Precision Oncology Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review of Phase II Clinical Trials with Biomarker-Driven, Adaptive Design.

Purpose: Novel clinical trial designs are conducted in the precision medicine era. This study aimed to evaluate biomarker-driven, adaptive phase II trials in precision oncology, focusing on infrastructure, efficacy, and safety. Materials and Methods: We systematically reviewed and analyzed the target studies. EMBASE and PubMed searches from 2015 to 2023 generated 29 eligible trials. Data extraction included infrastructure, biomarker screening methodologies, efficacy, and safety profiles. Results: Government agencies, cancer hospitals, and academic societies with accumulated experiences led investigator-initiated precision oncology clinical trials (IIPOCTs), which later guided sponsor-initiated precision oncology clinical trials (SIPOCTs). Most SIPOCTs were international studies with basket design. IIPOCTs primarily used the central laboratory for biomarker screening, but SIPOCTs used both central and local laboratories. Most of the studies adapted next-generation sequencing and/or immunohistochemistry for biomarker screening. Fifteen studies included an independent central review committee for outcome investigation. Efficacy assessments predominantly featured objective response rate as the primary endpoint, with varying results. Nine eligible studies contributed to the United States Food and Drug Administration's marketing authorization. Safety monitoring was rigorous, but reporting formats lacked uniformity. Health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes were described in some protocols but rarely reported. Conclusion: Our results reveal that precision oncology trials with adaptive design rapidly and efficiently evaluate anticancer drugs' efficacy and safety, particularly in specified biomarker-driven cohorts. The evolution from IIPOCT to SIPOCT has facilitated fast regulatory approval, providing valuable insights into the precision oncology landscape.

Unveiling the Biosimilar Paradox of Oncologists' Perceptions and Hesitations in South Korea: A Web-Based Survey Study.

INTRODUCTION: Biosimilars offer a cost-effective alternative to original biopharmaceuticals with comparable efficacy and safety. The perception and familiarity of prescribers toward biosimilars play a critical role in their market penetration. Yet, few studies have explored the perception of oncologists toward biosimilars, much less in Asia. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to understand barriers of adopting biosimilars among oncologists and explore strategies to promote their use in clinical practice settings. METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted among Korean oncologists from September to October 2022, assessing their perception of biosimilars and prescribing practices. RESULTS: Among the 118 surveyed oncologists, 75.4% (89 out of 118) had previously prescribed biosimilars. When asked about their preference, 48.3% (57 out of 118) of the respondents preferred originators to biosimilars, whereas 16.1% (19 out of 118) favored biosimilars over the originators. The primary reason for preferring the originators was trust in safety and efficacy (94.7%, 54 out of 57). Still, a paradox was noted as 87.0% (47 out of 54) and 85.2% (46 out of 54) of these also acknowledged the comparable efficacy and safety of biosimilars. A relatively small number of the respondents (16.1%, 19 out of 118) did not consider prescribing biosimilars to biologic-naïve patients at all, and up to 56.8% (67 out of 118) expressed reluctance to switch prescriptions from originators to biosimilars. However, 90.7% (107 out of 118) of respondents considered changing their prescription to biosimilars if patients faced financial stress. Concerns regarding the efficacy when switching to biosimilars were expressed by 42.7% (38 out of 89) of oncologists with biosimilar prescribing experience, increasing to 69.0% (20 out of 29) among those without such experience. CONCLUSION: Korean oncologists perceived biosimilars to be as safe and effective as originators. However, there is a notable mismatch between this perception and their prescribing practices, particularly among those who have not prescribed biosimilars before. The financial burden of patients served as a significant driver for prescribing biosimilars, yet marginal price differences between originators and biosimilars may be associated with the low adoption rate of biosimilars in Korea. Active price competition may enhance market penetration of biosimilars.

Is the Availability of Biosimilar Adalimumab Associated with Budget Savings? A Difference-in-Difference Analysis of 14 Countries.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the influence of the presence of biosimilar adalimumab on adalimumab budget savings in 14 high- and upper-middle-income countries. METHODS: This study analyzed Multinational Integrated Data Analysis System (MIDAS)-IQVIA data from the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2018 to the Q4 of 2019, comparing adalimumab expenditure (in United States dollars) and consumption (in standard units [SU]) across 14 countries (Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, and Taiwan). The countries were divided into two groups based on the availability of adalimumab biosimilars during the study period. A difference-in-difference design was employed to analyze the groups, focusing on changes from Q4 2018 to Q4 2019. Additionally, changes in adalimumab expenditure were decomposed into price, quantity, and drug mix during the study period. RESULTS: Among countries with adalimumab biosimilars, there was a significant decrease in expenditure (- $371.0 per gross domestic product per capita; p = 0.03) over four quarters, while the consumption significantly increased (1.0 SU per 1000 population; p = 0.02). This was consistent with visual observations and differed from countries without adalimumab biosimilar. Sensitivity analysis with a narrowed list of countries (12 high-income countries) showed a consistent trend. Adalimumab expenditure decreased by 14% during the study period in countries where adalimumab biosimilars were available, mainly due to the price changes (Pt = 0.85; - 15%) and the drug-mix effect (εt  = 0.88; - 12%). Yet, adalimumab expenditure (Et = 1.04; +4%) changed in a quantity-dependent manner (Qt = 1.06; +6%) in countries where adalimumab biosimilars were absent. CONCLUSION: The availability of biosimilars was associated with a decrease in adalimumab expenditure without compromising the consumption of adalimumab.

Price and Prejudice? The Value of Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-Cell Therapy.

Although chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has shown a high response rate in lymphoma patients, its cost-effectiveness is controversial due to the high price and uncertainty of the clinical evidence. In addition to the high acquisition cost of CAR T-cell therapy, procedure and facility cost increase the financial burden considering the frequency of adverse events such as cytokine release syndrome. In clinical research, relatively short follow-up periods were used compared to traditional cancer agents. In addition, head-to-head comparative effectiveness data are unavailable, which is an important factor when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of a new treatment. Additional evidence that will compensate for the uncertainty of existing clinical data is needed for full evaluation of long-term efficacy, safety, and comparative effectiveness.

Impact and challenges of enactment for advanced regenerative medicine in South Korea.

The Korean government has enacted the Act on Advanced Regenerative Medicine and Advanced Biological products (ARMAB) in August 2019, and it has been implemented in 2020. We reviewed the changes made by ARMAB compared to the existing Pharmaceutical Affairs Act and discussed future challenges to accelerate regenerative medicine while ensuring safety and efficacy. This act and regulations focused on the key elements of act as follows: the definition of advanced regenerative medicine (RM), the licensing of related facilities, safety management such as long-term follow-up, clinical research review committee, and establishment of a roadmap. Our study shows that Korea has achieved the second highest number of first approvals for regenerative medicine indications worldwide through expedited approvals encouraging innovation, while maintaining patient safety by mandating long-term follow-up. Additionally, the establishment of an interactive system for retrieval of patients' data and reporting of safety information by manufacturers electronically demonstrates Korea's commitment to innovation for Advanced RM and patient safety.

Corporate social responsibility of pharmaceutical industry in Korea.

Background: Global pharmaceutical companies in Korea argue that the development of innovative drugs should be recognized as a social contribution, yet it has been countered by various stakeholders. The need to distinguish between philanthropic activities and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of pharmaceutical companies and reaching consensus in the Korean context has been raised. We sought to evaluate the CSR status of Korean pharmaceutical companies and collect the stakeholders' opinions to define philanthropic activities and CSR related to pharmaceutical companies in Korea. Methods: We conducted a literature review on the definition of CSR of pharmaceutical companies, and the CSR activities of the domestic pharmaceutical companies were compared with those of global pharmaceutical companies operating in Korea. The opinions of stakeholder groups (patient advocate groups, consumer organizations, and domestic/global pharmaceutical companies) were collected using focus group interviews (FGI) and written surveys. Results: Literature review suggested that CSR is categorized as "must do" (economic and legal responsibilities), "ought to do" (ethical responsibilities), and "can do" (philanthropic responsibilities), whereas contributions beyond the economic, legal, or ethical responsibilities can be defined as "can do" (philanthropic responsibilities). Domestic pharmaceutical companies simply adopted systems for ethical and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) management, which are at the "ought to do" level (ethical responsibility), whereas the headquarters of these global pharmaceutical companies established the CSR team and systematically reported on the CSR activity, including ESG management reports, which is at the "ought to do" level and further moving to the "can do" level, but the Korean branch rarely has CSR teams, and the CSR activities in Korea were also insufficient. At the FGI, the global pharmaceutical companies argued that CSR activities, such as innovative drug development, should be recognized as similar to philanthropic activities, yet stakeholders besides them suggested that those activities are "can do" rather than being philanthropic. Discussion: We found that the pharmaceutical companies in Korea are attempting to achieve the "ought to do" level (ethical responsibilities) while complying with the "must do" level (legal and economic responsibilities) yet not philanthropic activities. A social consensus regarding the philanthropic responsibilities of pharmaceutical companies in Korea was not reached.

The Impact of Payment Scheme Changes on Medication Adherence and Persistence of Patients Diagnosed with Depression in Korea.

As of 1 July 2018, the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) changed the fee schedule for individual psychotherapy (IP). We sought to analyze the impact of the IP payment scheme changes on the medication adherence and persistence of patients diagnosed with depression in Korea. We utilized the NHIS claims database from 2017 to 2019. Patients who were newly diagnosed with depression and utilized IP and were prescribed antidepressants during the study period were included. Adherence was measured using the medication possession ratio (MPR), and persistence was measured using the length of therapy (LOT) during the follow-up period. Adherence and persistence during the pre-policy period (before the change of the payment scheme, from January 2018 until June 2018) and the post-policy period (after the change, from July 2018 until December 2019) were compared. During the study period, a total of 176,740 patients with depression were identified. The average MPR significantly increased from 0.20 to 0.33 in the pre- and post-policy periods, respectively (p < 0.001). The average LOT of the patients improved considerably from 36 to 56 days in the pre- and post-policy periods, respectively (p < 0.001). Poisson regression analysis showed that patients with depression who were female, 19-34 years of age (vs. 50-64 years or over 64 years), and in the post-policy period were significantly associated with greater adherence and persistence rates. Payment scheme changes were associated with an increased adherence and persistence of medication use among patients diagnosed with depression.

How Sensitive is Sensitivity Analysis?: Evaluation of Pharmacoeconomic Submissions in Korea.

Purpose: We aimed to describe the types of uncertainties examined in the economic evaluations submitted for reimbursement in Korea and their impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Method: Fifty dossiers were submitted by pharmaceutical companies to the economic subcommittee of the Pharmaceutical Benefit Coverage Advisory Committee (PBCAC) from January 2014 to December 2018. The types of uncertainties were categorized as structural and parametric, and the frequencies of the sensitivity analysis per variables were analyzed. The impact of uncertainties was measured by the percent variance of the ICER relative to that of the base case analysis. Results: Of the 50 submissions, varying discount rate (44 submissions), followed by time horizon (38 submissions) and model assumptions (29 submissions), were most frequently used to examine structural uncertainty, while utility (42 submissions), resource use (41 submissions), and relative effectiveness (26 submissions) were used to examine parametric uncertainty. A total of 1,236 scenarios (a scenario corresponds to a case where a single variable is varied by a single range) were presented in the one-way sensitivity analyses, where parametric and structural sensitivity analyses comprised 679 and 557 scenarios, respectively. Varying drug prices had the highest impact on ICER (median variance 19.9%), followed by discount rate (12.2%), model assumptions (11.9%), extrapolation (11.8%), and time horizon (10.0%). Conclusions: Variables related to long-term assumptions, such as model assumptions, time horizon, extrapolation, and discounting rate, were related to a high level of uncertainty. Caution should be exercised when using immature data.

For Whom the Price Escalates: High Price and Uncertain Value of Cancer Drugs.

The price of cancer drugs has skyrocketed, yet it is not clear whether their value is commensurate with their price. More cancer drugs are approved under expedited review, which considers less rigorous clinical evidence, yet only 20% of them show an overall survival gain in the confirmatory trial. Moreover, clinical data are often generated based on small, single-arm studies with surrogate outcomes, challenging economic evaluation. With their high price and uncertain (marginal) clinical value, cancer drugs are frequently rejected by health technology assessment (HTA) bodies. Therefore, agencies, including the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), have adopted cancer drug funds (CDF) or risk-sharing schemes to provide extra access for expensive cancer drugs which fail to meet NICE's cost effectiveness threshold. With rising pricing and fewer new cancer medications with novel mechanisms of action, it is unclear if newly marketed cancer therapies address unmet clinical needs or whether we are paying too much. Transparency, equity, innovativeness, and sustainability are all harmed by a "special" approach for cancer medications. If early access is allowed, confirmatory trials within a certain time frame and economic evaluation should be conducted, and label changes or disinvestment should be carried out based on those evaluations.

Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations: Updates in the Third Version.

The first version of the pharmacoeconomic (PE) guidelines was published in South Korea in 2006. Despite its first revision in 2011, there were still ambiguities in its interpretation. Moreover, methodologies for estimating effectiveness and costs have also evolved since then. Under these circumstances, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service published the third version in January 2021. This article reviews the revision process and major changes made in the new edition of the PE guidelines. The revision was processed through reviews of the previous 50 PE submissions, international guidelines, academic literature, and surveys and advisory meetings to obtain stakeholders' opinions. The analysis perspective has changed from a limited societal perspective to a healthcare system perspective. In addition to the drug with the highest market share, drugs used in clinical trials can be selected as comparators under certain conditions. The discount rate decreased from 5% to 4.5%. Furthermore, the revised guidelines provide more detailed and specific instructions for items including non-inferiority margin, extrapolation, utility elicitation, and uncertainty. Treatment switch and co-dependent technology guidelines are newly included; the budget impact analysis guideline is deleted. Through this revision, transparency and consistency of decision-making is expected to improve.

Projecting Lifetime Health Outcomes and Costs Associated with the Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Exposure among Adult Women in Korea.

We sought to estimate the lifetime healthcare costs and outcomes associated with the exposure to the escalated concentration of fine particulate matter (particle size < 2.5 µm, PM2.5) among adult Korean women. We adapted a previously developed Markov model, and a hypothetical cohort composed of Korean women was exposed to either a standard (15 µg/m3) or increased (25 µg/m3) concentration of PM2.5. The time horizon of the analysis was 60 years, and the cycle length was 1 year. The outcomes were presented as direct healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs were discounted annually at 5%. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The model estimated that when the exposure concentration was increased by 10 µg/m3, the lifetime healthcare cost increased by USD 9309, which is an 11.3% increase compared to the standard concentration group. Women exposed to a higher concentration of PM2.5 were predicted to live 30.64 QALYs, compared to 32.08 QALYs for women who were exposed to the standard concentration of PM2.5. The tendency of a higher cost and shorter QALYs at increased exposure was consistent across a broad range of sensitivity analyses. The negative impact of PM2.5 was higher on cost than on QALYs and accelerated as the exposure time increased, emphasizing the importance of early intervention.

Regenerative Medicine in South Korea: Bridging the Gap Between Authorization and Reimbursement.

Regenerative medicine (RM) has considerable potential to address the needs of aging-related and uncurable diseases. However, its incorporation into reimbursement of health insurance benefits poses many challenges, including uncertain evidence and insufficient investment. This paper examines the wide gap between manufacturers, regulatory bodies, and health technology bodies regarding reimbursements for RMs focused cell therapy products. In this mixed-methods study, we first analyzed the sales of RMs approved in South Korea. In addition to exploring beliefs related to the market value of RMs, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 experts (17 from bio-industries, two from the regulatory body, three from a health technology assessment (HTA) body, and two from the Pharmaceutical Benefit Coverage Assessment Committee [PBCAC]). Lastly, we surveyed PBCAC members about the market value of RMs. In total, 15 of the 20 developed cell therapy products are on the market in South Korea, and amounted to 0.24% of total pharmaceutical expenditures in 2018. We identified a wide gap between stakeholders and regulators regarding the market value and pricing of RMs. The interviewees from the pharmaceutical manufacturer association raised the issue of rising manufacturing costs and proposed a specific pricing policy for RMs. To bridge the gap between approval and reimbursement, stakeholders demand an alternative framework of value-based pricing. Conditional health insurance reimbursement may be an alternative to the traditional process in order to generate evidence of the effects of RMs using "risk-based" or "outcome-based" approaches.

How can we improve patients' access to new drugs under uncertainties? : South Korea's experience with risk sharing arrangements.

BACKGROUND: New drugs including cancer drugs and orphan drugs are becoming increasingly more expensive. Risk sharing arrangements (RSAs) could manage the risk based on both financial impact and the health outcome of new drugs if reimbursed. To improve patients' access to new drugs under uncertainties, many developed countries have adopted RSAs. In this study, we aimed to understand the effects of RSAs in South Korea on patients' access. METHODS: We reviewed current status of RSA drugs in South Korea. The number of appraisals and time gap between market approval and reimbursement per RSA drug were considered to quantify improvement of patients' access as they showed how rapidly decisions on reimbursement of RSA drugs were derived. Then, we applied a comparative analysis to determine whether the RSA drugs in South Korea were reimbursed in the UK, Italy, and Australia. Most data for this study were obtained from websites of the governmental department/agencies responsible for appraisal of drug reimbursement in each country. And literatures related to RSAs were investigated as well. RESULTS: The eligibility for Korean RSAs had two key components - drugs for cancer and rare diseases and not having other alternative treatments. As of the first half of 2019, there were 39 RSA drugs reimbursed in South Korea, the majority of which were financial-based schemes. Refund and expenditure cap were the representative types (89.7%). After introduction of RSAs, the time gap and number of appraisals were decreased. Based on the indications of RSA drugs, the level of drug coverage in South Korea was found lower than Italy, similar to the UK, and higher than Australia. CONCLUSIONS: RSAs in South Korea significantly enhanced patients' access to new drugs and led to the alleviation of patients' out-of-pocket expenses. The drug coverage of South Korea had a level comparable to that of other countries. This study provides implications for countries that have a dual mission of containing pharmaceutical expenditure and improving access to new drugs.

The Current Situation Regarding Long-Acting Insulin Analogues Including Biosimilars Among African, Asian, European, and South American Countries; Findings and Implications for the Future.

Background: Diabetes mellitus rates continue to rise, which coupled with increasing costs of associated complications has appreciably increased global expenditure in recent years. The risk of complications are enhanced by poor glycaemic control including hypoglycaemia. Long-acting insulin analogues were developed to reduce hypoglycaemia and improve adherence. Their considerably higher costs though have impacted their funding and use. Biosimilars can help reduce medicine costs. However, their introduction has been affected by a number of factors. These include the originator company dropping its price as well as promoting patented higher strength 300 IU/ml insulin glargine. There can also be concerns with different devices between the manufacturers. Objective: To assess current utilisation rates for insulins, especially long-acting insulin analogues, and the rationale for patterns seen, across multiple countries to inform strategies to enhance future utilisation of long-acting insulin analogue biosimilars to benefit all key stakeholders. Our approach: Multiple approaches including assessing the utilisation, expenditure and prices of insulins, including biosimilar insulin glargine, across multiple continents and countries. Results: There was considerable variation in the use of long-acting insulin analogues as a percentage of all insulins prescribed and dispensed across countries and continents. This ranged from limited use of long-acting insulin analogues among African countries compared to routine funding and use across Europe in view of their perceived benefits. Increasing use was also seen among Asian countries including Bangladesh and India for similar reasons. However, concerns with costs and value limited their use across Africa, Brazil and Pakistan. There was though limited use of biosimilar insulin glargine 100 IU/ml compared with other recent biosimilars especially among European countries and Korea. This was principally driven by small price differences in reality between the originator and biosimilars coupled with increasing use of the patented 300 IU/ml formulation. A number of activities were identified to enhance future biosimilar use. These included only reimbursing biosimilar long-acting insulin analogues, introducing prescribing targets and increasing competition among manufacturers including stimulating local production. Conclusions: There are concerns with the availability and use of insulin glargine biosimilars despite lower costs. This can be addressed by multiple activities.

Should We Consider Value Frameworks for Cancer Drugs as Oncology's Landscape Evolves?; from an Oncologist Perspective in Korea.

BACKGROUND: As the role of immunotherapies and personalized medicine grow, cancer patients have faced many choices in treatments and have suffered financial toxicity. These challenges brought the need for the value framework (VF) to guide treatment decision making. METHODS: A survey was taken to 102 oncologists about perception for VF. They were asked about priorities among several considerations when they prescribe cancer drugs. Their views on the need for development and potential implications of VF in Korea were assessed, also. RESULTS: The survey shows that 90% of the respondents choose clinical efficacy as the most important value in cancer drugs selection, and the cost of drug was more weighted value in immune checkpoint inhibitors (13.7%). Approximately half (53.9%) answered that they were aware of the existing VFs. Over 90% of respondents agreed with the need for development of a VF for cancer drugs based on Korean healthcare system and further usefulness for decisions about reimbursement issues. Seventy-one percent answered that two representative VFs (American Society Clinical Oncology-VF and European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale) should be reflected in value measurement of cancer drugs in Korea. CONCLUSION: The Korean oncologists recognized the necessity for the clinical application of VF. Further discussion between the stakeholders should be followed to alleviate the financial burden through the value-based decision making of cancer drugs.

Current utilization patterns for long-acting insulin analogues including biosimilars among selected Asian countries and the implications for the future.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence rates for diabetes mellitus continue to rise, which, coupled with increasing costs of complications, has appreciably increased expenditure in recent years. Poor glycaemic control including hypoglycaemia enhances complication rates and associated morbidity, mortality and costs. Consequently, this needs to be addressed. Whilst the majority of patients with diabetes have type-2 diabetes, a considerable number of patients with diabetes require insulin to help control their diabetes. Long-acting insulin analogues were developed to reduce hypoglycaemia associated with insulin and help improve adherence, which can be a concern. However, their considerably higher costs have impacted on their funding and use, especially in countries with affordability issues. Biosimilars can help reduce the costs of long-acting insulin analogues thereby increasing available choices. However, the availability and use of long-acting insulin analogues can be affected by limited price reductions versus originators and limited demand-side initiatives to encourage their use. Consequently, we wanted to assess current utilisation rates for long-acting insulin analogues, especially biosimilars, and the rationale for patterns seen, across multiple Asian countries ranging from Japan (high-income) to Pakistan (lower-income) to inform future strategies. METHODOLOGY: Multiple approaches including assessing utilization and prices of insulins including biosimilars among six Asian countries and comparing the findings especially with other middle-income countries. RESULTS: Typically, there was increasing use of long-acting insulin analogues among the selected Asian countries. This was especially the case enhanced by biosimilars in Bangladesh, India, and Malaysia reflecting their perceived benefits. However, there was limited use in Pakistan due to issues of affordability similar to a number of African countries. The high use of biosimilars in Bangladesh, India and Malaysia was helped by issues of affordability and local production. The limited use of biosimilars in Japan and Korea reflects limited price reductions and demand-side initiatives similar to a number of European countries. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing use of long-acting insulin analogues across countries is welcomed, adding to the range of insulins available, which increasingly includes biosimilars. A number of activities are needed to enhance the use of long-acting insulin analogue biosimilars in Japan, Korea and Pakistan.

Medication Adherence and Persistence of Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients in Korea: A Retrospective Study Using National Health Insurance Claims Data.

This study aimed to analyze medication adherence and persistence among open-angle glaucoma patients in Korea. A retrospective study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance (NHI) claims database from 2016 to 2019. Newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma patients who were prescribed with the intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering eyedrops were included. Adherence was measured using the medication possession ratio (MPR), and persistence was measured using the duration of therapy during the 24 month follow-up period. During the study period, 14,648 open-angle glaucoma patients were identified, and 3118 (21.3%) and 4481 patients (30.6%) were adherent to and persistent with their glaucoma treatment, respectively. The mean MPR was 48.8%, and the mean duration of therapy was 357.2 days. Logistic regression analysis showed that patients who are older, female, using prostaglandins as the index medication, and visiting secondary or tertiary hospitals were significantly associated with greater rates of adherence (odds ratio (OR) = 1.21, 1.12, 1.27, and 1.73, respectively) and persistence (OR = 1.11, 1.17, 1.16, 1.17, and 1.36, respectively) during the study period. Patients with open-angle glaucoma in Korea had substandard medication adherence and discontinued their treatment. Ophthalmologists should pay more attention to younger, male patients to improve adherence.

Value Frameworks: Adaptation of Korean Versions of Value Frameworks for Oncology.

This study sought to adapt the existing value framework (VF) to produce a reliable and valid Korean oncology VF. Two VFs developed by The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) were selected for examination in the present study. Forward and backward translations were conducted for six high-priced drugs indicated for non-small-cell lung cancer and multiple myeloma. Inter-rater reliability was measured based on the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and variation was described using the coefficient of variation. The relative weights of factors critically considered by Korean oncologists were derived following the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), and focus group interviews (FGIs) were used to obtain qualitative data regarding the applications of these two VFs in the Korean setting. The ICCs of the Korean VFs were 0.895 (0.654-0.983) for ASCO and 0.726 (0-0.982) for ESMO translations, suggesting excellent reliability for ASCO and good reliability for ESMO. AHP demonstrated that clinical benefit has the highest priority, which is consistent with the ASCO VF. The FGIs suggested that the result for AHP is acceptable and that both ESMO and ASCO VFs should be used complementarily. Although further evaluation with a larger sample size is needed, the Korean versions of ESMO/ASCO VFs are valid and reliable tools and are acceptable to Korean stakeholders, yet they should be applied with caution.

Potential approaches for the pricing of cancer medicines across Europe to enhance the sustainability of healthcare systems and the implications.

Introduction: There are growing concerns among European health authorities regarding increasing prices for new cancer medicines, prices not necessarily linked to health gain and the implications for the sustainability of their healthcare systems.Areas covered: Narrative discussion principally among payers and their advisers regarding potential approaches to the pricing of new cancer medicines.Expert opinion: A number of potential pricing approaches are discussed including minimum effectiveness levels for new cancer medicines, managed entry agreements, multicriteria decision analyses (MCDAs), differential/tiered pricing, fair pricing models, amortization models as well as de-linkage models. We are likely to see a growth in alternative pricing deliberations in view of ongoing challenges. These include the considerable number of new oncology medicines in development including new gene therapies, new oncology medicines being launched with uncertainty regarding their value, and continued high prices coupled with the extent of confidential discounts for reimbursement. However, balanced against the need for new cancer medicines. This will lead to greater scrutiny over the prices of patent oncology medicines as more standard medicines lose their patent, calls for greater transparency as well as new models including amortization models. We will be monitoring these developments.