Overall Survival Benefits of Cancer Drugs Approved in China From 2005 to 2020

Evaluation of changes in price, volume and expenditure of PD-1 drugs following the government reimbursement negotiation in China: a multiple-treatment period interrupted time series analysis

Background

Government reimbursement negotiation (GRN) is an important policy tool to increase the accessibility of drugs. In China, the impact of GRN implementation on programmed death-1 (PD-1) drugs price, procurement volume, and expenditure is unknown.

Methods

This study used a multiple-treatment period interrupted time series design covering the period from the first-time recorded in Chinese Medical Economic Information database to 2022 to examine changes in hospital procurement price, volume and expenditure of PD-1 drugs after the implementation of GRN in China. Data were obtained from 698 public hospitals of 30 provinces in China.

Results

A total of four PD-1 drugs have been selected in the National Reimbursement Drug List via GRN between March 2019 and 2022. After the implementation of the first-time GRN, the prices of all PD-1 drugs decreased significantly, with Camrelizumab experiencing the largest reduction in price and the largest increase in volume and expenditure. The Camrelizumab's price decreased by 1151.75 Chinese Yuan (CNY) (β2 = -1151.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -1254.534, 1048.96), volume increased by 159.549 thousand defined daily doses (β2 = 159.549; 95% CI = 119.12, 199.979) and expenditure increased by 11.172 million CNY (β2 = 11.172; 95% CI = 1.653, 20.692). Following the implementation of the second-time of GRN, Sintilimab showed the largest decrease in price, with price decreased by 164.099 CNY (β4 = -164.099; 95% CI = -171.867, 156.331), Tislelizumab had the largest increase in volume and expenditure, with the volume increased by 102.185 thousand defined daily doses (β4 = 102.185; 95% CI = 47.862, 156.509) and expenditure increased by 4.119 million CNY (β4 = 4.119; 95% CI = -3.808, 12.047).

Conclusions

The GRN policy improved the accessibility and affordability of PD-1 drugs. Health insurance policy-makers need to consider the legitimate interests of PD-1 drug manufacturers while ensuring the sustainability of the basic health insurance fund.

Overview of new indications for novel drugs approved in China between 2018 and 2024

Since China's regulatory reforms were initiated in 2015, the development of new indications for novel drugs has become an important trend. Between 2018 and 2024, China's National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) approved 313 new indications for 151 novel drugs. This cross-sectional study comprehensively depicts the landscape of China's new indications for novel drugs, including the characteristics of approvals, quality, and quantity of clinical trial evidence. The quality characteristics of the efficacy evidence for new indications were affected by the treatment areas and conditional approval programs. The efficacy of a novel drug for a new indication can be demonstrated by one pivotal trial or one pivotal trial plus supportive evidence in most cases.

Preferences for public health insurance coverage of new anticancer drugs: a discrete choice experiment among non-small cell lung cancer patients in China

BACKGROUND

Ensuring equal access to affordable, high-quality, and satisfied healthcare for cancer patients is a challenge worldwide. Our study aimed to investigate preferences for public health insurance coverage of new anticancer drugs among non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in China.

METHODS

We identified six attributes of new anticancer drugs and adopted a Bayesian-efficient design to generate choice scenarios for a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The one-on-one, face-to-face DCE was conducted in four cities in Jiangsu Province. The mixed logit regression model was used to estimate patient-reported preferences for each attribute. The interaction model was used to investigate preference heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Data from 486 patients were available for analysis. The most valuable attribute was the out-of-pocket cost if reimbursed (RI = 32.25%), followed by extension of overall survival (RI = 15.99%), and low incidence of serious side effects (RI = 14.45%). Patients had the highest willingness to pay for the comparative 9-month' extension of overall survival. Patients with advanced NSCLC were more likely to expect new anticancer drugs could improve HRQoL (p < 0.01) and require fewer out-of-pocket costs (p < 0.01). Older patients and patients with low income cared more about the out-of-pocket costs (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Health insurance policymakers need to consider the affordability, comparative survival benefits, comparative safety, and comparative patient-reported outcomes of new anticancer drugs. The findings also highlight the need to ensure affordability for older patients, low-income patients, and patients with advanced cancer.

Research and Development of Medical Countermeasures for Emerging Infectious Diseases, China, 1990-2022

Since the severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak in 2003, China has invested substantial efforts in promoting scientific and technological advances for medical countermeasures against high-threat pathogens. The examination of China's landscape identifies progress and gaps in research and development (R&D) and also highlights management and regulatory issues that should be of concern to other countries. Our study examined the current state of R&D of medical countermeasures in China during 1990-2022. The findings showed a robust and diversified pipeline responding quickly to disease outbreaks and policy changes. However, proactive and highly innovative candidates are limited, and a large proportion of vaccines and drugs stagnate at the early development stage. A paradigm shift involving a preemptive R&D agenda and persistent investment, innovative technology development, and accelerated research translation is urgently needed to prepare for the next pandemic.

Questionnaire survey and analysis of drug clinical research implementation capabilities of breast cancer treatment departments in Chinese hospitals

BACKGROUND

Clinical research competence determines the quality of clinical research and the reliability of research findings. We aimed to explore the clinical research implementation capabilities of breast cancer treatment departments in China.

METHODS

This was a department-based cross-sectional study conducted in the form of electronic questionnaires on the Wenjuanxing platform from 7th August to 31st August 2023 among hospitals from the first batch of breast cancer standardized diagnosis and treatment quality control pilot centers in China.

RESULTS

A total of 127 questionnaires from 122 hospitals were ultimately included in the analysis. Medical personnel involved in the clinical research of 118 (92.9 %) departments received good clinical practice (GCP) training. The steps of the approval process from research initiation to completion lasted 2-4 weeks or longer. The majority of departments initiated or participated in 2 or fewer clinical research projects over the past year. Among the differences between different departments, the Department of Medical Oncology had a better qualification profile and process and greater number of initiated and participated clinical studies than did the Department of Surgical Oncology. For needs and problems, most of the departments were strongly willing to undertake clinical research and receive professional training; the most common problem in the process of conducting studies was patient recruitment.

CONCLUSIONS

Most departments generally exhibited complete capabilities for implementing clinical research. Improvements in implementation efficiency, quality of research and patient recruitment are still needed. Professional training and communication, as well as the recommendation of clinical research, are required in future development.

Impact of competition on reimbursement decisions for cancer drugs in China: an observational study

Background

Annual Chinese National negotiations for including innovative drugs in the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) reveal an increasing number of new drugs with overlapping action mechanisms of action and similar indications. Yet, it is unclear if competition affects reimbursement decisions. Thus, we explored the impact of competition on reimbursement decisions for cancer drugs in China.

Methods

We identified the cancer drugs involved in NRDL negotiations from 2017 to 2022 and focused on the initial reimbursement decision for eligible newly negotiated drugs. Drugs were classified as within-class competitors based on their equivalent biological mechanisms of action and approved indications, including identified and potential competitors. Other variables included drug type, clinical benefit and safety, monthly drug cost, and disease incidence rate. We employed traditional univariate and multivariate Firth's penalized logistic regression to assess the association between reimbursement decisions and variables at the indication and drug levels.

Findings

Between 2017 and 2022, 102 cancer drugs corresponding to 141 indications were studied, and 66 drugs (64.7%) covering 95 indications (67.4%) were added to the NRDL. The proportion of reimbursements for indications with identified competition was significantly higher than that for indications without identified competition (84.6% vs 52.6%, p < 0.0001). However, the difference in reimbursement proportions between groups with and without potential competition was not statistically significant (66.7% vs 68.3%, p = 0.84). Firth's penalized logistic regression showed that identified competition was positively correlated with successful NRDL inclusion, whereas potential competition had no significant effect on negotiation outcomes. Improved overall survival or progression-free survival were positively associated with NRDL inclusion, whereas disease incidence negatively impacted reimbursement decisions.

Interpretation

Improved clinical benefit and identified competition were positively correlated with NRDL inclusion. In China's value-based negotiation model, clinical benefits served as a crucial foundation of price negotiation for cancer drugs, and market competition helped these drugs enter the NRDL at more reasonable prices. This has important implications for reimbursement decisions and accessibility and affordability improvement for innovative drugs worldwide.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 72104151).

Sugemalimab combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

This study aims to systematically analyze the cost-effectiveness of the combination therapy comprising sugemalimab and chemotherapy in the management of advanced ESCC from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Methods

An advanced ESCC patient simulation partitioned survival approach model was developed to mimic the disease progression of patients undergoing treatment with sugemalimab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. To ensure accuracy and precision, clinical data, treatment costs, and utility values were collected from comprehensive clinical trials and reliable economic databases. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted by assessing the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in relation to the established willingness-to-pay threshold. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model.

Results

The cumulative expenditure for the group of patients administered with sugemalimab amounted to US$ 41734.87, whereas the placebo group was associated with a total cost of US$ 22926.25. By evaluating the ICER, which quantifies the additional cost incurred per QALY gained, a value of US$ 61066.96 per QALY was determined. It is imperative to note that this ICER value surpasses the predetermined threshold for WTP in China, set at US$ 39,855.79 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results were sensitive to the cost of sugemalimab, progression-free survival, and utility values. These fluctuations did not result in a reversal of the study findings.

Conclusion

The combination of sugemalimab with chemotherapy for the treatment of ESCC in China is currently not considered a cost-effective therapeutic approach. However, it is suggested that additional reductions in price may facilitate the potential for achieving cost-effectiveness.

Association of Launch Price and Clinical Value With Reimbursement Decisions for Anticancer Drugs in China

BACKGROUND

The potential role played by launch price and clinical value in reimbursement decisions has not been sufficiently established in China. This study aimed to investigate the association of launch price and clinical value with reimbursement decisions for anticancer drugs after the implementation of reimbursement-linked price negotiation in China.

METHODS

Anticancer drugs approved by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) of China from January 2017 to June 2022 were eligible for inclusion. Approval and reimbursement dates of included drug indications were retrieved from publicly available resources. We collected measures of clinical value, including survival, quality of life (QoL), and overall response rate from pivotal clinical trials and calculated treatment price at launch. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were employed to estimate the association between launch price, clinical value, and reimbursement decisions of anticancer drugs in China.

RESULTS

The median reimbursement lag was 579 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 402-936) for 93 indications supported by randomized controlled trials and 637 days (IQR: 373-858) for 42 indications supported by single-arm clinical trials. Reimbursement was granted to 60 (65%) and 23 (55%) indications supported by randomized controlled and single-arm clinical trials, respectively. The launch price of anticancer drugs was not associated with reimbursement decisions in multivariate regression analyses. Indications supported by randomized controlled trials with higher clinical value were more likely to be reimbursed (hazard ratio [HR] for survival=1.07, 95% CI: 1.00-1.15, P=.037), while the overall response rate of indications supported by single-arm clinical trials was not associated with the likelihood of being reimbursed (HR=2.09, 95% CI: 0.14-32.28, P=.595).

CONCLUSION

The launch price of anticancer drugs may not have a significant impact on reimbursement decisions, while the implementation of reimbursement-linked price negotiation in China has prioritized anticancer drugs with higher clinical value, but only for indications supported by randomized controlled trials. Efforts are needed to prioritize indications supported by single-arm clinical trials that have higher value during the process of price negotiation.

Cancer drug indication approvals in China and the United States: a comparison of approval times and clinical benefit, 2001-2020

Background

Perceived delays in cancer drug approvals have been a major concern for policymakers in China. Policies have been implemented to accelerate the launch of new cancer drugs and indications. This study aimed to assess similarities and differences between China and the United States in the approvals, timing, and clinical benefit evidence of cancer drug indications between 2001 and 2020.

Methods

This study retrospectively identified all cancer drugs and indications approved in both China and the United States from January 1st, 2001 to December 31, 2020, and described differences in approval times as well as in submission and review times. Information on the availability of overall survival benefit evidence by December 31, 2020, was collected. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to assess whether evidence of benefit and other factors affected the propensity and timing of approvals of cancer drug indications in China.

Findings

Between 2001 and 2020, 229 indications corresponding to 145 cancer drugs approved in the United States were identified. Of those, 80 indications (34.9%) were also approved in China by the end of 2020. Cancer drug indications were approved in China at a median of 1273.5 days after approval in the United States. The median submission and review time differences for cancer drug indications in China were 1198.0 days and 180.0 days respectively. Submission time differences accounted for most of the approval time differences (p < 0.001). Indications supported by overall survival benefit evidence had shorter median review time differences (145.0 days) than those without such evidence (235.0 days, p = 0.008). Indications with overall survival benefit evidence were 3.94 times more likely to be approved in China compared to those without such evidence (p = 0.001), controlling for approval year, cancer type, and the prevalence of cancer by site.

Interpretation

FDA-approved cancer drug indications demonstrating a survival benefit were more likely to receive approvals in China with shorter regulatory review times compared to indications without such evidence. Given that manufacturer submission times were the main driver of cancer drug approval times in China, factors influencing submission timing should be explored.

Funding

No funding.

Analysis of oncological drugs authorised in Spain in the last decade: association between clinical benefit and reimbursement

BACKGROUND

Our study aimed to assess whether there was a relationship between clinical benefits and reimbursement decisions as well as the inclusion of economic evaluations in  therapeutic positioning reports (IPTs) and to explore factors influencing reimbursement decisions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analysed all anti-cancer drugs approved in Spain from 2010 to September 2022. The clinical benefit of each drug were evaluated using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) 1.1. The characteristics of these drugs were obtained from the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices. Reimbursement status information was obtained using BIFIMED, a web resource available in Spanish and consulted the agreements of the Interministerial Committee on Pricing of Medicines (CIPM).

RESULTS

In total, 73 drugs were included involving 197 indications. Almost half of the indications had substantial clinical benefit (49.8% yes vs. 50.3% no). Of the 153 indications with a reimbursement decision, 61 (56.5%) reimbursed indications had substantial clinical benefit compared to 14 (31.1%) of the non-reimbursed (p < 0.01). The median gain of overall survival was 4.9 months (2.8-11.2) for reimbursed indications and 2.9 months (1.7-5) in non-reimbursed (p < 0.05). Only six (3%) indications had an economic evaluation in the IPT.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that there is a relationship between substantial clinical benefit and the reimbursement decision in Spain. However, we also found that the overall survival gain was modest, and a significant proportion of the reimbursed indications had no substantial clinical benefit. Economic evaluations in IPTs are infrequent and cost-effectiveness analysis is not provided by CIPM.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and economic evaluation

Background

Recently, several novel programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors have been approved for second-line treating advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), including camrelizumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, sintilimab and tislelizumab. However, the optimal treatment regimen remained ambiguous.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy, safety and economy of available PD-1 inhibitors to determine the optimal treatment from the Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Design

A systematic review and economic evaluation.

Data sources and methods

A systematic review was undertaken utilizing PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase and Scopus databases to identify eligible studies until 31 August 2023. Primary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs). We also developed a partitioned survival model at 3-week intervals based on five clinical trials to predict long-term costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for various treatment options. Direct medical costs and utility values were obtained from public drug bidding databases, clinical trials or published literature. The parameter uncertainties within the model were determined via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

Results

Five randomized controlled trials involving 2837 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with other treatments examined, camrelizumab provided the best PFS benefits [hazard ratio (HR): 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56-0.86], and pembrolizumab provided the best OS benefits (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.37-0.82). Nivolumab caused a relatively lower incidence of treatment-related AEs (HR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.05-0.20) and grade 3-5 AEs (HR: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.21) than other immunotherapy regimens. In the economic evaluation, average 10-year costs ranged from $5,433.86 (chemotherapy) to $50,617.95 (nivolumab) and mean QALYs ranged from 0.55 (chemotherapy) to 0.82 (camrelizumab). Pembrolizumab was eliminated because of dominance. Of the remaining strategies, when the willingness-to-pay thresholds were 1, 2 and 3 times GDP per capita in 2022, sintilimab, tislelizumab and camrelizumab were the most cost-effective treatment options, respectively.

Conclusion

Sintilimab might be the optimal treatment alternative for second-line therapy of advanced OSCC in China, followed by tislelizumab and camrelizumab.

Trial registration

This study has been registered on the PROSPERO database with the registration number CRD42023495204.

Use of suboptimal control arms in randomized clinical trials of investigational cancer drugs in China, 2016-2021: An observational study

BACKGROUND

The use of suboptimal controls in randomized trials of new cancer drugs can produce potentially unreliable clinical efficacy results over the current standard of care and expose patients to substandard therapy. We aim to investigate the proportion of randomized trials of investigational cancer drugs that used a suboptimal control arm and the number of trial participants at risk of exposure to suboptimal treatments in China. The association between the use of a suboptimal control and concluding statistical significance on the primary endpoint was also examined.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This observational study included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cancer drugs that were authorized by specific Chinese institutional review boards between 2016 and 2021, supporting investigational new drug applications of these drugs in China. The proportion of trials that used a suboptimal control arm and the total number of trial participants at risk of exposure to suboptimal treatments were calculated. In a randomized trial for a specific condition, a comparator was deemed suboptimal if it was not recommended by clinical guidelines published in priori or if there existed a regimen with a higher level of recommendation for the indication. The final sample included 453 Phase II/III and Phase III randomized oncology trials. Overall, 60 trials (13.2%) adopted a suboptimal control arm. Among them, 58.3% (35/60) used comparators that were not recommended by a prior guideline for the indication. The cumulative number of trial participants at risk of exposure to suboptimal treatments totaled 18,610 by the end of 2021, contributing 15.1% to the total number of enrollees of all sampled RCTs in this study. After adjusting for the year of ethical approval, region of participant recruitment, line of therapy, and cancer site, second-line therapies (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.7, 95%CI [1.2, 5.9]), adjuvant therapies (aOR = 8.9, 95% CI [3.4, 23.1]), maintenance therapies (aOR = 5.2, 95% CI [1.6, 17.0]), and trials recruiting participants in China only (aOR = 4.1, 95% CI [2.1, 8.0]) were more likely to adopt a suboptimal control. For the 105 trials with publicly available results, no statistically significant difference was observed between the use of a suboptimal control and concluding positive on the primary endpoint (100.0% [12/12] versus 83.9% [78/93], p = 0.208). The main limitation of this study is its reliance on clinical guidelines that could vary across cancer types and time in assessing the quality of the control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, over one-eighth of randomized trials of cancer drugs registered to apply for regulatory approval in China used a suboptimal comparator. Our results highlight the necessity to refine the design of randomized trials to generate optimal clinical evidence for new cancer therapies.

The correlation between the costs and clinical benefits of national price-negotiated anticancer drugs for specific cancers in China

Background

The high costs of novel anticancer drugs have caused concern among healthcare stakeholders. To address the knowledge gap on the proportion of survival benefit with the related economic expenditure, we aimed to assess the correlation between the costs and value of innovative drugs targeted to specific tumours, before and after price negotiation policy implementation.

Methods

We identified new drugs for lung and breast cancer that entered the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) through price negotiation from 2016 to 2023. Therapeutic value consisted of traditional clinical endpoints, like the percentage improvement of overall survival (ΔOS%) and progression-free survival (ΔPFS%), and the quantified gains of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (ASCO-VF) and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). We calculated monthly drug costs and used Spearman's correlation coefficient and Cohen's kappa statistics for statistical analysis.

Results

Twenty-nine innovative price-negotiated drugs were collected between 2016 and 2023. The median monthly costs were US$3381.31 out of NRDL and US$1095.88 within NRDL, with an ΔOS% of 22.24% (IQR = 6.45-29.48) and a ΔPFS% of 83.82% (IQR = 50.41-104.05). The median ASCO-VF score was 40.98, and 17 drugs scored the meaningful benefit of ESMO-MCBS. We found no association between clinical benefits and their costs before and after NRDL, either overall or for specific cancers. The agreement between the two frameworks was stable.

Conclusions

The negotiation policy decreased medication costs, but did not generate the expected correlation between the value and costs of anticancer drugs. Comprehensive value assessments need to be performed in the future to explore more in-depth findings and promote the affordability and availability of effective anticancer drugs.

Review time of oncology drugs and its underlying factors: an exploration in China

Introduction: How the launch delay of drugs and other factors of interest can influence the length of the review period by drug agencies is still unknown, and understanding this can help better strike the trade-off related to review speed. Methods: We included all new oncology drug applications submitted to China's National Medical Product Administration (NMPA) between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021, and ultimately succeeded in achieving marketing approval. For each drug, the length of the NMPA review process and other major characteristics were collected, including the registration class, approval class, priority review designation, and launch delay relative to the United States, as well as the number of patients enrolled, comparator, and primary endpoint of the pivotal trials supporting the approval. Linear regression model was employed to analyze the effects of factors of interest on the NMPA review time. Results: From 2018 to 2021, NMPA received 137 oncology applications that were ultimately approved. Half of the approvals [76 (55.5%)] were first licensed in the US, leaving a median launch delay of 2.71 years (IQR, 1.03-5.59) in China. In the pivotal studies, the median enrollment was 361 participants (IQR, 131-682), and the use of control groups [90 (65.7%)] and surrogate endpoints [101 (73.7%)] was prevalent. The median review time was 304 days (IQR, 253-376). Multivariate analysis for log-transformed review time showed that larger enrollment (> 92) was associated with a drop of 20.55% in review time (coefficient = -0.230; 95% CI, -0.404 to -0.055; p = 0.010); and a short delay (0 < delay ≤ 1.95 years) was associated with a drop of 17.63% in review time (coefficient = -0.194; 95% CI, -0.325 to -0.062; p = 0.004). Discussion: The short launch delay relative to the US was one important driver to the review speed of NMPA, which might suggest its latent regulatory reliance on the other global regulator during the post-marketing period when new information on the drug's clinical benefit was still lacking.

Is Target-Based Drug Discovery Efficient? Discovery and "Off-Target" Mechanisms of All Drugs

Target-based drug discovery is the dominant paradigm of drug discovery; however, a comprehensive evaluation of its real-world efficiency is lacking. Here, a manual systematic review of about 32000 articles and patents dating back to 150 years ago demonstrates its apparent inefficiency. Analyzing the origins of all approved drugs reveals that, despite several decades of dominance, only 9.4% of small-molecule drugs have been discovered through "target-based" assays. Moreover, the therapeutic effects of even this minimal share cannot be solely attributed and reduced to their purported targets, as they depend on numerous off-target mechanisms unconsciously incorporated by phenotypic observations. The data suggest that reductionist target-based drug discovery may be a cause of the productivity crisis in drug discovery. An evidence-based approach to enhance efficiency seems to be prioritizing, in selecting and optimizing molecules, higher-level phenotypic observations that are closer to the sought-after therapeutic effects using tools like artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Evidence of pre-approval clinical trial supporting the granted conditional approval for novel cancer drugs in China between 2015 and 2022

Background

Accelerated approval (AA) of novel anticancer drugs based on surrogacy has attracted considerable concern globally. China National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) also established a similar conditional approval (CA) program to accelerate the approval of novel drugs to address unmet medical needs. This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the pre-approval clinical trial evidence and potential challenge of cancer drugs receiving CA in China from policy implementation to 2022.

Methods

The cancer drugs (initial and supplemental indications) granted CA between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2022 using the public database of the NMPA were analyzed. The characteristics of the cancer drugs received CA were described. Primary efficacy endpoints and safety derived from the pre-approval clinical trial, including response rates (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), treatment-related serious adverse events (SAE) and Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were quantitatively estimated by meta-analysis. Besides, the correlation between the surrogate endpoints and OS was estimated by the reported trial-level correlation analysis.

Findings

The NMPA approved 72 cancer indications (56 new molecular entities) with CA between 2015 and 2022. 34 indications (47%) were also approved by the FDA or EMA. 74% (53/72) of cancer indications were based on a single-arm trial design while 26% (19/72) for randomized controlled trials. The pooled RR was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.45-0.55, I2 = 96%) with significant differences across cancer types and targets while the pooled hazard risk was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.28-0.53, I2 = 89%) for PFS and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.61-0.73, I2 = 0%) for OS. The pooled treatment-related SAE and Grade ≥3 AEs from single-arm designs resulted in 15% and 25%, respectively. In randomized controlled trials, the pooled treatment-related SAE and Grade ≥3 AEs observed in CA drugs and the control groups were comparable. Surrogate endpoints were widely used as the primary efficacy endpoints in the pre-approval pivotal clinical trials with 75% (54/72) for RR, 10% (7/72) for PFS, and 4% (3/72) for others. Of these, 27% (17/63) of the surrogate endpoints reported a trial-level correlation with OS; three reported high correlation (r ≥ 0.85), two reported moderate correlation (0.70 ≤ r < 0.85) and 12 reported low correlation (r < 0.70).

Interpretation

The majority of novel cancer drugs that received CA were based on RR designed for single-arm trials. The reported correlations of treatment effect between the surrogate endpoints and OS used for CA were limited. Our findings highlighted that the introduction of OS or quality of life based on RCT in confirmatory clinical trials as much as feasible was essential to ensure the clinical benefits for patients.

Funding

This study was supported by postdoctoral fellowship from Tsinghua-Peking Joint Centers for Life Sciences (CLS).

Cancer Drugs Reimbursed with Limited Evidence on Overall Survival and Quality of Life: Do Follow-Up Studies Confirm Patient Benefits?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Cancer drug costs have increased considerably within healthcare systems, but many drugs lack quality-of-life (QoL) and overall survival (OS) data at the time of reimbursement approval. This study aimed to review the extent of subsequent literature documenting improvements in OS and QoL for cancer drug indications where no such evidence existed at the time of reimbursement approval.

METHODS

Drug indications with claims of added therapeutical value but a lack of evidence on OS and QoL that were reimbursed between 2010 and 2020 in Sweden were included for review. Searches were conducted in PubMed and ClinicalTrial.gov for randomized controlled trials examining OS and QoL.

RESULTS

Of the 22 included drug indications, seven were found to have at least one trial with conclusive evidence of improvements in OS or QoL after a mean follow-up of 6.6 years. The remaining 15 drug indications either lacked subsequent randomized controlled trial data on OS or QoL (n = 6) or showed no statistically significant improvements (n = 9). Only one drug demonstrated evidence of improvement in both OS and QoL for its indication.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable share of reimbursed cancer drug indications continue to lack evidence of improvement in both OS and QoL. With limited healthcare resources and an increasing cancer burden, third-party payers have strong incentives to require additional post-reimbursement data to confirm any improvements in OS and QoL.

Assessment of patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs in China: a best-worst discrete choice experiment on three common cancer types

OBJECTIVES

Despite the advancement in anticancer drug therapies, cancer treatment decisions are often complex and preference-sensitive, making them well suited for studying shared decision-making (SDM). Our study aimed to assess preferences for new anticancer drugs among three common types of patients with cancer to inform SDM.

DESIGN

We identified five attributes of new anticancer drugs and used a Bayesian-efficient design to generate choice sets for a best-worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE). The mixed logit regression model was applied to estimate patient-reported preferences for each attribute. The interaction model was used to investigate preference heterogeneity.

SETTING

The BWDCE was conducted in Jiangsu province and Hebei province in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 18 years or older, who had a definite diagnosis of lung cancer, breast cancer or colorectal cancer were recruited.

RESULTS

Data from 468 patients were available for analysis. On average, the most valued attribute was the improvement in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (p<0.001). The low incidence of severe to life-threatening side effects, prolonged progression-free survival and the low incidence of mild to moderate side effects were also positive predictors of patients' preferences (p<0.001). Out-of-pocket cost was a negative predictor of their preferences (p<0.001). According to subgroup analysis by type of cancer, the improvement in HRQoL remained the most valuable attribute. However, the relative importance of other attributes varied by type of cancer. Whether patients were newly diagnosed or previously diagnosed cancer cases played a dominant role in the preference heterogeneity within each subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study can assist in the implementation of SDM by providing evidence on patients' preferences for new anticancer drugs. Patients should be informed of the multiattribute values of new drugs and encouraged to make decisions reflecting their values.

Trends in Disparities and Transitions of Treatment in Patients With Early Breast Cancer in China and the US, 2011 to 2021

Importance

Breast cancer treatment has profoundly improved in China recently. However, trends in disparities and transitions of treatment in early-stage cancer between China and the US are not well known.

Objective

To identify changes for patients with early breast cancer by using large databases from China and the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter cross-sectional study used the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer (CSCO BC) database from hospitals in 13 provinces in China and the Flatiron Health (hereinafter referred to as Flatiron) database from more than 280 community oncology clinics in the US. Patients with stage I to III breast cancer diagnosed from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021, were included. Data were analyzed from June 10 to December 1, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The distribution of age, clinical stage, and cancer subtypes at diagnosis were examined overall and by year. The mean annual percent change (MAPC) from 2011 to 2021 in systemic therapy and surgery was also analyzed.

Results

A total of 57 720 patients with early breast cancer were screened from the CSCO BC (n = 45 970) and Flatiron (n = 11 750) databases. The median age at diagnosis in China among the 41 449 patients included in the age analysis was 47 (IQR, 40-56) years; in the US, the median age was 64 (IQR, 54-73) years. Among patients with clinical stage data in the CSCO BC (n = 22 794) and Flatiron (n = 4413) databases, the proportion of stage I cancer was 7250 (31.8%) vs 2409 (54.6%); stage II cancer, 10 043 (44.1%) vs 1481 (33.6%); and stage III cancer, 5501 (24.1%) vs 523 (11.9%). The proportion of hormone receptor-positive cancer in China was 69.8%, lower than that in the US (87.5%). For patients with ERBB2 (formerly HER2 or HER2/neu)-positive cancer, the proportion in China (30.2%) was higher than that in the US (15.6%). For neoadjuvant therapy, the annual rate increased from 247 of 1553 (15.9%) to 200 of 790 (25.3%) in China, with an MAPC of -4.4% (95% CI, -50.6% to 85.0%; P = .89). For patients with ERBB2-positive cancer, the proportion treated with trastuzumab in early-stage cancer in China increased significantly, with an MAPC of 22.1% (95% CI, 17.4%-26.9%; P < .001), and overtook that in the Flatiron database since 2017 (1684 [68.5%] vs 550 [62.5%]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that disparities in treatment of early breast cancer narrowed between China and the US during the study period. The rapid growth of trastuzumab treatment in China was suggestive of differential access to targeted ERBB2 therapy.

Access to anticancer medicines in public hospitals of Northwestern China

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the accessibility of anticancer medicines in public hospitals of Shaanxi, a representative province of Northwestern China.

Methods

Thirty-one anticancer medicines were investigated in 146 designated public hospitals in 10 cities of Shaanxi Province. We used medicine procurement data from the Shaanxi Drug Centralized Purchasing Platform during 2019-2021. Primary outcomes included the availability, drug utilization, and affordability of anticancer medicines.

Results

The mean availability of 31 anticancer medicines increased significantly from 5.45% in 2019 to 14.72% in 2021. The mean availability of nationally negotiated medicines was significantly lower than that of Class B medicines (8.72% vs. 12.85%, p = 0.048), whilst the availability of injectable medicines was significantly greater than that of oral medicines (13.66% vs. 8.77%, p = 0.007). In 2019-2021, the annual mean amount purchased increased significantly from CNY 6.51 million to CNY 18.56 million (p = 0.007). The mean defined daily doses of 31 medicines significantly rose from 225.50 to 1019.50 (p = 0.008) whereas their defined daily drug cost significantly decreased from CNY 551.15 to CNY 404.50 (p < 0.001). The percentage of catastrophic health expenditure decreased from 71.0 to 51.65% and from 90.30 to 80.60% for urban and rural residents, respectively. The affordability of nationally negotiated medicines was significantly lower than that of Class B medicines (p = 0.032), and the affordability of injectable medicines had no significant difference compared to that of oral medicines (p = 0.124) for both urban and rural residents.

Conclusion

The accessibility of anticancer medicines improved dramatically in public hospitals of Northwestern China during the period 2019-2021.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of PD-1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma in China

Objective: This study was aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of all available programmed death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors combined with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. Methods: A partitioned survival model with a 3-week cycle and a 10-year time horizon was constructed based on a network meta-analysis. The survival data and utility values were derived from clinical trials, and the direct medical costs were collected from public drug bidding database and published literature. Total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Scenario, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty around model parameters. Results: Compared with mono-chemotherapy, toripalimab, sintilimab and camrelizumab plus chemotherapy were cost-effective treatment regimens, while serplulimab, pembrolizumab and nivolumab plus chemotherapy were not cost-effective options. Toripalimab plus chemotherapy provided the highest QALYs of 0.95 with the lower cost of $8,110.53 compared to other competing alternatives. The robustness of the base-case results was confirmed by scenario and one-way sensitivity analysis. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times per capita gross domestic product ($38,351.20) in 2021, the probability of toripalimab plus chemotherapy being the optimal option was 74.25% compared with other six competing alternatives. Conclusion: Toripalimab plus chemotherapy represented the most cost-effective option as the first-line therapy for advanced ESCC patients in China.

The price, efficacy, and safety of within-class targeted anticancer medicines between domestic and imported drugs in China: a comparative analysis

Background

Affordability to novel anticancer drugs has become a major health issue in China. It is encouraging to note that China initiated its drug regulatory reform and national price negotiation policies since 2015. As a growing number of domestic within-class targeted anticancer drugs are approved in China, it is expected that this may reduce the price of novel anticancer drugs and improve the affordability of anticancer drugs. This study aimed to evaluate the price, efficacy, and safety of the within-class anticancer drugs between domestic and imported drugs approved in China from 2010 to 2022.

Methods

The domestic and imported within-class targeted drugs for solid cancers approved in China between 2010 and 2022 were extracted. We classified it as a class of anticancer drugs based on the same indication and similar biological mechanism. The published literature derived from pivotal clinical trials of these domestic and imported drugs was identified based on the review report and the latest labels issued by the China National Medical Products Administration. We evaluated the monthly treatment price at launch and the latest (2022), primary efficacy endpoint and safety between domestic and imported anticancer drugs. Meta-analyses were further employed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the domestic and imported anticancer drugs, including pooled hazard ratios (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rates (ORR) for solid cancers, and relative risk for serious adverse events (SAE) and Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs).

Findings

In our cohort study, 12 within-class anticancer drugs with 7 cancer diseases were analyzed, including 18 domestic (21 indications; 21 pivotal trials) and 18 imported (21 indications; 27 pivotal trials) novel anticancer drugs, respectively. The median monthly treatment price of domestic and imported drugs from the years of launch to 2022 had significantly decreased by 71% and 62%, respectively. Moreover, the median monthly treatment price of domestic targeted anticancer drugs on the market at launch ($3786 vs. $5393, P = 0.007) and the latest ($1222 vs. $2077, P = 0.011) was significantly lower than that of imported drugs. No significant differences in median PFS gains (9.0 vs. 11.0 months; P = 0.24), OS gains (9.3 vs 10.6 months; P = 0.66), and ORR (57% vs 62%, P = 0.77) of targeted anticancer drugs in their pivotal trials were observed between the domestic and imported drugs. Additionally, there was no significant difference between domestic and imported drugs in the incidence of SAE (23% vs. 24%; P = 0.41) and Grade ≥3 AEs (59% vs. 57%; P = 0.45). These findings were also further confirmed in the meta-analyses for primary efficacy endpoints and safety outcomes.

Interpretation

The prices of both domestic and imported anticancer drugs significantly decreased after market entry mainly due to the role of national price negotiations. The median monthly treatment price of domestic within-class targeted anticancer drugs was significantly lower than that of imported drugs. Furthermore, the efficacy and safety of domestic anticancer drugs were comparable to that of imported drugs. This evidence implicated that the development of within-class anticancer drugs with national price negotiations in China significantly improved the affordability for patients.

Funding

This study was supported by postdoctoral fellowship from Tsinghua-Peking Joint Centers for Life Sciences (CLS).

Value assessment of NMPA-approved new cancer drugs for solid cancer in China, 2016-2020

Background

Whether the high cost of cancer drugs is commensurate with their value to patients, which has become the focus of public concern. We aimed to assess the value of new cancer drugs approved for solid cancer in China and to explore the association between price and value of drugs.

Methods

We identified all new drugs for solid tumor that approved by the China's National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) between 2016 and 2020. The value of these drugs was assessed according to the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (ASCO-VF) and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). We calculated Cohen's κ statistic to describe agreement between the two frameworks. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between price and value of drugs.

Results

Between 2016 and 2020, 37 new drugs were approved by the NMPA for solid tumor and we could evaluate the value of 28 drugs (76%). Eight (29%) of drugs were approved for non-small-cell lung cancer and 6 (21%) for breast cancer. ASCO-VF scores had a range of -20 to 110.1, and the median score was 43.3 (inter-quartile range 27.1-58.35). Only seven drugs (25%) met the ASCO-VF cutoff score. By the ESMO-MCBS, 13 drugs showed a meaningful value. Agreement between these two frameworks thresholds was only fair (κ = 0.515, P < 0.05). We found no statistically significant correlation between launch price of drugs and clinical benefit according to both frameworks.

Conclusions

Not all NMPA-approved new cancer drugs had meaningful value as measured by ASCO-VF or ESMO-MCBS. There was no significant correlation between drug price and the level of clinical benefit.

Analysis of new treatments proposed for malignant pleural mesothelioma raises concerns about the conduction of clinical trials in oncology

In this commentary, using existing clinical trial data and FDA approvals we propose that there is currently a critical need for an appropriate balancing between the financial impact of new cancer drugs and their actual benefit for patients. By adopting "pleural mesothelioma" as our clinical model we summarize the most relevant pertinent and available literature on this topic, and use an analysis of the reliability of the trials submitted for registration and/or recently published as a case in point to raise concerns with respect to appropriate trial design, biomarker based stratification and to highlight the ongoing need for balancing the benefit/cost ratio for both patients and healthcare providers.