Estimating the Prognostic Value of the NTRK Fusion Biomarker for Comparative Effectiveness Research in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the prognostic value of the neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusions by comparing the survival of patients with NTRK+ tumours with patients without NTRK+ tumours. METHODS: We used genomic and clinical registry data from the Center for Personalized Cancer Treatment (CPCT-02) study containing a cohort of cancer patients who were treated in Dutch clinical practice between 2012 and 2020. We performed a propensity score matching analysis, where NTRK+ patients were matched to NTRK- patients in a 1:4 ratio. We subsequently analysed the survival of the matched sample of NTRK+ and NTRK- patients using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression, and performed an analysis of credibility to evaluate the plausibility of our result. RESULTS: Among 3556 patients from the CPCT-02 study with known tumour location, 24 NTRK+ patients were identified. NTRK+ patients were distributed across nine different tumour types: bone/soft tissue, breast, colorectal, head and neck, lung, pancreas, prostate, skin and urinary tract. NTRK fusions involving the NTRK3 gene (46%) and NTRK1 gene (33%) were most common. The survival analysis rendered a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.44 (95% CI 0.81-2.55) for NTRK+ patients. Using the point estimates of three prior studies on the prognostic value of NTRK fusions, our finding that the HR is > 1 was deemed plausible. CONCLUSIONS: NTRK+ patients may have an increased risk of death compared with NTRK- patients. When using historic control data to assess the comparative effectiveness of TRK inhibitors, the prognostic value of the NTRK fusion biomarker should therefore be accounted for.

Cost-effectiveness of genetic-based screening strategies for maturity-onset diabetes of the young.

Maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) is often misdiagnosed as Type I or II diabetes. This study was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness of MODY screening strategies in Hungary, which included a recent genetic test compared with no routine screening for MODY. A simulation model that combined a decision tree and an individual-level Markov model was constructed to assess the costs per quality-adjusted life year of screening strategies. Stratifying patients based on age and insulin treatment followed by a risk assessment questionnaire, a laboratory test and genetic testing was the most cost-effective strategy, saving EUR 12 and generating 0.0047 quality-adjusted life years gained per screened patient. This screening strategy could be considered for reimbursement, especially in countries with limited resources.

Lessons learned from the application of the HEcoPerMed guidance to three modeling case studies.

Background: The HEcoPerMed consortium developed a methodological guidance for the harmonization and improvement of economic evaluations in personalized medicine. Materials & methods: In three therapeutic areas, health economic models were developed to scrutinize the recommendations of the guidance. Results: Altogether, 20 of the 23 recommendations of the guidance were addressed by the models. Seven recommendations were applied in all studies, six in two of the studies and seven in one of the studies. Recommendations with an essential role on the final conclusions of the analyses were identified in each study. Conclusion: The guidance was found to be best used as a tool to identify and prioritize issues, verify solutions and justify decisions during the economic analysis of personalized interventions.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative NTRK testing strategies in cancer patients followed by histology-independent therapy with entrectinib: an analysis of three European countries.

Aim: To explore variations in the cost-effectiveness of entrectinib across different testing strategies and settings. Methods: Four testing strategies where adult cancer patients received entrectinib if they tested positive for NTRK gene fusions compared with 'no testing' and standard of care (SoC) for all patients were evaluated. Results: Immunohistochemistry for all patients followed by RNA-based next-generation sequencing after a positive result was the optimal strategy in all included countries. However, the incremental net monetary benefit compared with SoC was negative in all countries, ranging between international euros (int€) -206 and -404. In a subgroup analysis with only NTRK-positive patients, the incremental net monetary benefit was int€ 8405 in England, int€ -53,088 in Hungary and int€ 54,372 in The Netherlands. Conclusion: Using the cost-effectiveness thresholds recommended by national guidelines, none of the testing strategies were cost-effective compared with no testing. The implementation of entrectinib is unlikely to become cost-effective in Hungary, due to the large cost difference between the entrectinib and SoC arms, while there might be more potential in England and The Netherlands.

Histology-independent pharmaceuticals are a new phenomenon in cancer care. Most chemotherapies are prescribed based on the tumor's (primary) location, while histology-independent therapies are prescribed based on genetic markers in the tumor DNA. In this study, the added value of the histology-independent treatment entrectinib, which is aimed at cancer patients with so-called NTRK gene fusions, was investigated. Because these patients must be identified before they can be given entrectinib, various strategies for diagnostic testing were considered. An economic model was programmed to gain insight into the costs and health outcomes associated with the different testing strategies. The same analysis was done for three different countries (England, Hungary and The Netherlands) using local data. In all three countries, the health gains from receiving entrectinib may be large for patients with NTRK gene fusions. However, treatment with entrectinib was also much more expensive than standard-care treatment, especially in Hungary. In each of the three countries, all evaluated testing strategies were found to offer a negative net benefit to society (i.e., a net loss). This may be partially explained by the fact that NTRK gene fusions are rare, meaning that a large group of cancer patients has to receive (costly) testing while, subsequently, only a few patients enjoy the benefit of switching to a treatment that is more effective for them (i.e., entrectinib). Nonetheless, in England and Hungary, even if the most accurate test was provided for free, the net benefit to society of implementing entrectinib remained negative. Further changes, such as a reduction in the price of entrectinib, may therefore be needed.

Cost-effectiveness of extended DPYD testing before fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in the UK.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ToxNav©, a multivariant genetic test, to screen for DPYD followed by personalized chemotherapy dosing for metastatic breast cancer in the UK compared with no testing followed by standard dose, standard of care. In the main analysis, ToxNav was dominant over standard of care, producing 0.19 additional quality-adjusted life years and savings of £78,000 per patient over a lifetime. The mean additional quality-adjusted life years per person from 1000 simulations was 0.23 savings (95% CI: 0.22-0.24) at £99,000 (95% CI: £95-102,000). Varying input parameters independently by range of 20% was unlikely to change the results in the main analysis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed ~97% probability of the ToxNav strategy to be dominant.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of screening strategies for maturity-onset diabetes of the young in three European countries.

Background: Correct diagnosis of maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY), which is often misdiagnosed as Type 1 or 2 diabetes, is important for providing appropriate treatment. Materials & Methods: A diabetes model was adapted to Hungary, the Netherlands, and the UK to analyse the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of different screening strategies for MODY with 20 years time horizon. Results: Compared with no screening, screening with the MODY calculator then genetic testing is considered cost-effective with respect to each country's willingness to pay threshold. The addition of autoantibody testing dominated the no screening strategy. The budget impact of the strategies ranges between 0.001 and 0.025% of annual public healthcare spending. Conclusion: The analysed strategies are considered good value for money with potential cost savings in the long term.

Financial incentives to promote personalized medicine in Europe: an overview and guidance for implementation.

The implementation of adequate financing and reimbursement of personalized medicine (PM) in Europe is still turbulent. The views and experience of stakeholders about barriers in financing and reimbursing PM and potential solutions were elicited and supplemented with literature findings to draft a set of recommendations. Key recommendations to overcome the barriers for adequately financing and reimbursing PM in different healthcare systems in Europe included the provision of legal foundations and establishment of large pan-European databases, use of financial-based agreements and regulation of transparency of prices and reimbursement, and creating a business-friendly environment and attractive market for innovation. The recommendations could be used by health authorities for designing a sequence of policy steps to ensure the timely access to beneficial PM.

Budget impact and transferability of cost-effectiveness of DPYD testing in metastatic breast cancer in three health systems.

The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of introducing extended DPYD testing prior to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients in the UK, The Netherlands and Hungary were examined. DPYD testing with ToxNav© was cost-effective in all three countries. In the UK and The Netherlands, the ToxNav strategy led to more quality-adjusted life years and fewer costs to the health systems compared with no genetic testing and standard dosing of capecitabine/5-fluorouracil. In Hungary, the ToxNav strategy produced more quality-adjusted life years at a higher cost compared with no testing and standard dose. The ToxNav strategy was found to offer budget savings in the UK and in The Netherlands, while in Hungary it resulted in additional budget costs.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treating Patients With NTRK-Positive Cancer With the Histology-Independent Therapy Entrectinib.

OBJECTIVES: This study tackles several challenges of evaluating histology-independent treatments using entrectinib as an example. Histology-independent treatments are provided based on genetic marker(s) of tumors, regardless of the tumor type. We evaluated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of testing all patients for NTRK fusions and treating the positive cases with entrectinib compared with no testing and standard of care (SoC) for all patients. METHODS: The health economic model consisted of a decision tree reflecting the NTRK testing phase followed by a microsimulation model reflecting treatment with either entrectinib or SoC. Efficacy of entrectinib was based on data from basket trials, whereas historical data from NTRK-negative patients were corrected for the prognostic value of NTRK fusions to model SoC. RESULTS: "Testing" (testing for NTRK fusions, with subsequent entrectinib treatment in NTRK-positive patients and SoC in NTRK-negative patients) had higher per-patient quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs than "No testing" (SoC for all patients), with a difference of 0.0043 and €732, respectively. This corresponded to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €169 957/QALY and, using a cost-effectiveness threshold of €80 000/QALY, an incremental net monetary benefit of -€388. When excluding the costs of genetic testing for NTRK fusions, the ICER was reduced to €36 290/QALY and the incremental net monetary benefit increased to €188. CONCLUSIONS: When treatment requires the identification of a genetic marker, the associated costs and effects need to be accounted for. Because of the low prevalence of NTRK fusions, the number needed-to-test to identify patients eligible for entrectinib is large. Excluding the testing phase reduces the ICER substantially.

Supporting a review of the benefits package of the National Health Insurance Scheme in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Although Ghana is lauded for its National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), concerns exist about the scheme's functioning and sustainability. An often-cited issue-contributing to the scheme's decreasing membership, long-standing financial deficit, and frequent out-of-pocket payments among members-is the large benefits package (BP). While, on paper, the BP covers over 95% of the conditions occurring in Ghana, its design was not informed by any budget analysis, nor any systematic prioritization of interventions. This paper aims to provide evidence-based input into ongoing discussions regarding a review of the NHIS benefits package. METHODS: An existing analytic framework is used to calculate net health benefit (NHB) for a range of interventions in order to assess their cost-effectiveness and enable the prioritization of 'best buys'. The framework is expanded upon by incorporating concerns for financial protection, and practical feasibility, as well as the political economy challenges of disinvesting in currently funded activities. Five different options for the benefits package, each based on policy discourse in Ghana's health sector, are presented and evaluated. RESULTS: Implementing all interventions for which data was available to 100% of the population in need was estimated to cost GH₵4323 million (US$994 million), while the available NHIS budget was only GH₵970 million (US$223 million). Options for the benefits package that focussed on cost-effectiveness and primary care provision achieved the best health outcomes, while options reflecting the status quo and allowing for co-payments included a higher number of healthcare interventions. Apart from the package option focussing on primary care, all packages were faced with physician shortages. CONCLUSIONS: Current funding to the NHIS is insufficient to provide the historical benefits package, which promises to cover over 95% of disease conditions occurring in Ghana, to the total population. Shifting the NHIS focus from intervention coverage to population coverage is likely to lead to better health outcomes. A primary care package may be most feasible in the short-term, though additional physicians should be trained to provide higher-level care that is highly cost-effective, such as emergency neonatal care.

Financing and Reimbursement Models for Personalised Medicine: A Systematic Review to Identify Current Models and Future Options.

BACKGROUND: The number of healthcare interventions described as 'personalised medicine' (PM) is increasing rapidly. As healthcare systems struggle to decide whether to fund PM innovations, it is unclear what models for financing and reimbursement are appropriate to apply in this context. OBJECTIVE: To review financing and reimbursement models for PM, summarise their key characteristics, and describe whether they can influence the development and uptake of PM. METHODS: A literature review was conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Econlit to identify studies published in English between 2009 and 2021, and reviews published before 2009. Grey literature was identified through Google Scholar, Google and subject-specific webpages. Articles that described financing and reimbursement of PM, and financing of non-PM were included. Data were extracted and synthesised narratively to report on the models, as well as facilitators, incentives, barriers and disincentives that could influence PM development and uptake. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-three papers were included. Research and development of PM was financed through both public and private sources and reimbursed largely through traditional models such as single fees, Diagnosis-Related Groups, and bundled payments. Financial-based reimbursement, including rebates and price-volume agreements, was mainly applied to targeted therapies. Performance-based reimbursement was identified mainly for gene and targeted therapies, and some companion diagnostics. Gene therapy manufacturers offered outcome-based rebates for treatment failure for interventions including Luxturna®, Kymriah®, Yescarta®, Zynteglo®, Zolgensma® and Strimvelis®, and coverage with evidence development for Kymriah® and Yescarta®. Targeted testing with OncotypeDX® was granted value-based reimbursement through initial coverage with evidence development. The main barriers and disincentives to PM financing and reimbursement were the lack of strong links between stakeholders and the lack of demonstrable benefit and value of PM. CONCLUSIONS: Public-private financing agreements and performance-based reimbursement models could help facilitate the development and uptake of PM interventions with proven clinical benefit.

The Net Benefit of Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Literature Review and Regression Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Amidst conflicting expectations about the benefits of personalized medicine (PM) and the potentially high implementation costs, we reviewed the available evidence on the cost-effectiveness of PM relative to non-PM. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM and extracted data, including incremental quality-adjusted life-years (ΔQALYs) and incremental costs (Δcosts). ΔQALYs and Δcosts were combined with estimates of national cost-effectiveness thresholds to calculate incremental net monetary benefit (ΔNMB). Regression analyses were performed with these variables as dependent variables and PM intervention characteristics as independent variables. Random intercepts were used to cluster studies according to country. RESULTS: Of 4774 studies reviewed, 128 were selected, providing cost-effectiveness data for 279 PM interventions. Most studies were set in the United States (48%) and the United Kingdom (16%) and adopted a healthcare perspective (82%). Cancer treatments (60%) and pharmaceutical interventions (72%) occurred frequently. Prognostic tests (19%) and tests to identify (non)responders (37%) were least and most common, respectively. Industry sponsorship occurred in 32%. Median ΔQALYs, Δcosts, and ΔNMB per individual were 0.03, Int$575, and Int$18, respectively. We found large heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness. Regression analysis showed that gene therapies were associated with higher ΔQALYs than other interventions. PM interventions for neoplasms brought higher ΔNMB than PM interventions for other conditions. Nonetheless, average ΔNMB in the 'neoplasm' group was found to be negative. CONCLUSIONS: PM brings improvements in health but often at a high cost, resulting in 0 to negative ΔNMB on average. Pricing policies may be needed to reduce the costs of interventions with negative ΔNMB.

Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop guidance contributing to improved consistency and quality in economic evaluations of personalised medicine (PM), given current ambiguity about how to measure the value of PM as well as considerable variation in the methodology and reporting in economic evaluations of PM. METHODS: A targeted literature review of methodological papers was performed for an overview of modelling challenges in PM. Expert interviews were held to discuss best modelling practice. A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM was conducted to gain insight into current modelling practice. The findings were synthesised and used to develop a set of draft recommendations. The draft recommendations were discussed at a stakeholder workshop and subsequently finalised. RESULTS: Twenty-two methodological papers were identified. Some argued that the challenges in modelling PM can be addressed within existing methodological frameworks, others disagreed. Eighteen experts were interviewed. They believed large uncertainty to be a key concern. Out of 195 economic evaluations of PM identified, 56% addressed none of the identified modelling challenges. A set of 23 recommendations was developed. Eight recommendations focus on the modelling of test-treatment pathways. The use of non-randomised controlled trial data is discouraged but several recommendations are provided in case randomised controlled trial data are unavailable. The parameterisation of structural uncertainty is recommended. Other recommendations consider perspective and discounting; premature survival data; additional value elements; patient and clinician compliance; and managed entry agreements. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive list of recommendations to modellers of PM and to evaluators and reviewers of PM models.