a network of expert precision-medicine centers and ensuring that precision-medicine procedures are reimbursed by social security would guarantee fair and sustainable access. Finally, training healthcare professionals, creating interfaces between precision-medicine expert centers and primary care professionals as well as patients, and integrating individual patient data into medical records are all key drivers that will enable information from precision-medicine to be made available and guarantee the proper use of these approaches.

Corrigendum: Probiotics Reduce Health Care Cost and Societal Impact of Flu-Like Respiratory Tract Infections in the USA: An Economic Modeling Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2019.00980.].

Probiotics Reduce Health Care Cost and Societal Impact of Flu-Like Respiratory Tract Infections in the USA: An Economic Modeling Study.

Acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs) of viral origin place a substantial burden on health care resources and society. Randomized controlled trials have shown positive effects of probiotics on clinical outcomes in these commonly occurring RTIs. Two meta-analyses published by the York Health Economics Consortium (YHEC) and Cochrane reported the efficacy of probiotics in reducing incidence and duration of RTIs, number of antibiotic courses, and days absent from work. The aim of this study was to assess the potential health-economic impact of probiotics on RTI-associated events and expenses in the US primary care setting. A state-transition microsimulation model reproduced a study population representative of the US national demographics for age and gender (1/1,000 sample). RTI incidence was based on the influenza-like illness outpatient consultation rate reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) FluView. Data on vaccination, on factors that negatively impact RTI outcomes, on resource utilization, and on productivity loss were obtained from US national databases. Analyses were performed for both meta-analyses independently. Outcomes included cost savings for the health care payer, related to a reduced number of RTI episodes, less outpatient consultations, and decreased medical prescriptions as well as cost savings from a broader societal perspective related to productivity loss. The analysis showed that generalized probiotic intake in the US population for 2017-2018 would have allowed cost savings for the health care payer of 4.6 million USD based on the YHEC scenario and 373 million USD for the Cochrane scenario, by averting 19 million and 54.5 million RTI sick days, respectively, compared to no probiotics. Antibiotic prescriptions decreased with 1.39-2.16 million courses, whereas absence from work decreased by 3.58-4.2 million days when applying the YHEC and Cochrane data, respectively. When productivity loss is included, total savings for society represented 784 million or 1.4 billion USD for the YHEC and Cochrane scenarios, respectively. Subgroup analyses demonstrated an incremental benefit of probiotics in at-risk groups, which might be of relevance for targeted interventions. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes. Our analysis demonstrated a positive impact of probiotics on the health care and economic burden of flu-like RTIs. Improved disease outcomes translated into considerable cost savings for both the payer and society.

Patient preference for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment inhalers: a discrete choice experiment in France.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding inhaler preferences may contribute to improving adherence in COPD patients and improving long-term outcomes. This study aims to identify and quantify preferences for convenience-related inhaler attributes in French moderate-to-severe COPD patients, with discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology. METHODS: Attributes were defined from a literature search, clinician and patient interviews: shape, dose insertion, dose preparation, dose release, dose confirmation, dose counter and reusability. An online DCE was conducted in respondents with self-reported COPD stage 2-4 recruited through a panel. The study questionnaire included twelve choice scenarios per respondent and questions on patient characteristics, treatment and disease severity. Statistical analyses used a mixed logit regression model with random effects. Utility scores were estimated for four types of inhalers: Inhaler A - soft mist inhaler; Inhaler B - reusable soft mist inhaler; Inhaler C - multi-dose dry powder inhaler; and Inhaler D - single dose dry powder inhaler. RESULTS: The study was completed by 153 patients (50 females); respondents were 50.4 years old on average; 13 different inhaler devices were reported. The most preferred inhaler is L-shaped, has dose preparation with capsule insertion and a dose counter, and is reusable. Inhaler profiles A and B had the highest utilities (mean of 1.2533 and 0.9578 respectively) compared to inhaler C (0.6315) and D (0.2200). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed statistically significant results that the strongest drivers of preference in French users of inhalation devices for COPD are shape, dose counter and reusability. Convenience-related characteristics are important to patients and should be taken into account by clinicians prescribing these devices.

Orphan Drugs in Oncology.

Rare diseases represent a group of conditions affecting a very limited number of patients. Low profitability resulting from the small size of target population coupled with difficulties in conducting the research causes the lack of interest from the pharmaceutical industry. In order to promote research and development of medicines for rare diseases, a special 'orphan' legislation was introduced in a number of regions. These measures led to a significant increase in the number of approved orphan molecules. The high per patient cost of orphan drugs, as well the rapid growth of orphan drug sector, raised concerns regarding the sustainable funding of therapies for rare diseases. Rare cancers represent the majority of the current orphan drug market and are often associated with very high revenues. This chapter provides a review of orphan legislations and health technology assessment framework, analyses the position of oncology drugs on the orphan drug market and discusses future perspectives.

Challenges in Research and Health Technology Assessment of Rare Disease Technologies: Report of the ISPOR Rare Disease Special Interest Group.

BACKGROUND: Successful development of new treatments for rare diseases (RDs) and their sustainable patient access require overcoming a series of challenges related to research and health technology assessment (HTA). These impediments, which may be unique to RDs or also apply to common diseases but are particularly pertinent in RDs, are diverse and interrelated. OBJECTIVE: To develop for the first time a catalog of primary impediments to RD research and HTA, and to describe the cause and effect of individual challenges. METHODS: Challenges were identified by an international 22-person expert working group and qualitative outreach to colleagues with relevant expertise. A broad range of stakeholder perspectives is represented. Draft results were presented at annual European and North American International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) congresses, and written comments were received by the 385-strong ISPOR Rare Disease Review Group from two rounds of review. Findings were refined and confirmed via targeted literature search. RESULTS: Research-related challenges linked to the low prevalence of RDs were categorized into those pertaining to disease recognition and diagnosis, evaluation of treatment effect, and patient recruitment for clinical research. HTA-related challenges were classified into issues relating to the lack of a tailored HTA method for RD treatments and uncertainty for HTA agencies and health care payers. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying and highlighting diverse, but interrelated, key challenges in RD research and HTA is an essential first step toward developing implementable and sustainable solutions. A collaborative multistakeholder effort is required to enable faster and less costly development of safe, efficacious, and appropriate new RD therapies that offer value for money.

Quantifying the persisting orphan-drug shortage public health crisis in the United States.

Background: Orphan drugs (ODs) are pharmaceuticals manufactured for rare conditions that affect less than 200,000 people in the US. ODs are therefore produced in small quantities to meet sparse demand. Since 2010, OD shortages have become frequent, but no comprehensive, quantitative studies exist. Objective: The objective of this study is to assess the rates of OD shortages per therapeutic class and their trends over time in the United States. Study design: OD approvals were collected from publicly available information on the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website on 13 June 2016. Data on OD shortages were collected from the FDA and the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) websites. We reviewed the number of shortages per year and per therapeutic area. Multiple indications for the same drug were counted individually. Results: Of 569 ODs approved, 50% were approved in the decade ending in 2015. Oncology was found to be the most represented therapeutic area (34% of all OD approvals), followed by endocrinology (11%). Shortage data were available from 2008. In total, there were 66 (12%) OD shortages, with an average shortage duration of 455.5 days. Shortages were observed mainly for oncology products (19 cases, 13% of oncology ODs) and endocrinology products (14 cases, 22% of endocrinology ODs) Conclusion: Despite the FDA strategic plan for preventing and mitigating drug shortages (October 2013), remaining OD shortages still pose an enduring challenge to patient care, with a median shortage duration of almost 15 months. In many instances, ODs are the only available therapy for rare diseases, and OD shortages can lead to serious health deterioration and death. More research is needed to elucidate the causes of shortages and their impact on patients' health.

Do payers value rarity? An analysis of the relationship between disease rarity and orphan drug prices in Europe.

Background and Objective: Orphan drugs have been a highlight of discussions due to their higher prices than non-orphan drugs. There is currently no European consensus on the method of value assessment for orphan drugs. This study assessed the relationship between the prevalence of rare diseases and the annual treatment cost of orphan drugs in France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and UK. Methods: Approved orphan drugs and prevalence data were extracted from the European Medicines Agency website. Annual treatment costs were calculated using ex-factory price. Simple regression was used to analyse the relationship between costs and prevalence. A specific bivariate analysis was performed for the rarest diseases (≤1 per 10,000). Results: 120 drugs were analysed. Prevalence ranged from 0.001 to 5 per 10,000 (mean 1.24, median 1). Annual treatment costs per patient ranged from €755 to €1,051,956 (mean €100,000, median €39,303). Results show a statistically significant inverse correlation between annual treatment cost and disease prevalence in all countries (France: r = -0.370, p = 0.002; Germany: r = -0.365, p = 0.002; Italy: r = -0.340, p = 0.002; Spain: r = -0.316, p = 0.041; UK: r = -0.358, p = 0.0004; Sweden: r = -0.414, p = 0.014; Norway: r = -0.367, p = 0.002). When analysis was focused on the rarest diseases, a stronger correlation exists in all countries (France: r = -0.525, Germany: r = -0.482, Italy: r = -0.497, Spain: r = -0.531, UK: r = -0.436, Sweden: r = -0.455, Norway: r = -0.466; all p < 0.05 except Sweden p = 0.077). Conclusions: This study shows an inverse correlation between annual treatment cost and prevalence with high statistical significance in the studied countries. Although pricing is a complex process where different attributes are assessed, this study supports the idea that payers value rarity in pricing decisions.

Determinants of orphan drugs prices in France: a regression analysis.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of the orphan drug legislation led to the increase in the number of available orphan drugs, but the access to them is often limited due to the high price. Social preferences regarding funding orphan drugs as well as the criteria taken into consideration while setting the price remain unclear. The study aimed at identifying the determinant of orphan drug prices in France using a regression analysis. METHODS: All drugs with a valid orphan designation at the moment of launch for which the price was available in France were included in the analysis. The selection of covariates was based on a literature review and included drug characteristics (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) class, treatment line, age of target population), diseases characteristics (severity, prevalence, availability of alternative therapeutic options), health technology assessment (HTA) details (actual benefit (AB) and improvement in actual benefit (IAB) scores, delay between the HTA and commercialisation), and study characteristics (type of study, comparator, type of endpoint). The main data sources were European public assessment reports, HTA reports, summaries of opinion on orphan designation of the European Medicines Agency, and the French insurance database of drugs and tariffs. A generalized regression model was developed to test the association between the annual treatment cost and selected covariates. RESULTS: A total of 68 drugs were included. The mean annual treatment cost was €96,518. In the univariate analysis, the ATC class (p = 0.01), availability of alternative treatment options (p = 0.02) and the prevalence (p = 0.02) showed a significant correlation with the annual cost. The multivariate analysis demonstrated significant association between the annual cost and availability of alternative treatment options, ATC class, IAB score, type of comparator in the pivotal clinical trial, as well as commercialisation date and delay between the HTA and commercialisation. CONCLUSION: The orphan drug pricing is a multivariate phenomenon. The complex association between drug prices and the studied attributes and shows that payers integrate multiple variables in decision making when setting orphan drug prices. The interpretation of the study results is limited by the small sample size and the complex data structure.