Cost-effectiveness analysis of the use of immunotherapy in metastatic solid tumours in Austria by applying the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) version 1.1

Global perspectives on patient-centered outcomes: advancing patient-centered cancer clinical trials globally

Patient-centered clinical trials prioritize the patient experience and outcomes that matter most to those affected by cancer. By centering on patient values and experiences, patient-centered outcomes research generates evidence to inform policies and practices, facilitating more personalized and effective cancer care. This manuscript explores the importance of patient-centered approaches in the global context, emphasizing challenges and opportunities for substantive patient engagement and the integration of patient-reported measures in clinical therapeutic trials in low- and middle-income countries. Despite important barriers such as limited infrastructure and funding constraints, leveraging innovative strategies and investing in research infrastructure and regulatory harmonization initiatives can enhance the capacity of low- and middle-income countries to conduct high-quality research and address the global burden of cancer more effectively. Through these efforts, patient-centered care and research can be extended to underserved populations, ensuring equitable access to cancer care worldwide.

Breast cancer drugs: FDA approval, development time, efficacy, clinical benefits, innovation, trials, endpoints, quality of life, value, and price

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzes the development, benefits, trial evidence, and price of new breast cancer drugs with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval.

METHODS

We identified 26 drugs with 42 FDA-approved indications for early and metastatic breast cancer (2000-2023). Data were collected from FDA labels, clinicaltrials.gov, and Medicare and Medicaid. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratios (HRs) and tumor response's relative risk (RR) alongside objective response rate (ORR) were meta-analyzed.

RESULTS

The median development time for breast cancer drugs was 7.8 years (95% CI 6.2-10.8). 26% of treatments were considered innovative ("first-in-indication") with 88% acting via a targeted mechanism. 64% were small molecules, 19% antibodies, and 18% antibody-drug conjugates. 38% were approved for HR + and 31% for HER2 + breast cancer. 6 indications were for early and 36 for metastatic breast cancer. Indications utilized FDA's special programs: orphan (2%), fast track (24%), accelerated approval (19%), priority review (74%), breakthrough therapy (44%). Approval was predominantly supported by phase 3 trials (88%) of randomized controlled design (66%), enrolling a median of 585 patients (IQR 417-752) at 181 centers (IQR 142-223) across 19 countries (IQR 17-20). New drugs' HR were 0.78 for OS (95% CI 0.74-0.82) and 0.59 for PFS (95% CI 0.54-0.64) with a RR for tumor response of 1.61 (95% CI 1.46-1.76). Median improvements of OS were 2.8 months (IQR 1.8-5.8) and PFS were 4.4 months (IQR 2.2-7.1). In single-arm trials, the average ORR was 31% (95% CI 10-53). In meta-regressions, the correlation between OS/PFS was 0.34 (p = 0.031) and OS/response was 0.01 (p = 0.435). 60% of treatments had a 'high-value' ESMO-MCBS score with 14% demonstrating improvements in quality of life. The median price was $16,013 per month (95% CI 13,097-17,617). There was no association between prices and patient benefit. The median value per life year gained was $62,419 (IQR 25,840-86,062).

CONCLUSIONS

Over the past two decades, the development of innovative and effective drugs transformed the treatment landscape for breast cancer patients. Yet, investigators and regulators must safeguard that highly-priced new drugs demonstrate improvements in patient-centered clinical endpoints: overall survival and quality of life.

ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale for haematological malignancies (ESMO-MCBS:H) version 1.0

BACKGROUND

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO)-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) has been accepted as a robust tool to evaluate the magnitude of clinical benefit reported in trials for oncological therapies. However, the ESMO-MCBS hitherto has only been validated for solid tumours. With the rapid development of novel therapies for haematological malignancies, we aimed to develop an ESMO-MCBS version that is specifically designed and validated for haematological malignancies.

METHODS

ESMO and the European Hematology Association (EHA) initiated a collaboration to develop a version for haematological malignancies (ESMO-MCBS:H). The process incorporated five landmarks: field testing of the ESMO-MCBS version 1.1 (v1.1) to identify shortcomings specific to haematological diseases, drafting of the ESMO-MCBS:H forms, peer review and revision of the draft based on re-scoring (resulting in a second draft), assessment of reasonableness of the scores generated, final review and approval by ESMO and EHA including executive boards.

RESULTS

Based on the field testing results of 80 haematological trials and extensive review for feasibility and reasonableness, five amendments to ESMO-MCBS were incorporated in the ESMO-MCBS:H addressing the identified shortcomings. These concerned mainly clinical trial endpoints that differ in haematology versus solid oncology and the very indolent nature of nevertheless incurable diseases such as follicular lymphoma, which hampers presentation of mature data. In addition, general changes incorporated in the draft version of the ESMO-MCBS v2 were included, and specific forms for haematological malignancies generated. Here we present the final approved forms of the ESMO-MCBS:H, including instructions.

CONCLUSION

The haematology-specific version ESMO-MCBS:H allows now full applicability of the scale for evaluating the magnitude of clinical benefit derived from clinical studies in haematological malignancies.

A triple-drug combination induces apoptosis in cervical cancer-derived cell lines

Introduction

Cervical cancer is a worldwide health problem due to the number of deaths caused by this neoplasm. In particular, in 2020, 30,000 deaths of this type of tumor were reported in Latin America. Treatments used to manage patients diagnosed in the early stages have excellent results as measured by different clinical outcomes. Existing first-line treatments are not enough to avoid cancer recurrence, progression, or metastasis in locally advanced and advanced stages. Therefore, there is a need to continue with the proposal of new therapies. Drug repositioning is a strategy to explore known medicines as treatments for other diseases. In this scenario, drugs used in other pathologies that have antitumor activity, such as metformin and sodium oxamate, are analyzed.

Methods

In this research, we combined the drugs metformin and sodium oxamate with doxorubicin (named triple therapy or TT) based on their mechanism of action and previous investigation of our group against three CC cell lines.

Results

Through flow cytometry, Western blot, and protein microarray experiments, we found TT-induced apoptosis on HeLa, CaSki, and SiHa through the caspase 3 intrinsic pathway, including the critical proapoptotic proteins BAD, BAX, cytochrome-C, and p21. In addition, mTOR and S6K phosphorylated proteins were inhibited in the three cell lines. Also, we show an anti-migratory activity of the TT, suggesting other targets of the drug combination in the late CC stages.

Discussion

These results, together with our former studies, conclude that TT inhibits the mTOR pathway leading to cell death by apoptosis. Our work provides new evidence of TT against cervical cancer as a promising antineoplastic therapy.

Applicability of ESMO-MCBS and ESCAT for molecular tumor boards

Scoring systems for classifying genomic alterations (GAs) with respect to their potential targeted anticancer therapies (TTs) may be useful for rational and evidence-based decision-making, for example in molecular tumor boards. Therefore, a working group of the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) has developed a comprehensive and reproducible classification score that allows the ranking of GAs and TTs according to their level of evidence and clinical relevance. This score is called the ESMO Scale for Clinical Actionability of Molecular Targets (ESCAT). Another score not explicitly developed for TTs but helpful in grading novel TTs is the ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). This tool was designed to objectively quantify the clinical benefit of novel approved therapies. The current review summarizes the status quo of these scores and their applicability for molecular tumor boards.

Patterns of Peripheral Blood B-Cell Subtypes Are Associated With Treatment Response in Patients Treated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Prospective Longitudinal Pan-Cancer Study

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized systemic anti-tumor treatments across different types of cancer. Nevertheless, predictive biomarkers regarding treatment response are not routinely established yet. Apart from T-lymphocytes, the humoral immunity of B-lymphocytes is studied to a substantially lesser extent in the respective setting. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate peripheral blood B-cell subtypes as potential predictors of ICI treatment response.

Methods

Thirty-nine cancer patients receiving ICI therapy were included into this prospective single-center cohort study. All had a first blood draw at the date before treatment initiation and a second at the time of first response evaluation (after 8-12 weeks). Seven different B-cell subtypes were quantified by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS). Disease control- (DCR) and objective response rate (ORR) were co-primary study endpoints.

Results

Overall, DCR was 48.7% and ORR was 25.6%, respectively. At baseline, there was no significant association of any B-cell subtype with neither DCR nor ORR. At the first response evaluation, an increase in the frequency of CD21- B-cells was a statistically significant negative predictor of response, both regarding DCR (OR=0.05, 95%CI=0.00-0.67, p=0.024) and ORR (OR=0.09, 95%CI=0.01-0.96, p=0.046). An increase of the frequency of switched memory B-cells was significantly associated with reduced odds for DCR (OR=0.06, 95%CI=0.01-0.70, p=0.025). Patients with an increased frequency of naïve B-cells were more likely to benefit from ICI therapy as indicated by an improved DCR (OR=12.31, 95%CI=1.13-134.22, p=0.039).

Conclusion

In this study, certain B-cell subpopulations were associated with ICI treatment response in various human cancer types.

Evaluation of autoantibodies as predictors of treatment response and immune-related adverse events during the treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A prospective longitudinal pan-cancer study

Background

The presence of autoantibodies in the serum of cancer patients has been associated with immune‐checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy response and immune‐related adverse events (irAEs). A prospective evaluation of different autoantibodies in different cancer entities is missing.

Materials and Methods

In this prospective cohort study, we included a pan‐cancer cohort of patients undergoing ICI treatment and measured a comprehensive panel of autoantibodies at treatment start and at the time point of first response evaluation. The presence and induction of autoantibodies (ANA, ENA, myositis, hepatopathy, rheumatoid arthritis) in different cancer entities were assessed and the association between autoantibodies and disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and progression‐free survival (PFS), as well as the development of grade 3 or higher irAEs were evaluated by logistic regression models, cox proportional hazard models, and Kaplan–Meier estimators.

Results

Of 44 patients with various cancer entities, neither the presence of any positive autoantibody measurement nor the presence of positive antinuclear antibodies (ANA) [≥1:80] at baseline was associated with the examined clinical endpoints (DCR, ORR, PFS) in univariable and multivariable analyses. After 8–12 weeks of ICI treatment, DCR, ORR, and PFS did not significantly differ between patients with and without any positive autoantibody measurement or positive ANA titers. The frequency of irAEs did not differ depending on autoantibody status of the patients.

Conclusion

Autoantibodies at treatment initiation or induction after 8–12 weeks of ICI treatment are not associated with treatment efficacy as indicated by DCR, ORR, and PFS or higher grade irAEs.