EpCAMhigh and EpCAMlow circulating tumor cells in metastatic prostate and breast cancer patients.

The presence of high expressing epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAMhigh) circulating tumor cells (CTC) enumerated by CellSearch® in blood of cancer patients is strongly associated with poor prognosis. This raises the question about the presence and relation with clinical outcome of low EpCAM expressing CTC (EpCAMlow CTC). In the EU-FP7 CTC-Trap program, we investigated the presence of EpCAMhigh and EpCAMlow CTC using CellSearch, followed by microfiltration of the EpCAMhigh CTC depleted blood. Blood samples of 108 castration-resistant prostate cancer patients and 22 metastatic breast cancer patients were processed at six participating sites, using protocols and tools developed in the CTC-Trap program. Of the prostate cancer patients, 53% had ≥5 EpCAMhigh CTC and 28% had ≥5 EpCAMlow CTC. For breast cancer patients, 32% had ≥5 EpCAMhigh CTC and 36% had ≥5 EpCAMlow CTC. 70% of prostate cancer patients and 64% of breast cancer patients had in total ≥5 EpCAMhigh and/or EpCAMlow CTC, increasing the number of patients in whom CTC are detected. Castration-resistant prostate cancer patients with ≥5 EpCAMhigh CTC had shorter overall survival versus those with <5 EpCAMhigh CTC (p = 0.000). However, presence of EpCAMlow CTC had no relation with overall survival. This emphasizes the importance to demonstrate the relation with clinical outcome when presence of CTC identified with different technologies are reported, as different CTC subpopulations can have different relations with clinical outcome.

Evidence on the cost of breast cancer drugs is required for rational decision making.

BACKGROUND: For rational decision making, assessing the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of new drugs and comparing the costs of drugs already on the market is required. In addition to value frameworks, such as the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework and the European Society of Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical benefit Scale, this also requires a transparent overview of actual drug prices. While list prices are available, evidence on treatment cost is not. This paper aims to synthesise evidence on the reimbursement and costs of high-cost breast cancer drugs in The Netherlands (NL). METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify currently reimbursed breast cancer drugs in the NL. Treatment costs were determined by multiplying list prices with the average length of treatment and dosing schedule. RESULTS: Comparing list prices to the estimated treatment cost resulted in substantial differences in the ranking of costliness of the drugs. The average mean treatment length was unknown for 11/31 breast cancer drugs (26.2%). The differences in the 15 highest-cost drugs were largest for Bevacizumab, Lapatinib and everolimus, with list prices of €541, €158, €1,168 and estimated treatment cost of €174,400, €18,682 and €31,207, respectively. The lowest-cost (patented) targeted drug is €1,818 more expensive than the highest-cost (off-patent) generic drug according to the estimated drug treatment cost. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of evidence on the reimbursement and cost of high-cost breast cancer drugs complicates rapid and transparent evidence synthesis, necessary to focus strategies aiming to limit the increasing healthcare costs. Interestingly, the findings show that off-patent generics (such as paclitaxel or doxorubicin), although substantially cheaper than patented drugs, are still relatively costly. Extending standardisation and increasing European and national regulations on presenting information on costs per cancer drug is highly recommended.