Personalised reimbursement: a risk-sharing model for biomarker-driven treatment of rare subgroups of cancer patients

The ESMO Tumour-Agnostic Classifier and Screener (ETAC-S): a tool for assessing tumour-agnostic potential of molecularly guided therapies and for steering drug development

BACKGROUND

Advances in precision oncology led to approval of tumour-agnostic molecularly guided treatment options (MGTOs). The minimum requirements for claiming tumour-agnostic potential remain elusive.

METHODS

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Precision Medicine Working Group (PMWG) coordinated a project to optimise tumour-agnostic drug development. International experts examined and summarised the publicly available data used for regulatory assessment of the tumour-agnostic indications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and/or the European Medicines Agency as of December 2023. Different scenarios of minimum objective response rate (ORR), number of tumour types investigated, and number of evaluable patients per tumour type were assessed for developing a screening tool for tumour-agnostic potential. This tool was tested using the tumour-agnostic indications approved during the first half of 2024. A taxonomy for MGTOs and a framework for tumour-agnostic drug development were conceptualised.

RESULTS

Each tumour-agnostic indication had data establishing objective response in at least one out of five patients (ORR ≥ 20%) in two-thirds (≥4) of the investigated tumour types, with at least five evaluable patients in each tumour type. These minimum requirements were met by tested indications and may serve as a screening tool for tumour-agnostic potential, requiring further validation. We propose a conceptual taxonomy classifying MGTOs based on the therapeutic effect obtained by targeting a driver molecular aberration across tumours and its modulation by tumour-specific biology: tumour-agnostic, tumour-modulated, or tumour-restricted. The presence of biology-informed mechanistic rationale, early regulatory advice, and adequate trial design demonstrating signs of biology-driven tumour-agnostic activity, followed by confirmatory evidence, should be the principles for tumour-agnostic drug development.

CONCLUSION

The ESMO Tumour-Agnostic Classifier (ETAC) focuses on the interplay of targeted driver molecular aberration and tumour-specific biology modulating the therapeutic effect of MGTOs. We propose minimum requirements to screen for tumour-agnostic potential (ETAC-S) as part of tumour-agnostic drug development. Definition of ETAC cut-offs is warranted.

Application of comprehensive molecular genetic profiling in precision cancer medicine, Hungarian experiences

Recent developments in molecular genetic testing methods (e.g. next-generation sequencing [NGS]-panels) largely accelerated the process of finding the most appropriate targeted therapeutic intervention for cancer patients based on molecularly targetable genetic alterations. In Hungary, a centralized approval system following the recommendation of the National Molecular Tumor Board was launched for the coordination of all aspects of comprehensive genetic profiling (CGP) including patient selection and therapy reimbursement.

AIM

The study aims to evaluate the clinical benefit of CGP in our Comprehensive Cancer Center Methods and patients: CGP was introduced into our routine clinical practice in 2021. An NGS-based large (> 500 genes) gene panel was used for cases where molecular genetic testing was approved by the National Molecular Tumor Board. From 2021 until August 2023 163 cases were tested. The majority of them were ECOG 0-1 patients with advanced-stage diseases, histologically rare cancer, or cancers with unknown primary tumours.

RESULTS

Seventy-four cases (74 of 163, 45%) had clinically relevant genetic alterations. In 34 patients, the identified variants represented an indication for an approved therapy (approved by the Hungarian authorities, on-label indication), while in 40 cases the recommended therapy did not have an approved indication in Hungary for certain tumour types, but off-label indication could be recommended. Based on our CGP results, 24 patients (24/163; 14.7%) received targeted therapy. Treatment duration was between 1 and 60 months. In total 14 (14/163; 8.5% of the tested cases) patients had a positive clinical response (objective response or stable disease) and were treated for more than 16 weeks.

INTERPRETATION

NGS-based CGP was successfully introduced in our institution and a significant number of patients benefited from comprehensive genetic tests. Our preliminary results can serve as the starting point of Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) studies.

PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE: Collaboration for implementation of precision cancer medicine in Europe

BACKGROUND

In the two European Union (EU)-funded projects, PCM4EU (Personalized Cancer Medicine for all EU citizens) and PRIME-ROSE (Precision Cancer Medicine Repurposing System Using Pragmatic Clinical Trials), we aim to facilitate implementation of precision cancer medicine (PCM) in Europe by leveraging the experience from ongoing national initiatives that have already been particularly successful.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE gather 17 and 24 partners, respectively, from 19 European countries. The projects are based on a network of Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP)-like clinical trials that are currently ongoing or soon to start in 11 different countries, and with more trials expected to be established soon. The main aims of both the projects are to improve implementation pathways from molecular diagnostics to treatment, and reimbursement of diagnostics and tumour-tailored therapies to provide examples of best practices for PCM in Europe.

RESULTS

PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE were launched in January and July 2023, respectively. Educational materials, including a podcast series, are already available from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024.

CONCLUSION

PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE were launched in January and July 2023, respectively. Educational materials, including a podcast series, are already available from the PCM4EU website (http://www.pcm4eu.eu). The first reports, including an overview of requirements for the reimbursement systems in participating countries and a guide on patient involvement, are expected to be published in 2024.

CONCLUSION

European collaboration can facilitate the implementation of PCM and thereby provide affordable and equitable access to precision diagnostics and matched therapies for more patients.

The evolution of precision oncology: The ongoing impact of the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP)

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) is a Dutch, pan-cancer, nonrandomized clinical trial that aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of targeted and immunotherapies outside their registered indication in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer.

PATIENTS

Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer are eligible when there are no standard of care treatment options left and the tumor possesses a molecular genomic variant for which commercially available anticancer treatment is accessible off-label in DRUP. Clinical benefit is the study's primary endpoint, characterized by a confirmed objective response or stable disease after at least 16 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

More than 2,500 patients have undergone evaluation, of which over 1,500 have started treatment in DRUP. The overall clinical benefit rate (CBR) remains 33%. The nivolumab cohort for patients with microsatellite instable metastatic tumors proved highly successful with a CBR of 63%, while palbociclib or ribociclib in patients with tumors harboring CDK4/6 pathway alterations showed limited efficacy, with a CBR of 15%. The formation of two European initiatives (PCM4EU and PRIME-ROSE) strives to accelerate implementation and enhance data collection to broaden equitable access to anticancer treatments and gather more evidence.

CONCLUSION

DRUP persists in improving patients access to off-label targeted or immunotherapy in the Netherlands and beyond. The expansion of DRUP-like clinical trials across Europe provides countless opportunities for broadening the horizon of precision oncology.

Cemiplimab in locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: prospective real-world data from the DRUG Access Protocol

Background

The DRUG Access Protocol provides patients with cancer access to registered anti-cancer drugs that are awaiting reimbursement in the Netherlands and simultaneously collects prospective real-world data (RWD). Here, we present RWD from PD-1 blocker cemiplimab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (laCSCC; mCSCC).

Methods

Patients with laCSCC or mCSCC received cemiplimab 350 mg fixed dose every three weeks. Primary endpoints were objective clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as objective response (OR) or stable disease (SD) at 16 weeks, physician-assessed CBR, defined as clinician's documentation of improved disease or SD based on evaluation of all available clinical parameters at 16 weeks, objective response rate (ORR), and safety, defined as grade ≥ 3 treatment related adverse events (TRAEs) occurring up to 30 days after last drug administration. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

Findings

Between February 2021 and December 2022, 151 patients started treatment. Objective and physician-assessed CBR were 54.3% (95% CI, 46.0-62.4) and 59.6% (95% CI, 51.3-67.5), respectively. ORR was 35.1% (95% CI, 27.5-43.3). After a median follow-up of 15.2 months, median DoR was not reached. Median PFS and OS were 12.2 (95% CI, 7.0-not reached) and 24.2 months (95% CI, 18.8-not reached), respectively. Sixty-eight TRAEs occurred in 29.8% of patients. Most commonly reported TRAE was a kidney transplant rejection (9.5%).

Interpretation

Cemiplimab proved highly effective and safe in this real-world cohort of patients with laCSCC or mCSCC, confirming its therapeutic value in the treatment of advanced CSCC in daily clinical practice.

Funding

The DRUG Access Protocol is supported by all participating pharmaceutical companies: Bayer, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi.

Generating and using real-world data: A worthwhile uphill battle

The precision oncology paradigm challenges the feasibility and data generalizability of traditional clinical trials. Consequently, an unmet need exists for practical approaches to test many subgroups, evaluate real-world drug value, and gather comprehensive, accessible datasets to validate novel biomarkers. Real-world data (RWD) are increasingly recognized to have the potential to fill this gap in research methodology. Established applications of RWD include informing disease epidemiology, pharmacovigilance, and healthcare quality assessment. Currently, concerns regarding RWD quality and comprehensiveness, privacy, and biases hamper their broader application. Nonetheless, RWD may play a pivotal role in supplementing clinical trials, enabling conditional reimbursement and accelerated drug access, and innovating trial conduct. Moreover, purpose-built RWD repositories may support the extension or refinement of drug indications and facilitate the discovery and validation of new biomarkers. This perspective explores the potential of leveraging RWD to advance oncology, highlights its benefits and challenges, and suggests a path forward in this evolving field.

Histology independent drug development - Is this the future for cancer drugs?

The Cancer Drug Development Forum (CDDF)'s 'Histology independent drug development - is this the future for cancer drugs?' workshop was set up to explore the current landscape of histology independent drug development, review the current regulatory landscape and propose recommendations for improving the conduct of future trials. The first session considered lessons learnt from previous trials, including innovative solutions for reimbursement. The session explored why overall survival represents the most valuable endpoint, and the importance of duration of response, which can be captured with swimmer and spider plots. The second session on biomarker development and treatment optimisation considered current regulations for companion diagnostics, FDA guidance on histology independent drug development in oncology, and the need to establish cut-offs for the biomarker of tumour mutational burden to identify the patients most likely to benefit from PDL1 treatment. The third session reviewed novel trial designs, including basket, umbrella and platform trials, and statistical approaches of hierarchical modelling where homogeneity between study cohorts enables information to be borrowed between cohorts. The discussion highlighted the need to agree 'common assessment standards' to facilitate pooling of data across studies. In the fourth session, the sharing of data sets was recognised as a key step for improving equity of access to precision medicines across Europe. The session considered how the European Health Data Space (EHDS) could streamline access to medical records, emphasizing the importance of introducing greater accountability into the digital space. In conclusion the workshop proposed 11 recommendations to facilitate histology agnostic drug development.

Precision cancer medicine: Concepts, current practice, and future developments

Precision cancer medicine is a multidisciplinary team effort that requires involvement and commitment of many stakeholders including the society at large. Building on the success of significant advances in precision therapy for oncological patients over the last two decades, future developments will be significantly shaped by improvements in scalable molecular diagnostics in which increasingly complex multilayered datasets require transformation into clinically useful information guiding patient management at fast turnaround times. Adaptive profiling strategies involving tissue- and liquid-based testing that account for the immense plasticity of cancer during the patient's journey and also include early detection approaches are already finding their way into clinical routine and will become paramount. A second major driver is the development of smart clinical trials and trial concepts which, complemented by real-world evidence, rapidly broaden the spectrum of therapeutic options. Tight coordination with regulatory agencies and health technology assessment bodies is crucial in this context. Multicentric networks operating nationally and internationally are key in implementing precision oncology in clinical practice and support developing and improving the ecosystem and framework needed to turn invocation into benefits for patients. The review provides an overview of the diagnostic tools, innovative clinical studies, and collaborative efforts needed to realize precision cancer medicine.

Efficacy, safety and biomarker analysis of durvalumab in patients with mismatch-repair deficient or microsatellite instability-high solid tumours

BACKGROUND

In this study we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab across various mismatch repair deficient (dMMR) or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H) tumours in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP). This is a clinical study in which patients are treated with drugs outside their labeled indication, based on their tumour molecular profile.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with dMMR/MSI-H solid tumours who had exhausted all standard of care options were eligible. Patients were treated with durvalumab. The primary endpoints were clinical benefit ((CB): objective response (OR) or stable disease ≥16 weeks) and safety. Patients were enrolled using a Simon like 2-stage model, with 8 patients in stage 1, up to 24 patients in stage 2 if at least 1/8 patients had CB in stage 1. At baseline, fresh frozen biopsies were obtained for biomarker analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients with 10 different cancer types were included. Two patients (2/26, 8%) were considered as non-evaluable for the primary endpoint. CB was observed in 13 patients (13/26, 50%) with an OR in 7 patients (7/26, 27%). The remaining 11 patients (11/26, 42%) had progressive disease. Median progression-free survival and median overall survival were 5 months (95% CI, 2-not reached) and 14 months (95% CI, 5-not reached), respectively. No unexpected toxicity was observed. We found a significantly higher structural variant (SV) burden in patients without CB. Additionally, we observed a significant enrichment of JAK1 frameshift mutations and a significantly lower IFN-γ expression in patients without CB.

CONCLUSION

Durvalumab was generally well-tolerated and provided durable responses in pre-treated patients with dMMR/MSI-H solid tumours. High SV burden, JAK1 frameshift mutations and low IFN-γ expression were associated with a lack of CB; this provides a rationale for larger studies to validate these findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration: NCT02925234. First registration date: 05/10/2016.

Outcome-based reimbursement in Central-Eastern Europe and Middle-East

Outcome-based reimbursement models can effectively reduce the financial risk to health care payers in cases when there is important uncertainty or heterogeneity regarding the clinical value of health technologies. Still, health care payers in lower income countries rely mainly on financial based agreements to manage uncertainties associated with new therapies. We performed a survey, an exploratory literature review and an iterative brainstorming in parallel about potential barriers and solutions to outcome-based agreements in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and in the Middle East (ME). A draft list of recommendations deriving from these steps was validated in a follow-up workshop with payer experts from these regions. 20 different barriers were identified in five groups, including transaction costs and administrative burden, measurement issues, information technology and data infrastructure, governance, and perverse policy outcomes. Though implementing outcome-based reimbursement models is challenging, especially in lower income countries, those challenges can be mitigated by conducting pilot agreements and preparing for predictable barriers. Our guidance paper provides an initial step in this process. The generalizability of our recommendations can be improved by monitoring experiences from pilot reimbursement models in CEE and ME countries and continuing the multistakeholder dialogue at national levels.

Cost-effectiveness of molecularly matched off-label therapies for end-stage cancer - the MetAction precision medicine study

BACKGROUND

Precision cancer medicine (PCM), frequently used for the expensive and often modestly efficacious off-label treatment with medications matched to the tumour genome of end-stage cancer, challenges healthcare resources. We compared the health effects, costs and cost-effectiveness of our MetAction PCM study with corresponding data from comparator populations given best supportive care (BSC) in two external randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

We designed three partitioned survival models to evaluate the healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as the main outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PCM relative to BSC with an annual willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of EUR 56,384 (NOK 605,000). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty.

RESULTS

We estimated total healthcare costs (relating to next-generation sequencing (NGS) equipment and personnel wages, molecularly matched medications to the patients with an actionable tumour target and follow-up of the responding patients) and the health outcomes for the MetAction patients versus costs (relating to estimated hospital admission) and outcomes for the BSC cases. The ICERs for incremental QALYs were twice or more as high as the WTP threshold and relatively insensitive to cost decrease of the NGS procedures, while reduction of medication prices would contribute significantly towards a cost-effective PCM strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The models suggested that the high ICERs of PCM were driven by costs of the NGS diagnostics and molecularly matched medications, with a likelihood for the strategy to be cost-effective defying WTP constraints. Reducing drug expenses to half the list price would likely result in an ICER at the WTP threshold. This can be an incentive for a public-private partnership for sharing drug costs in PCM, exemplified by ongoing European initiatives.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV, IDENTIFIER

NCT02142036.

The future of oncology policy

To ensure the previous progress seen in cancer survival rates continues as we move through the 21st Century it is important to determine future effective policy related to oncology healthcare delivery and funding. Recent successes with, for example, the COVID vaccine response, the decision-making agility exhibited by governments and healthcare systems and the effective use of telehealth and real-world evidence highlight the progress that can be made with pooled efforts and innovative thinking. This shared approach is the basis for the European Beating Cancer Plan which outlines action points for governments and health systems for the period 2021-2025. It focuses on a whole government approach, centred on patients, maximising the potential of new technologies and insights across policy areas including employment, education, transport and taxation, enabling the tackling of cancer drivers in schools, workplaces, research labs, towns and cities and rural communities. Despite the plan there are still concerns that oncology policy has not adequately responded to the pace of innovation and the unique challenges generated by innovative oncological technologies. There needs to be focus on: gaining consensus on the most appropriate methods to assess and price combination therapies and cell and gene therapies, developing effective outcome-based payment models for personalised medicine and developing consensus on the ideal approach for multiple indication pricing. Finally, future policy needs to ensure pharmaceutical companies and other research organisations are adequately rewarded for innovation to ensure continued R&D and the development of innovative oncological products.

Financing and Reimbursement Models for Personalised Medicine: A Systematic Review to Identify Current Models and Future Options

BACKGROUND

The number of healthcare interventions described as 'personalised medicine' (PM) is increasing rapidly. As healthcare systems struggle to decide whether to fund PM innovations, it is unclear what models for financing and reimbursement are appropriate to apply in this context.

OBJECTIVE

To review financing and reimbursement models for PM, summarise their key characteristics, and describe whether they can influence the development and uptake of PM.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Econlit to identify studies published in English between 2009 and 2021, and reviews published before 2009. Grey literature was identified through Google Scholar, Google and subject-specific webpages. Articles that described financing and reimbursement of PM, and financing of non-PM were included. Data were extracted and synthesised narratively to report on the models, as well as facilitators, incentives, barriers and disincentives that could influence PM development and uptake.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-three papers were included. Research and development of PM was financed through both public and private sources and reimbursed largely through traditional models such as single fees, Diagnosis-Related Groups, and bundled payments. Financial-based reimbursement, including rebates and price-volume agreements, was mainly applied to targeted therapies. Performance-based reimbursement was identified mainly for gene and targeted therapies, and some companion diagnostics. Gene therapy manufacturers offered outcome-based rebates for treatment failure for interventions including Luxturna®, Kymriah®, Yescarta®, Zynteglo®, Zolgensma® and Strimvelis®, and coverage with evidence development for Kymriah® and Yescarta®. Targeted testing with OncotypeDX® was granted value-based reimbursement through initial coverage with evidence development. The main barriers and disincentives to PM financing and reimbursement were the lack of strong links between stakeholders and the lack of demonstrable benefit and value of PM.

CONCLUSIONS

Public-private financing agreements and performance-based reimbursement models could help facilitate the development and uptake of PM interventions with proven clinical benefit.

Challenges and Obstacles in Applying Therapeutical Indications Formulated in Molecular Tumor Boards

Considering the rapid improvement of cancer drugs' efficacy and the discovery of new molecular targets, the formulation of therapeutical indications based on the multidisciplinary approach of MTB is becoming increasingly important for attributing the correct salience to the targets identified in a single patient. Nevertheless, one of the biggest stumbling blocks faced by MTBs is not the bare indication, but its implementation in the clinical practice. Indeed, administering the drug suggested by MTB deals with some relevant difficulties: the economical affordability and geographical accessibility represent some of the major limits in the patient's view, while bureaucracy and regulatory procedures are often a disincentive for the physicians. In this review, we explore the current literature reporting MTB experiences and precision medicine clinical trials, focusing on the challenges that authors face in applying their therapeutical indications. Furthermore, we analyze and discuss some of the solutions devised to overcome these difficulties to support the MTBs in finding the most suitable solution for their specific situation. In conclusion, we strongly encourage regulatory agencies and pharmaceutical companies to develop effective strategies with medical centers implementing MTBs to facilitate access to innovative drugs and thereby allow broader therapeutical opportunities to patients.

A Comparison of Post-marketing Measures Imposed by Regulatory Agencies to Confirm the Tissue-Agnostic Approach

There are currently four anti-cancer medicinal products approved for a tissue-agnostic indication. This is an indication based on a common biological characteristic rather than the tissue of origin. To date, the regulatory experience with tissue-agnostic approvals is limited. Therefore, we compared decision-making aspects of the first tissue-agnostic approvals between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA). Post-marketing measures (PMMs) related to the tissue-agnostic indication were of specific interest. The main data source was the publicly available review documents. The following data were collected: submission date, approval date, clinical trials and datasets, and PMMs. At the time of data collection, the FDA and PMDA approved pembrolizumab, larotrectinib, and entrectinib for a tissue-agnostic indication, while the EMA approved larotrectinib and entrectinib for a tissue-agnostic indication. There were differences in analysis sets (integrated vs. non-integrated), submission dates and requests for data updates between agencies. All agencies had outstanding issues that needed to be addressed in the post-market setting. For pembrolizumab, larotrectinib and entrectinib, the number of imposed PMMs varied between one and eight, with the FDA requesting the most PMMs compared to the other two agencies. All agencies requested at least one PMM per approval to address the remaining uncertainties related to the tissue-agnostic indication. The FDA and EMA requested data from ongoing and proposed trials, while the PMDA requested data from use-result surveys. Confirmation of benefit in the post-marketing setting is an important aspect of tissue-agnostic approvals, regardless of agency. Nonetheless, each approach to confirm benefit has its inherent limitations. Post-marketing data will be essential for the regulatory and clinical decisions-making of medicinal products with a tissue-agnostic indication.

Patients with Rare Cancers in the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP) Benefit from Genomics-Guided Treatment

PURPOSE

Patients with rare cancers (incidence less than 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year) commonly have less treatment opportunities and are understudied at the level of genomic targets. We hypothesized that patients with rare cancer benefit from approved anticancer drugs outside their label similar to common cancers.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

In the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with therapy-refractory metastatic cancers harboring an actionable molecular profile are matched to FDA/European Medicines Agency-approved targeted therapy or immunotherapy. Patients are enrolled in parallel cohorts based on the histologic tumor type, molecular profile and study drug. Primary endpoint is clinical benefit (complete response, partial response, stable disease ≥ 16 weeks).

RESULTS

Of 1,145 submitted cases, 500 patients, including 164 patients with rare cancers, started one of the 25 available drugs and were evaluable for treatment outcome. The overall clinical benefit rate was 33% in both the rare cancer and nonrare cancer subgroup. Inactivating alterations of CDKN2A and activating BRAF aberrations were overrepresented in patients with rare cancer compared with nonrare cancers, resulting in more matches to CDK4/6 inhibitors (14% vs. 4%; P ≤ 0.001) or BRAF inhibitors (9% vs. 1%; P ≤ 0.001). Patients with rare cancer treated with small-molecule inhibitors targeting BRAF experienced higher rates of clinical benefit (75%) than the nonrare cancer subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive molecular testing in patients with rare cancers may identify treatment opportunities and clinical benefit similar to patients with common cancers. Our findings highlight the importance of access to broad molecular diagnostics to ensure equal treatment opportunities for all patients with cancer.

Extension of Indication for Authorised Oncology Products in the European Union: A Joint Effort of Multiple Stakeholders

After marketing authorisation, the development of a medicinal product often continues with studies investigating new therapeutic indications. Positive results can potentially lead to changes to the terms of the marketing authorisation, such as an extension of therapeutic indication(s). These studies can be initiated and sponsored by the marketing authorisation holder (MAH) or by others. When results from an investigator-initiated trial suggest that an authorised medicinal product is safe and effective for a new therapeutic indication, physicians may want to treat their patients with this medicinal product. In such a situation, it is desirable to extend the therapeutic indication(s) via the regulatory approval process, as this can facilitate patient access within the European Union. There may however be challenges when the MAH did not conduct the study and might not have access to the data. In this perspective, we focus on the possibilities to extend the therapeutic indication(s) of an already authorised medicinal product based on results from investigator-initiated trials. We address: (1) the advantages of an extension of indication; (2) the regulatory requirements for a variation application; (3) investigator-initiated trials as a basis for regulatory approval; (4) the role of the MAH in extending the indication. With this article, we want to emphasize the importance of a collaborative approach and dialogue between stakeholders with the aim to facilitate access to effective medicinal products.

Healthcare policy by other means: Cancer clinical research as "oncopolicy"

Social studies of biomedicine often focus on how exogenous policies shape the medical domain. While policy agendas no doubt affect complex biomedical projects, in the present paper we analyze a different dynamic, namely how oncologists enact policy as part of several flagship precision oncology endeavors. Empirically, the article focuses on the U.S. TAPUR trial, the Dutch DRUP trial, and the Canadian CAPTUR trial, which have recently been joined by similar Scandinavian studies. Taken together, these trials represent innovative forms of clinical research that, beyond their varying experimental nature, have been designed to transform the evidential processes to provide access to biomarker-driven treatments. Along with gathering evidence on effectiveness of off-label targeted therapies, their explicit goals include the recentering of a major professional organization around research, and the reframing of healthcare as a learning system seamlessly connecting epistemic, organizational, and economic issues. Accordingly, we analyze the design and implementation of these trials as a form of (onco)policy by other means.

Patients with Biallelic BRCA1/2 Inactivation Respond to Olaparib Treatment Across Histologic Tumor Types

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of olaparib, a PARP inhibitor (PARPi) in patients with tumors with BRCA1/2 mutations, regardless of histologic tumor type.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with treatment-refractory BRCA1/2-mutated cancer were included for treatment with off-label olaparib 300 mg twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), patients with treatment-refractory solid malignancies receive off-label drugs based on tumor molecular profiles while whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is performed on baseline tumor biopsies. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit (CB; defined as objective response or stable disease ≥ 16 weeks according to RECIST 1.1). Per protocol patients were enrolled using a Simon-like two-stage model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four evaluable patients with nine different tumor types harboring BRCA1/2 mutations were included, 58% had CB from treatment with olaparib. CB was observed in patients with complete loss of function (LoF) of BRCA1/2, while 73% of patients with biallelic BRCA LoF had CB. In 17 patients with and seven without current labeled indication, 10 and four patients had CB, respectively. Treatment resistance in four patients with biallelic loss might be explained by an additional oncogenic driver which was discovered by WGS, including Wnt pathway activation, FGFR amplification, and CDKN2A loss, in three tumor types.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate that using PARPis is a promising treatment strategy for patients with non-BRCA-associated histologies harboring biallelic BRCA LoF. WGS allows to accurately detect complete LoF of BRCA and homologous repair deficiency (HRD) signature as well as oncogenic drivers that may contribute to resistance, using a single assay.

Manufacturers' views on outcome-based agreements

INTRODUCTION

Outcome-based agreements (OBAs) are occasionally deployed to relieve the burden of high drug prices on healthcare budgets. However, it is not clear when manufacturers are willing to collaborate in establishing such agreements. Therefore, we explored the feasibility of OBAs from the manufacturer's point of view.

METHODS

Dutch market-access experts from eight major pharmaceutical companies, globally active in the field of oncology, were interviewed. Opinions were compiled, and interviewees and their colleagues were then given the chance to review the manuscript for additional comments.

RESULTS

Most interviewees believe that OBAs can be useful in providing access to off-label use of authorised medicines, especially when no alternative treatment is available for seriously ill patients. For the licenced indications, manufacturers seem to be more inclined to collaborate when there is a potential incentive to improve market-access (e.g., if the product is not used because of concerns regarding its effectiveness). However, manufacturers are less likely to collaborate when there are greater financial risks for the company. Further concerns were definition of outcome or performance, the impact of compliance on the effectiveness of a drug, administrative burden, uncertainty regarding revenue recognition and the challenges of reimbursing combination therapies.

DISCUSSION

Market-access interviewees were generally positive about OBAs, however they were more reluctant towards OBAs for registered indications with low response-rate. The definition of performance or outcome and its clinical relevance and validity, the feasibility of OBAs and their administrative burden are relevant aspects that need to be addressed in advance. Ideally, countries should collaborate to share the outline of OBAs and create shared databases to accumulate evidence.

Learning health care systems: Highly needed but challenging

BACKGROUND

Learning health care systems (LHSs) have the potential to transform health care. However, this transformation process faces significant challenges.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on proposals and early examples of LHSs in the literature and conceptual analysis of the LHS mission, we provide four models with distinct organizational and ethical implications that may facilitate the transformation.

RESULTS

An LHS could be developed in the following ways: by taking away practical impediments that prevent patients and professionals from engaging in scientific research (model 1: optimization LHS); by routinely analyzing observational data from electronic health records and other sources (model 2: comprehensive data LHS); by making clinical decisions based on the outcomes of the aforementioned data analyses and directly evaluating the outcomes in order to continuously improve decision-making (model 3: real-time LHS); or by embedding clinical trials into routine care delivery (model 4: full LHS).

CONCLUSIONS

Each model has different ethical implications for consent and oversight. Also, the four-model approach shows that reorganizing a health care center into an LHS is not an all-or-nothing decision. Rather, it is a choice from a menu of possibilities. Instead of discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the LHS menu in its entirety, the medical community should focus on the designs and ethical aspects of each of the separate options.