Affordability and Price Increases of New Cancer Drugs in Clinical Guidelines, 2007-2016

Added benefit and revenues of oncology drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 1995 and 2020: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the added benefit and revenues of oncology drugs, explore their association, and investigate potential discrepancies between added benefit and revenues across different approval pathways of the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Oncology drugs and their indications approved by the EMA between 1995 and 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Added benefit was evaluated using ratings published by seven organisations: health technology assessment agencies from the United States, France, Germany, and Italy, two medical oncology societies, and a drug bulletin. All retrieved ratings were recategorised using a four point ranking scale to indicate negative or non-quantifiable, minor, substantial, or major added benefit. Revenue data were extracted from publicly available financial reports and compared with published estimates of research and development (R&D) costs. Finally, the association between added benefit and revenue was evaluated. All analyses were performed within the overall study cohort, and within subgroups based on the EMA approval pathway: standard marketing authorisation, conditional marketing authorisation, and authorisation under exceptional circumstances.

RESULTS

131 oncology drugs with 166 indications were evaluated for their added benefit by at least one organisation within the required timeframe, yielding a total of 458 added benefit ratings; 189 (41%) were negative or non-quantifiable. The median time to offset the median R&D costs ($684m, £535m, €602m, adjusted to 2020 values) was three years; 50 of 55 (91%) drugs recovered these costs within eight years. Drugs with higher added benefit ratings generally had greater revenues. Negative or non-quantifiable added benefit ratings were more frequent for conditional marketing authorisations and authorisations under exceptional circumstances than for standard marketing authorisations (relative risk 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.89). Conditional marketing authorisations generated lower revenues and took longer to offset R&D costs than standard marketing authorisations (four years compared with three years).

CONCLUSIONS

While revenues seem to align with added benefit, most oncology drugs recover R&D costs within a few years despite providing little added benefit. This is particularly true for drugs approved through conditional marketing authorisations, which inherently appear to lack comprehensive evidence. Policy makers should evaluate whether current regulatory and reimbursement incentives effectively promote development of the most effective drugs for patients with the greatest needs.

Launch and Post-Launch Prices of Injectable Cancer Drugs in the US: Clinical Benefit, Innovation, Epidemiology, and Competition

BACKGROUND

Rising cancer drug prices adversely affect patients' adherence and survival.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify and quantify factors associated with launch prices and post-launch price changes of injectable cancer drugs in the US from 2005 to 2023.

DATA AND METHODS

All anticancer drugs with US FDA approval between 2000 and 2022 were identified in the Drugs@FDA database. The sample was then restricted to cancer drugs covered under Medicare Part B (injectable drugs). Data characterizing each drug's clinical benefits, disease epidemiology, approved indications, competition, and price were obtained from FDA labels, the Global Burden of Disease study, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The association between launch/post-launch prices and collected variables was assessed in random-effects regressions.

RESULTS

Of 170 cancer drugs with FDA approval between 2000 and 2022, we identified 66 (39%) injectable cancer drugs with quarterly price data from 2005 to 2023. In 2023, mean prices amounted to $27,688 per month, with an average price increase of 94% from 2005 to 2023. Launch and post-launch price changes were significantly associated with the treated disease epidemiology. A 1% decline in disease incidence was associated with a 0.2511% (p = 0.008) increase in launch prices and a 0.0086% (p = 0.032) annual increase in post-launch prices. Accordingly, launch prices were 120% (p = 0.051) higher for orphan than non-orphan drugs, with 3% (p = 0.008) greater annual post-launch price increases. Post-launch prices declined by up to -2% annually as new supplemental indications were approved for the same drug. We found no consistent association between launch/post-launch prices and the drugs' clinical benefit in terms of overall survival, progression-free survival, and tumor response. The market entry of new competitors was not associated with price reductions. 28 of 33 drug pairs within the same class had positive correlation coefficients. Pearson correlation coefficients were high (>0.80) for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, CD38 antibodies, CD20 antibodies, HER2 antibodies, and mTOR inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer drug prices regularly increase faster than inflation; however, there is no evidence that launch prices and post-launch price changes are aligned with the clinical benefit a drug offers to patients. In particular, patients with rare diseases experience greater price increases for their orphan drugs. There is no evidence that brand-brand competition results in drug price reductions.

Cancer Drug Prices in the United States: Efficacy, Innovation, Clinical Trial Evidence, and Epidemiology

OBJECTIVES

Rising cancer drug prices challenge patients and healthcare systems. Although prices are routinely assigned to original drug indications receiving US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, the pricing of supplemental indication approvals remains uncertain. This study identifies and quantifies factors associated with cancer drug prices, distinctly analyzing original and supplemental indications.

METHODS

Clinical trial evidence and epidemiologic data supporting new indications' FDA approval (2003-2022) were collected from the Drugs@FDA database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Global Burden of Disease study. Indication-specific monthly treatment costs were calculated for Medicare patients. The association between log-prices and collected variables were assessed in regression analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 145 drugs approved across 373 cancer indications. Drugs were priced at $24 444 per month on average (median = $16 013). For original indications, prices weakly correlated to improvements in overall survival (β = 0.28, P = .037) and progression-free survival (β = 0.16, P = .001). Original indications' prices were as follows: (1) negatively associated with disease incidence (β = -0.21, P < .001) and prevalence; (2) positively correlated with first-in-class drugs (26%, P = .057), gene and cell therapies (176%, P < .001), hematologic cancers (62%, P < .001), and severe diseases with substantial unmet needs (6% per disability-adjusted life-year, P < .001); and (3) negatively correlated to indications with randomized-controlled phase 3 trials. Prices were poorly associated with supplemental indications' efficacy, clinical evidence, and epidemiology.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer drug prices are set based on the original indication's characteristics, thereby omitting the value of supplemental indications. Indication-specific pricing, coverage, and reimbursement policies considering each indication's safety, efficacy, innovativeness, and unmet needs are necessary to align a drug's value and price.

Value elements and methods of value-based pricing for drugs in Japan: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Value-based pricing (VBP) can be a promising tool for optimizing drug prices. However, there is no consensus on the specific value elements and pricing method that should be used for VBP.

AREAS COVERED

We performed a systematic review and narrative synthesis to investigate the value elements and pricing method for VBP. The main inclusion criterion was that value elements, VBP method, and estimated prices for actual drugs were reported. We performed a search in MEDLINE and ICHUSHI Web. Eight articles met the selection criteria. Four studies adopted the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) approach and the others used different approaches. The CEA approach included the value elements of productivity, value of hope, real option value, disease severity, insurance value in addition to costs and quality-adjusted life years. The other approaches used efficacy, toxicity, novelty, rarity, research and development costs, prognosis, population health burden, unmet needs, and effectiveness. Each study used individual methods to quantify these broader value elements.

EXPERT OPINION

Both conventional and broader value elements are used for VBP. To allow VBP to be widely applied to various diseases, a simple, versatile method is preferable. Further research is needed to establish VBP method which enables to incorporate broader values.

Silencing of microRNA-106b-5p prevents doxorubicin-mediated cardiotoxicity through modulation of the PR55α/YY1/sST2 signaling axis

Clinical use of doxorubicin (Dox), an anthracycline with potent anti-tumor effects, is limited because of its highly chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity (CIC). After myocardial infarction (MI), we have recently identified Yin Yang-1 (YY1) and histone deacetylase 4 (HDAC4) as two factors involved in the overexpression of the isoform soluble suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (sST2) protein, which acts as a decoy receptor blocking the favorable effects of IL-33. Therefore, high levels of sST2 are associated with increased fibrosis, remodeling, and worse cardiovascular outcomes. No data exist on the role of the YY1/HDAC4/sST2 axis in CIC. This study aimed to evaluate the pathophysiological implication of the molecular YY1/HDAC4/sST2 axis in remodeling that is developed in patients treated with Dox as well as to suggest a novel molecular therapy to prevent anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Here, we have characterized a novel nexus between miR106b-5p (miR-106b) levels and the YY1/HDAC4 axis in relation to the cardiac expression of sST2 using two experimental models with Dox-induced cardiotoxicity. The addition of Dox (5 μM) to human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes induced cellular apoptotic death via upregulation of miR-106b-5p (miR-106b), which was confirmed by specific mimic sequences. A functional blockage of miR-106b using the locked nucleic acid antagomir inhibited Dox-induced cardiotoxicity.

An Arm and a Leg: The Rising Cost of Cancer Drugs and Impact on Access

Increasing cancer drug prices present global challenges to treatment access and cancer outcomes. Substantial variability exists in drug pricing across countries. In countries without universal health care, patients are responsible for treatment costs. Low- or middle-income countries are heavily impacted, with limited patient access to novel cancer treatments. Financial toxicity is seen across cancer types, countries, and health care systems. Those at highest risk include younger patients, new immigrants, visible minority groups, and those without private health coverage. Currently, cancer drug pricing does not correlate with value or clinical benefit. Value-based pricing of oncology drugs may incentivize development of higher-value medicines and eliminate excess spending on drugs that yield little benefit. Generics and biosimilars in oncology can also improve affordability and patient access, offering dramatic reductions in drug spending while maintaining patient benefit. Oncologists can promote value-based care by following evidence-based clinical guidelines that avoid low-value treatments. Researchers can also engage in value-based research that critically explores optimal cancer drug dosing, schedules, and treatment duration and defines patient populations most likely to benefit (e.g., through biomarker selection). Cancer Groundshot proposes that we improve outcomes for today's patients with cancer, including broader global access for high-value treatments, promotion of affordable cancer control strategies, and reduction of cancer morbidity and mortality through low-cost prevention and screening initiatives. Moving forward, major oncology societies recommend promoting uniform global access to essential cancer medicines and avoiding financial harm for patients as key principles in addressing the affordability of cancer drugs.

Challenges of diagnostic genomics in Latin America

Cancer genome sequencing methods have now become essential for diagnostic purposes, for devising treatment strategies, and for monitoring disease regression and progression. However, access to these benefits has not permeated homogeneously throughout the world; certain regions, such as Latin America, have been slower at adopting these technologies in terms of their routine use, development and patient access. There are also differences among Latin American subregions with respect to their prioritized types of neoplasia and the drugs that are available and approved in them. An overview of the current situation, including the status of genomics for cancer diagnostics and efforts by type of cancer is presented. In addition, we discuss the perspective of initiatives, alliances, and educational/research programs that pledge to make cancer genomics diagnosis a reality for Latin American individuals' health.

Possible Susceptibility Genes for Intervention against Chemotherapy-Induced Cardiotoxicity

Recent therapeutic advances have significantly improved the short- and long-term survival rates in patients with heart disease and cancer. Survival in cancer patients may, however, be accompanied by disadvantages, namely, increased rates of cardiovascular events. Chemotherapy-related cardiac dysfunction is an important side effect of anticancer therapy. While advances in cancer treatment have increased patient survival, treatments are associated with cardiovascular complications, including heart failure (HF), arrhythmias, cardiac ischemia, valve disease, pericarditis, and fibrosis of the pericardium and myocardium. The molecular mechanisms of cardiotoxicity caused by cancer treatment have not yet been elucidated, and they may be both varied and complex. By identifying the functional genetic variations responsible for this toxicity, we may be able to improve our understanding of the potential mechanisms and pathways of treatment, paving the way for the development of new therapies to target these toxicities. Data from studies on genetic defects and pharmacological interventions have suggested that many molecules, primarily those regulating oxidative stress, inflammation, autophagy, apoptosis, and metabolism, contribute to the pathogenesis of cardiotoxicity induced by cancer treatment. Here, we review the progress of genetic research in illuminating the molecular mechanisms of cancer treatment-mediated cardiotoxicity and provide insights for the research and development of new therapies to treat or even prevent cardiotoxicity in patients undergoing cancer treatment. The current evidence is not clear about the role of pharmacogenomic screening of susceptible genes. Further studies need to done in chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity.

Recent Health Care Expenditure Trends Among Adult Cancer Survivors in United States, 2009-2016

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to understand recent trends in direct health care expenditures among cancer survivors using novel cost-estimation methods and a nationally representative database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of 193,003 adults, ≥18 years of age, using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey during the years 2009-2016. Manning and Mullahy two-part model was used to calculate adjusted mean and incremental medical expenditures after adjusting for covariates.

RESULTS

The mean direct annual health care expenditure among cancer survivors ($13,025.0 [$12,572.0 to $13,478.0]) was nearly 3 times greater than noncancer participants ($4689.3 [$4589.2 to $4789.3]) and were mainly spent on inpatient services, office-based visits, and prescription medications. Cancer survivors had an additional health care expenditure of $4407.6 ($3877.6, $4937.6) per person per year, compared with noncancer participants after adjusting for covariates (P<0.001). The total mean annual direct health care expenditure for cancer survivors increased from $12,960.0 (95% confidence interval: $12,291.0-$13,628.0) in 2009-2010 to $13,807.0 ($12,828.0 to $14,787.0) in 2015-2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the higher health care expenditures among cancer survivors and the increasing prevalence of cancers, cost-saving measures should be planned through multidisciplinary initiatives, collaborative research, and importantly, health care planning and policy changes. Our findings could be helpful in streamlining health care resources and interventions, developing national health care coverage policies, and possibly considering radically new insurance strategies for cancer survivors.

On the need for the development of a cancer early detection, diagnostic, prognosis, and treatment response system

Cancer is the second leading cause of noncommunicable disease deaths in the world. In 2018, there were over 18 million new cancer cases and approximately 10 million people died from the disease globally. In 2019, almost two million new cases of cancer will be diagnosed in USA and over 600,000 people are expected to die from the disease. The incidence of cancer is expected to rise because of lifestyle changes and a rapidly aging population. Evidence suggests that early detection is critical to reducing cancer morbidity and mortality. In this paper, the development of an integrated smart wearable and biomarker detection system is proposed to help reduce cancer morbidity and mortality. The potential benefits and limitations of the system are discussed.

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death in the world. Evidence suggests that its incidence will continue to rise in the future because of lifestyle changes and a rapidly aging population. There is currently no cure for the disease and the best way to reduce its incidence and morbidity is to detect it early. In this paper, an integrated smart wearable and biomarker detection system to help in the early detection, prognosis, diagnosis and treatment of cancer is proposed.