Prospective Observational Study of COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients with Thoracic Malignancies: Adverse Events, Breakthrough Infections and Survival Outcomes.

Due to the devastating COVID-19 pandemic, a preventive tool in the form of vaccination was introduced. Thoracic cancer patients had one of the highest rates of morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19 disease, but the lack of data about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines in this population triggered studies like ours to explore these parameters in a cancer population. Out of 98 patients with thoracic malignancies vaccinated per protocol, 60-75% experienced some adverse events (AE) after their first or second vaccination, most of them were mild and did not interfere with their daily activities. Out of 17 severe AEs reported, all but one were resolved shortly after vaccination. No significant differences were noted considering AE occurrence between different cancer therapies received after the first or second vaccination dose, p = 0.767 and p = 0.441, respectively. There were 37 breakthrough infections either after the first (1), second (13) or third (23) vaccine dose. One patient died as a direct consequence of COVID-19 infection and respiratory failure, and another after disease progression with simultaneous severe infection. Eight patients had moderate disease courses, received antiviral therapies and survived without consequences. Vaccination did not affect the time to disease progression or death from underlying cancer.

Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer: systematic review using the HTA Core Model® for Rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessment.

Background: Stool DNA testing for early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is a non-invasive technology with the potential to supplement established CRC screening tests. The aim of this health technology assessment was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of currently CE-marked stool DNA tests, compared to other CRC tests in CRC screening strategies in an asymptomatic screening population. Methods: The assessment was carried out following the guidelines of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA). This included a systematic literature search in MED-LINE, Cochrane and EMBASE in 2018. Manufacturers were asked to provide additional data. Five patient interviews helped assessing potential ethical or social aspects and patients' experiences and preferences. We assessed the risk of bias using QUADAS-2, and the quality of the body of evidence using GRADE. Results: We identified three test accuracy studies, two of which investigated a multitarget stool DNA test (Cologuard®, compared fecal immunochemical test (FIT)) and one a combined DNA stool assay (ColoAlert®, compared to guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (gFOBT), Pyruvate Kinase Isoenzyme Type M2 (M2-PK) and combined gFOBT/M2-PK). We found five published surveys on patient satisfaction. No primary study investigating screening effects on CRC incidence or on overall mortality was found. Both stool DNA tests showed in direct comparison higher sensitivity for the detection of CRC and (advanced) adenoma compared to FIT, or gFOBT, respectively, but had lower specificity. However, these comparative results may depend on the exact type of FIT used. The reported test failure rates were higher for stool DNA testing than for FIT. The certainty of evidence was moderate to high for Cologuard® studies, and low to very low for the ColoAlert® study which refers to a former version of the product and yielded no direct evidence on the test accuracy for ad-vanced versus non-advanced adenoma. Conclusions: ColoAlert® is the only stool DNA test currently sold in Europe and is available at a lower price than Cologuard®, but reliable evidence is lacking. A screening study including the current product version of ColoAlert® and suitable comparators would, therefore, help evaluate the effectiveness of this screening option in a European context.

Time to access to novel anticancer drugs and the correlation with ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale in Slovenia.

Objectives: Timely access to novel anticancer drugs is challenging and value frameworks such as the European Society of Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) could assist in drug prioritization. We assessed the overall time to access to novel anticancer drugs in Slovenia and its correlation with ESMO-MCBS scores.Methods: Anticancer drugs with European Medicines Agency marketing authorization (EMA MA), applying for national reimbursement approval (NRA) in the period 2008-2018 with assigned ESMO-MCBS score, were included. Publically available data from EMA and the Slovenian National Health Insurance Institute were used for time calculations.Results: Among 53 studied drugs; a majority (47) of them obtained reimbursement approval within the observed time. The median time to EMA MA was 397 (range 98-615) days with the NRA requiring additional 422 (range 154-892) days. Neither time to EMA MA nor NRA correlated with ESMO-MCBS substantial clinical benefit (p = 0.332 and p = 0.965, respectively).Conclusions: In Slovenia, time to access to novel anticancer drugs exceeds two years and, more importantly, is equally long for drugs with or without substantial clinical benefit. Integration of the ESMO-MCBS into reimbursement deliberations could improve access to drugs with substantial clinical benefit.

Decision-making criteria for medicine reimbursement in Slovenia: an expert panel discussion.

BACKGROUND: Rational and transparent Health Technology Assessment and reimbursement decision-making are crucial for healthcare system sustainability. A part of the reimbursement process are decision-making criteria which should be clearly defined. METHODS: The study aimed to obtain an insight into understanding and relevance of potential criteria for the medicine reimbursement decision-making process in Slovenia. A semi-structured guided focus panel was performed in June 2017 with five Slovenian experts covering principal healthcare system sectors. First, criteria understanding and relevance for medicine reimbursement decision-making were discussed. Second, healthcare priorities and societal values affecting decision-making were debated. The analysis was carried out with NVivo 11 by two independent researchers who coded the verbatim transcript in three coding steps based on the experts' interpretations and original ideas. RESULTS: Seven decision-making criteria were derived. Among those, the impact a disease has on the lives of patient family and caregivers and the indirect medicine benefit for them were new aspects comparing to the existing criteria set in Slovenia. The experts expressed that the same decision-making criteria are relevant for evaluating any health technology, allowing for different criteria weights. They also suggested a system that would allow re-evaluation of reimbursement decisions once real-world clinical data are available. CONCLUSIONS: As proposed by the international frameworks and tools, the Slovenian healthcare experts consider including multiple aspects more ethical and comprehensive than considering a single criterion, e.g. cost-effectiveness, existing in some healthcare systems. They recognize that in the existing decision-making process, health perspectives of the public represent a largely missed aspect.

Influence of novel oral anticoagulants on anticoagulation care management.

Anticoagulation treatment was recently improved by the introduction of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, this study explores the effects of the introduction of NOACs on anticoagulation care in Slovenia. Face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders revealed evolvement and challenges of anticoagulation care from different perspectives. Obtained information was further explored through the analysis of nationwide data of drug prescriptions and realization of health care services. Simplified management of anticoagulation treatment with NOACs and their high penetration expanded the capacity of anticoagulation clinics, and consequentially the treated population increased by more than 50 % in the last 5 years. The main challenge concerned the expenditures for medicines, which increased approximately 10 times in just a few years. At the same time, the anticoagulation clinics and their core organisation were not affected, which is not expected to change, since they are vital in delivering high-quality care.

PD-L1 Expression in Squamous-cell Carcinoma and Adenocarcinoma of the Lung.

BACKGROUND: With introduction of immunotherapy (IT) into the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a need for predictive biomarker became apparent. Programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein expression is most widely explored predictive marker for response to IT. We assessed PD-L1 expression in tumor cells (TC) and immune cells (IC) of squamous-cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We obtained 54 surgically resected tumor specimens and assessed PD-L1 expression by immunohistochemistry after staining them with antibody SP142 (Ventana, USA). Clinicopathological characteristics were acquired from the hospital registry database. Results were analyzed according to cut-off values of ≥ 5% and ≥ 10% of PD-L1 expression on either TC or IC. RESULTS: 29 (54%) samples were AC and 25 (46%) were SCC. PD-L1 expression was significantly higher in TC of SCC compared to AC at both cut-off values (52% vs. 17%, p = 0.016 and 52% vs. 14%, p = 0.007, respectively) no difference in PD-L1 expression in IC of SCC and AC was found. In AC alone, PD-L1 expression was significantly higher in IC compared to TC at both cut-off values (72% vs. 17%, p < 0.001 and 41% vs. 14%, p = 0.008, respectively), while no significant difference between IC and TC PD-L1 expression was revealed in SCC. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a significantly higher PD-L1 expression in TC of SCC compared to AC, regardless of the cut-off value. PD-L1 expression in IC is high in both histological subtypes of NSCLC, and adds significantly to the overall positivity of AC but not SCC.

The Value of Evidence in the Decision-Making Process for Reimbursement of Pharmacogenetic Dosing of Warfarin.

BACKGROUND: After early clinical trials that evaluated pharmacogenetic (PG) algorithms, many healthcare payers were reluctant to cover this technology and, consequently, PG dosing of warfarin could not be translated into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the value of upgrading evidence relating to PG dosing of warfarin from the healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated PG dosing of warfarin were identified through a systematic literature search, and their findings were combined by a cumulative meta-analysis. A health economic model was used to estimate economic outcomes and to calculate the expected value of perfect information (EVPI) as a measure of the value of clinical trials for decision makers. RESULTS: Nine RCTs were identified and included in our analysis. The estimated difference in the percentage of time in the therapeutic range was 5.6 percentage points in 2007, decreasing to 4.3 percentage points when all studies were included. At a reimbursement price of €160 per PG testing, the EVPI for the clinical benefit was estimated at €80 and €90 per patient in 2007 and 2014, respectively. A reduction in the price of PG testing to €40, which was observed in this period, resulted in an EVPI of €3 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated cumulative effect of PG dosing has remained similar since 2007, but additional evidence has contributed to a more precise estimation. While these variations should not affect the reimbursement decision, a large decline in the cost of PG testing in recent years calls for reconsideration.

Cost effectiveness of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation depending on the quality of warfarin anticoagulation control.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonists, such as warfarin, are standard treatments for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation. Patient outcomes depend on quality of warfarin management, which includes regular monitoring and dose adjustments. Recently, novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) that do not require regular monitoring offer an alternative to warfarin. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether cost effectiveness of NOACs for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation depends on the quality of warfarin control. METHODS: We developed a Markov decision model to simulate warfarin treatment outcomes in relation to the quality of anticoagulation control, expressed as percentage of time in the therapeutic range (TTR). Standard treatment with adjusted-dose warfarin and improved anticoagulation control by genotype-guided dosing were compared with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban. The analysis was performed from the Slovenian healthcare payer perspective using 2014 costs. RESULTS: In the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban was below the threshold of €25,000 per quality-adjusted life-years compared with adjusted-dose warfarin with a TTR of 60%. The probability that warfarin was a cost-effective option was around 1%. This percentage rises as the quality of anticoagulation control improves. At a TTR of 70%, warfarin was the preferred treatment in half the iterations. CONCLUSION: The cost effectiveness of NOACs for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who are at increased risk for stroke is highly sensitive to warfarin anticoagulation control. NOACs are more likely to be cost-effective options in settings with poor warfarin management than in settings with better anticoagulation control, where they may not represent good value for money.