New Anticancer Drugs: Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices.

Countries face challenges in paying for new drugs. High prices are driven in part by exploding drug development costs, which, in turn, are driven by essential but excessive regulation. Burdensome regulation also delays drug development, and this can translate into thousands of life-years lost. We need system-wide reform that will enable less expensive, faster drug development. The speed with which COVID-19 vaccines and AIDS therapies were developed indicates this is possible if governments prioritize it. Countries also differ in how they value drugs, and generally, those willing to pay more have better, faster access. Canada is used as an example to illustrate how "incremental cost-effectiveness ratios" (ICERs) based on measures such as gains in "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs) may be used to determine a drug's value but are often problematic, imprecise assessments. Generally, ICER/QALY estimates inadequately consider the impact of patient crossover or long post-progression survival, therapy benefits in distinct subpopulations, positive impacts of the therapy on other healthcare or societal costs, how much governments willingly might pay for other things, etc. Furthermore, a QALY value should be higher for a lethal or uncommon disease than for a common, nonlethal disease. Compared to international comparators, Canada is particularly ineffective in initiating public funding for essential new medications. Addressing these disparities demands urgent reform.

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.

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.

Determinants of the Cancer Drug Funding Process in Canada.

Background: Canada has a publicly funded healthcare system with a complex drug funding process. After Health Canada approval to market a drug, the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) (now renamed the CADTH reimbursement review) makes a non-binding funding recommendation to the Canadian provinces (except Quebec), which each then decide whether the drug will be publicly funded. We identified the determinants of funding in this process. Methods: We analyzed drugs for advanced lung (n = 15), breast (n = 8), colorectal (CRC) (n = 7), melanoma (n = 10), and neuroendocrine (NET) (n = 3) cancers undergoing the funding decision process from 2011 to 2019. Determinants of funding assessed in the model included list price, cancer type, drug class, and pCODR recommendation. The primary outcome was the correlation between list price and time to funding (TTF: Health Canada approval to first provincial funding). Secondary outcomes included an exploratory analysis of predictors of drug funding. Results: We analyzed 43 drugs: targeted agents 72%, immunotherapy 20%, chemotherapy 7%. A total of 72% were funded in at least one province. Median TTF was 379 days (IQR 203−601). Median list price (28-day course) was CAD 8213 (IQR CAD 5391−9445). Higher list price was not correlated with TTF (correlation coefficient −0.20, p = 0.28). There was no association between list price and pCODR recommendation or the decision to fund in at least one province. A positive pCODR recommendation correlated with the provinces' funding decisions (p < 0.001), where 89% of drugs with a positive recommendation were funded and 100% of drugs with a negative recommendation were not funded. Tumor type was predictive of TTF (p < 0.001): CRC drugs were the slowest at a median of 2541 days (IQR 702−4379), and NETs were the quickest at a median of 0 days (IQR 0−502). Cancer type predicted decision to fund in at least one province (p = 0.005), with funding for 100% of NET drugs at the high end and 29% of CRC drugs at the low end. Drug class was predictive of TTF (p = 0.01): 465 days (IQR 245−702) for targeted agents, 443 days (IQR 298−587) for chemotherapy, and 339 days (IQR 164−446) for immunotherapy. Conclusions: Determinants of drug funding included cancer type, drug class, and pCODR recommendation but not list price. Factors other than cost were more heavily weighted in the funding decisions of cancer drugs in Canadian provinces.

The Pathway for New Cancer Drug Access in Canada.

Cancer treatment has evolved significantly over the past decade with the emergence of a multitude of new treatments across cancer types. Alongside the pace of drug discovery, the cost of cancer drugs has also increased. In the face of this growth in development and spending, it is crucial to have an understanding of the processes and pressures new drugs navigate to get to the market in Canada. This paper is a review of the complex, multi-step regulatory and funding process undertaken by cancer drugs in Canada. It reviews the role of Health Canada, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, the Health Technology Assessment, the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance, and finally, the provincial, territorial, and federal payers. Recent developments are highlighted. Strategies to minimize duplication of effort, improve timeliness, and increase efficiency are explored. The cancer drug regulatory and funding process in Canada is complex, and an understanding of the current system and ongoing evolution is essential.

The Impact of Chronic Kidney Disease in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease are commonly excluded from clinical trials. The impact of chronic kidney disease on outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer has not been previously studied. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the impact of chronic kidney disease on outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. DESIGN: This is a multi-institutional, retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at academic and community cancer centers participating in the Canadian Health Outcomes Research Database Consortium Rectal Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation before curative-intent surgery from 2005 to 2013 were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease-free survival, overall survival, pathologic complete response, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy completion rate were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: A total of 1254 patients were included. Median age was 62, and 29%/69% had clinical stage II and III disease. Median estimated creatinine clearance was 93 mL/min, with 11% <60 mL/min (n = 136). There was no significant difference in the completion rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (82% vs 85%, p = 0.36) or radiotherapy (93% vs 95%, p = 0.45) between patients with and without chronic kidney disease. Patients with chronic kidney disease were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (63% vs 77%, p < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, patients with chronic kidney disease had decreased disease-free survival (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.03-1.82; p = 0.03) but not overall survival (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.88-1.75; p = 0.23) or pathologic complete response (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.50-1.39; p = 0.71). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and by limited events for overall survival analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with locally advanced rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation, baseline chronic kidney disease was associated with less use of adjuvant chemotherapy and decreased disease-free survival. Chronic kidney disease was not independently associated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiotherapy completion rate, pathologic complete response, or overall survival. These data suggest that patients with locally advanced rectal cancer with chronic kidney disease may have distinct outcomes and, accordingly, the results of landmark clinical trials may not be generalizable to this population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B694. LA REPERCUSIN DE LA ENFERMEDAD RENAL CRNICA EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO TRATADOS CON QUIMIORRADIOTERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE: ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica generalmente se excluyen de los ensayos clínicos. La repercusión de la enfermedad renal crónica en el desenlace en pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado no se ha estudiado previamente.OBJETIVO:Investigar la repercusión de la enfermedad renal crónica en los desenlaces en pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo multiinstitucional.ESCENARIO:Centros oncológicos académicos y comunitarios que participan en la base de datos de cáncer rectal del consorcio CHORD.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, tratados con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante, previa a la cirugía con intención curativa del 2005 al 2013.PRINCIPALES VARIABLES EVALUADAS:Sobrevida libre de enfermedad, sobrevida global, respuesta patológica completa, tasa de conclusión de quimioterapia / radioterapia neoadyuvante.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron 1254 pacientes. El promedio de edad fue de 62, y el 29% / 69% tenían enfermedad en estadio clínico II y III, respectivamente. El promedio de la depuración de creatinina estimada fue de 93 mililitros / minuto, con un 11% <60 mililitros / minuto (n = 136). No hubo diferencias significativas en la tasa de conclusión de la quimioterapia neoadyuvante (82% vs 85%, p = 0,36) o radioterapia (93% vs 95%, p = 0,45) entre pacientes con y sin enfermedad renal crónica. Los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica tenían menos probabilidades de recibir quimioterapia adyuvante (63% contra el 77%, p <0,01). En el análisis multivariado, los pacientes con enfermedad renal crónica tenían una sobrevida libre de enfermedad menor (HR 1,37, IC 95% 1,03-1,82, p = 0,03) pero no en la sobrevida global (HR 1,23, IC 95% 0,88-1,75, p = 0,23) o respuesta patológica completa (OR 0,83, IC 95% 0,50-1,39, p = 0,71).LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo y acontecimientos limitados para el análisis de sobrevida global.CONCLUSIONES:En pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado tratados con quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante, la enfermedad renal crónica de base se asoció con un menor uso de quimioterapia adyuvante y una menor sobrevida libre de enfermedad. La enfermedad renal crónica no se asoció de forma independiente con la tasa de conclusión de la quimioterapia / radioterapia neoadyuvante, la respuesta patológica completa o la sobrevida global. Estos datos sugieren que los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado con enfermedad renal crónica pueden tener resultados distintos y, en consecuencia, los resultados de los ensayos clínicos de referencia pueden no ser generalizables a esta población. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B694.

Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2019.

The annual Eastern Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference 2019 was held in Morell, Prince Edward Island, 19-21 September 2019. Experts in medical oncology, radiation oncology, and surgical oncology who are involved in the management of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies participated in presentations and discussion sessions for the purpose of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses multiple topics in the management of anal, colorectal, biliary tract, and gastric cancers, including: radiotherapy and systemic therapy for localized and advanced anal cancer; watch and wait strategy for the management of rectal cancer; role of testing for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency prior to commencement of fluoropyrimidine therapy; radiotherapy and systemic therapy in the adjuvant and unresectable settings for biliary tract cancer; and radiotherapy and systemic therapy in the perioperative setting for early-stage gastric cancer.

Phosphorylated transducer and activator of transcription-3 (pSTAT3) immunohistochemical expression in paired primary and metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription-3 (STAT3) mediates cellular functions. We assessed the IHC expression of phosphorylated STAT3 (pSTAT3) in paired primary tumors and liver metastases in patients with advanced stage colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: We included patients with tissue blocks available from both the primary CRC and a surgically resected liver metastasis. The IHC pSTAT3 expression agreement was measured using Cohen's kappa statistic. RESULTS: The study included 103 patients, 55% male, median age was 64. 43% tumors originated in rectum, and 63% of the primary tumors were synchronous. Expression of pSTAT3 was 76% in liver metastases and 71% in primary tumors. A difference in pSTAT3 staining between the primary tumor and liver metastases was noted in 64%. There was lost expression of pSTAT3 in the liver metastases in 28% and gained expression in 36% of cases compared to the primary. The kappa statistic comparing agreement between staining patterns of the primary tumors and liver metastases was a "less-than-chance", at -0.02. Median survival was 4.9 years, with no difference in survival outcomes by pSTAT3 expression in the primary tumor or liver metastases. DISCUSSION: STAT3 is not a prognostic marker in the selective setting of metastatic CRC to liver, but it may remain a potential therapeutic target given most liver metastases expressed pSTAT3. Discordant pSTAT3 expression in between primary tumors and paired liver metastases suggests that use of this class of drug to treat liver predominant metastatic colorectal cancer in a biomarker-driven approach may require confirmatory liver tumor biopsy.

The impact of driving time, distance, and socioeconomic factors on outcomes of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Objectives: Cancer patients experience disparities due to socioeconomic status (SES) factors. We assessed the impact of SES factors on outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) and surgery (Sx) in 3 Canadian provinces. Study design: This study was a multi-institutional retrospective chart review. Methods: Associations among community characteristics (2016 Canadian Census data), distance and time to the cancer center (mapping software), and outcomes were evaluated using the CHORD multi-institutional database. Results: 1,064 patients were included. Median age 62, 68% male, 15% lived in a rural community, 19% with median community household income >$50,000 CAD, median community proportion with post-secondary education 66%, 12% lived >100km away, and 18% lived >1 â€‹h away.Factors predictive of worse disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in univariate analysis included driving time >1 â€‹h, median community income ≤$50,000 CAD, driving distance >100km, and lower median community proportion with post-secondary education. Driving time >1 â€‹h remained significant in multivariate analysis for worse DFS (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.14-1.90; p â€‹= â€‹0.003) and OS (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.19-2.16; p â€‹= â€‹0.002). Conclusion: Outcomes of patients with LARC undergoing nCRT are negatively associated with increased driving time to the cancer centre.

Potential Life-Years Lost: The Impact of the Cancer Drug Regulatory and Funding Process in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Canada has an established publicly funded health care system with a complex drug approval and funding process. After proof of efficacy (POE; key publication/presentation) and before becoming publicly accessible, each drug undergoes a Health Canada approval process, a health technology assessment (HTA), a pricing negotiation, and finally individual provincial funding agreements. We quantified potential life-years lost during this process. METHODS: We analyzed drugs for advanced lung, breast, and colorectal cancer that underwent the HTA process between 2011 and 2016. Life-years lost were calculated by multiplying documented improvement in progression-free and overall survival, number of eligible patients, and time from POE to first public funding. For conservative calculation, we assumed all eligible patients in Canada had access at the time of first public funding, whereas in reality provinces fund at different time points. RESULTS: We analyzed 21 drugs. Of these, 15 have been funded publicly. The time from POE to first public funding ranged from 14.0 to 99.2 months (median 26.6 months). Total overall life-years lost from POE to first public funding were 39,067 (lung 32,367; breast 6,691). Progression-free life-years lost from POE to first public funding were 48,037 (lung 9,139, breast 15,827, colorectal 23,071). CONCLUSION: The number of potential life-years lost during the drug regulatory and funding process in Canada is substantial, largely driven by delays to funding of colorectal cancer drugs. Recognizing that interprovincial differences exist and that eligible patients may not all receive a given drug, if even a fraction does so, the impact of delays remains substantive. Collaborative national initiatives are required to address this major barrier to treatment access. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients may spend lengthy periods of time awaiting access to new and effective cancer drugs. Patients with private drug insurance or personal funds or who reside in certain Canadian provinces may obtain some drugs sooner than others, potentially creating a two-tiered access system. The cancer drug access and public funding system must be expedited to improve equity.

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios as predictive and prognostic markers in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: A standard therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) includes fluoropyrimidine (FP)-based neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT). Previous studies have inconsistently demonstrated that baseline neutrophil- and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios (NLR and PLR) are predictive of response to nCRT or prognostic of outcomes in LARC. METHODS: We reviewed patients with LARC undergoing nCRT followed by surgery from 2005 to 2013 across 8 Canadian cancer centres. Outcome measures of interest were pathological complete response (pCR), disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess for associations between baseline hematologic variables and outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1527 identified patients, 1237 (81%) were included in the DFS/OS analysis. Median age was 62 (range 23-88), 69% were male, and 80% had performance status (PS) 0-1. Twenty-six percent had elevated NLR (≥ 4), and 66% had elevated PLR (≥ 150). Ninety-seven percent of patients received FP-based nCRT, with 96% receiving ≥44 Gy. 81% completed neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 95% completed neoadjuvant radiotherapy, with a pCR rate of 18%. After a median follow-up time of 71 months, 8% developed local recurrence, 22% developed distant recurrence and 24% died. 5-year DFS and OS were 69% (95% CI 66-72%) and 79% (95% CI 77-82%), respectively. In multivariate analyses, elevated baseline NLR and PLR were neither prognostic for DFS and OS nor predictive of pCR. CONCLUSIONS: NLR and PLR were not found to be independently prognostic for DFS or OS and did not predict for pCR in patients with LARC undergoing nCRT followed by surgery.

Inpatients versus outpatients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Characteristics and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Most newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC patients have an initial medical oncology consult as an outpatient. Sometimes, the initial consult occurs as an inpatient. We explored differences among NSCLC patients presenting to medical oncology while hospitalized versus as outpatients. METHODS: With ethics approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of all stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients at our institution consulted by medical oncology between 2009 and 2012. The primary analysis is descriptive, exploring differences in baseline characteristics, treatment choices, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 637 patients were included: 123 inpatients and 514 outpatients. Among outpatients, 55% received systemic therapy compared to 21% of inpatients. Among treated patients, inpatients were likely to be younger (81% vs 70% <70 years, p = 0.04), have PS 3-4 (38% vs 5%, p<0.001), have ≥5% weight loss (54% vs 42%, p = 0.01), anemia (19% vs 4%, p = 0.001), leukocytosis (38% vs 32%, p = 0.001), thrombocytosis (27 vs 23%, p = 0.001), renal dysfunction (12% vs 5%, p = 0.01) and more rapid onset of symptoms (27% vs 6% for <2 weeks, 35% vs 11% for 2-6 weeks; p<0.001). Inpatients who received systemic therapy were more likely to have a complete or partial response (42% vs 26%, p = 0.007), however had a shorter median OS than treated outpatients (8.4 vs 10.5 months, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Patients initially consulted by medical oncologists while hospitalized were more unwell and fewer received systemic therapy. However, if treated, they had higher response rates than outpatients and reasonable OS. Systemic therapy can be considered in hospitalized advanced NSCLC patients. MICROABSTRACT: A minority of patients with lung cancer have an initial oncology consultation as an inpatient. We compared the characteristics and outcomes of inpatients with their outpatient counterparts. Inpatients were more unwell at diagnosis and fewer received systemic therapy, but among those who did, they were more likely to respond and their overall survival approached that of the outpatient cohort.

Patients With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Requiring Inpatient Medical Oncology Consultation: Characteristics, Referral Patterns, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) occasionally are hospitalized at the time of initial medical oncology consultation. We investigated the characteristics and outcomes of this population. METHODS: With ethics approval, we performed a retrospective analysis of patients with advanced NSCLC at our institution whose initial consult occurred while hospitalized from 2007 to 2012. This was an exploratory analysis. Multivariate survival analysis was performed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: A total of 223 patients were included. Baseline demographics were as follows: median age, 65 years; 52% were female; median Charlson Comorbidity Index of 10; 69% performance status (PS) 3 to 4; 49% were current smokers; 90% had stage IV disease; and 52% had ≥ 5% weight loss. Only 24% received chemotherapy. Among those treated, the median time from diagnosis to chemotherapy was 43 days. Common reasons for not receiving chemotherapy included poor PS (72%) and patient choice (9%). Factors associated with receiving chemotherapy in multivariate analysis were good PS (odds ratio [OR], 9.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.55-23.26; P < .001), no leukocytosis (OR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.35-9.35; P = .01), and age < 70 years (OR, 6.80; 95% CI, 1.78-26.32; P = .005). Factors associated with shorter overall survival in multivariate analysis were not receiving chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.11; 95% CI, 1.28-3.48; P = .003), PS 3 to 4 (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.01-2.26; P = .045), leukocytosis (HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.44-3.13; P < .001), and thrombocytosis (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.03-2.09; P = .036). CONCLUSIONS: Patients whose first consultation with medical oncologists occurs while hospitalized are an inherently sick population. Earlier diagnosis and referral would give more patients access to treatment options before a terminal functional decline.