Publicly Funded Cancer Care: Are Adjuvant Therapies Prioritized Over Treatment of Metastatic Cancer? The Israeli Experience

PURPOSE

In Israel, a public committee advises which new medications should be reimbursed subject to an annual budget allocation. The committee considers clinical trial outcomes, professional societies' preferences, projected budget impacts, and other social and ethical aspects. The Israeli oncologists' society places a strong emphasis on prioritizing adjuvant therapies because of their potential to advance cure. In 2023, several novel adjuvant therapies were suggested for national funding. Our objective was to ascertain whether Israeli decision makers have embraced the practice of prioritizing budgets for therapies with curative intent over late-disease therapy.

METHODS

We collected data on all proposed cancer therapies for the 2023 update: indications, treatment settings, European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) score, and whether accepted for reimbursement. The rates of acceptance were compared between drugs in curative and noncurative settings. Data were extracted from the official Israeli Ministry of Health publications and ESMO-MCBS website.

RESULTS

Seven of the eight proposed therapies with curative intent received reimbursement approval (88%), in contrast to 11 of the 55 therapies for advanced/metastatic stages (20%). Among all advanced disease therapies with a high ESMO-MCBS score of 4, only four of 16 (25%) secured reimbursement approval.

CONCLUSION

Our analysis revealed that during the 2023 reimbursement deliberations, Israeli policymakers embraced the prioritization of potentially curative therapies over treatments for incurable cancers, including several interventions that have demonstrated significant improvements in overall survival and/or quality of life. Introducing objective cost-effectiveness measures as a guiding framework for comparing competing medications may offer some resolution to this complex challenge.

Adjuvant anti-PD1 immunotherapy of resected skin melanoma: an example of non-personalized medicine with no overall survival benefit

Randomized clinical trials demonstrated a recurrence-free survival benefit with adjuvant anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD1) inhibitors of resected stage IIB-IV melanoma. However, no improvement in overall survival has been observed thus far. Furthermore, there are no predictive markers for immunotherapy response in melanoma, therefore adjuvant treatment is offered to all comers based exclusively on the pathological and clinical stages. Additionally, one year of treatment duration and the risk of chronic immune-related adverse effects may negatively impact patients´ quality of life. In this review, we will try to answer whether the currently available data on adjuvant anti-PD1 therapy of stage IIB-IV resected melanoma is sufficient to make this strategy available to all patients. We will also discuss the economic impact of this therapy on healthcare system budgets. Recent studies suggest that the high cost of cancer drugs may affect access to these agents globally by raising questions of sustainability for patients and society.

Patients' Preferences for Adjuvant Osimertinib in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Complete Surgical Resection: What Makes It Worth It to Patients?

BACKGROUND

The ADAURA trial confirmed adjuvant Osimertinib's efficacy in EGFR-mutated Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), yet the limited mature overall survival (OS) data at approval poses a challenge. This study explores patient preferences in the absence of complete OS information, hypothesizing that disease-free survival (DFS) benefit alone may influence adjuvant Osimertinib pursuit.

METHODS

At Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (Jan-Dec 2021), patients assessed for adjuvant therapy received a survey probing OS and DFS preferences. Scenarios were (a) minimum OS justifying Osimertinib, (b) minimum DFS improvement justifying 3-years of adjuvant Osimertinib, (c) minimum 5-year DFS percent change, and (d) minimum OS justifying copay changes. Results were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 524 NSCLC patients, 51 participated. Scenario 1 saw 56% requiring a 12-month OS benefit for Osimertinib justification. In scenario 2, 72% deemed a 12-month DFS benefit sufficient. Scenario 3 revealed 31% opting out despite a 10% OS increase. Scenario 4 showed varied willingness to pay, with 33% unwilling to any shoulder copayment even with a 10-year OS benefit.

CONCLUSION

This study explores patient preferences without complete OS data, revealing diverse thresholds. Factors include employment, education, and willingness to pay. Findings underscore shared decision-making importance. Limitations include sample size, potential biases, and regional focus; larger cohorts are needed for validation.

Assessment of endpoint definitions in recurrent and metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma trials: Head and Neck Cancer International Group consensus recommendations

Transparent and precise endpoint definitions are a crucial aspect of clinical trial conduct and reporting, and are used to communicate the benefit of an intervention. Previous studies have identified inconsistencies in endpoint definitions across oncological clinical trials. Here, the Head and Neck Cancer International Group assessed endpoint definitions from phase 3 trials or trials considered practice-changing for patients with recurrent or metastatic mucosal head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, published between 2008 and 2021. We identify considerable and global heterogeneity in endpoint definitions, which undermines the interpretation of results and development of future studies. We show how fundamental components of even incontrovertible endpoints such as overall survival vary widely, highlighting an urgent need for increased rigour in reporting and harmonisation of endpoints.

Lessons from ADAURA: Can we improve on a positive trial?

Although ADAURA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02511106) was a positive trial that produced a significant improvement in both disease‐free survival and overall survival, the limited crossover to postprotocol osimertinib and some other methodological issues detract from the cancer community’s ability to distinguish the benefits of timing of osimertinib versus overall access to osimertinib at a later point. Discrete refinements can be applied to global, randomized phase 3 trials to ensure their design optimally addresses the key clinical question while reducing disparities in best management practices based on resources across health care systems.

Perioperative Treatment Strategies in EGFR-Mutant Early-Stage NSCLC: Current Evidence and Future Challenges

Treatment with 3 years of adjuvant osimertinib is considered a new standard in patients with completely resected stage I to IIIA NSCLC harboring a common sensitizing EGFR mutation. This therapeutic approach significantly prolonged the disease-free survival and the overall survival versus placebo and revealed a significant role in preventing the occurrence of brain metastases. However, many unanswered questions remain, including the optimal duration of this therapy, whether all patients benefit from adjuvant osimertinib, and the role of adjuvant chemotherapy in this population. Indeed, there is a renewed interest in neoadjuvant strategies with targeted therapies in resectable NSCLC harboring oncogenic drivers. In light of these considerations, we discuss the past and current treatment options, and the clinical challenges that should be addressed to optimize the treatment outcomes in this patient population.

Timing and Reporting of Secondary Overall Survival End Points for Phase III Trials in Advanced/Metastatic Disease

Recent therapeutic advances have led to improved patient survival in many cancer settings. Although prolongation of survival remains the ultimate goal of cancer treatment, the availability of effective salvage therapies could make definitive phase III trials with primary overall survival (OS) end points difficult to complete in a timely manner. Therefore, to accelerate development of new therapies, many phase III trials of new cancer therapies are now designed with intermediate primary end points (eg, progression-free survival in the metastatic setting) with OS designated as a secondary end point. We review recently published phase III trials and assess contemporary practices for designing and reporting OS as a secondary end point. We then provide design and reporting recommendations for trials with OS as a secondary end point to safeguard OS data integrity and optimize access to the OS data for patient, clinician, and public-health stakeholders.

Locally Advanced Lung Cancer

Consolidation immunotherapy after concurrent chemoradiation has improved five-year survival rates in unresectable, locally advanced lung cancer, but disease progression and treatment personalization remain challenges. New treatment approaches with concurrent immunotherapy and consolidative novel agents are being investigated and show promising efficacy data, but at the risk of additive toxicity. Patients with PD-L1 negative tumors, oncogenic driver mutations, intolerable toxicity, or limited performance status continue to require innovative therapies. This review summarizes historical data that galvanized new research efforts, as well as ongoing clinical trials that address the challenges of current therapeutic approaches for unresectable, locally advanced lung cancer.

Adjuvant icotinib versus observation in patients with completely resected EGFR-mutated stage IB NSCLC (GASTO1003, CORIN): a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial

Background

This phase 2 trial aimed to compare adjuvant icotinib with observation in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive resected stage IB non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

We performed a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial from May 1, 2015 to December 29, 2020 at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center in China. Patients with completely resected, EGFR-mutant, stage IB (the 7th edition of TNM staging) NSCLC without adjuvant chemotherapy were randomised (1:1) to receive adjuvant therapy with icotinib (125 mg, three times daily) for 12 months or to undergo observation until disease progression or intolerable toxicity occurred. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). CORIN (GASTO1003) was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, with the number NCT02264210.

Findings

A total of 128 patients were randomised, with 63 patients in the icotinib group and 65 patients in the observation group. The median duration of follow-up was 39.9 months. The three-year DFS was significantly higher in the icotinib group (96.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 91.3-99.9) than in the observation group (84.0%, 95% CI, 75.1-92.9; P = 0.041). The DFS was significantly longer in the icotinib group than in the observation group, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.23 (95% CI, 0.07-0.81; P = 0.013). The OS data were immature, with three deaths in the observation arm. In the icotinib group, adverse events (AEs) of any grade were reported in 49 patients (77.8%), and grade 3 or greater AEs occurred in four patients (6.3%). No treatment-related deaths occurred.

Interpretation

Our findings suggested that adjuvant icotinib improved the 3-year DFS in patients with completely resected EGFR-mutated stage IB NSCLC with a manageable safety profile.

Funding

This study was sponsored by Betta Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Clinical Benefit Scales and Trial Design: Some Statistical Issues

Recently developed clinical-benefit outcome scales by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) allow standardized objective evaluation of outcomes of randomized clinical trials. However, incorporation of clinical-benefit outcome scales into trial designs highlights a number of statistical issues: the relationship between minimal clinical benefit and the target treatment-effect alternative used in the trial design, designing trials to assess long-term benefit, potential problems with using a trial endpoint that is not overall survival, and how to incorporate subgroup analyses into the trial design. Using the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale as a basis for discussion, we review what these issues are and how they can guide the choice of trial-design target effects, appropriate endpoints, and pre-specified subgroup analyses to increase the chances that the resulting trial outcomes can be appropriately evaluated for clinical benefit.

Osimertinib: A Review in Completely Resected, Early-Stage, EGFR Mutation-Positive NSCLC

Osimertinib (TAGRISSO^®) is an orally administered, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is approved for the adjuvant treatment of adults with completely resected, stage IB-IIIA, EGFR sensitizing mutation (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 [L858R] substitution)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In the pivotal ADAURA trial in adults with completely resected, early-stage, EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+) NSCLC, osimertinib adjuvant therapy significantly prolonged disease-free survival (DFS) compared with placebo in the overall population of patients with stage IB-IIIA disease, as well as in the primary population of patients with stage II-IIIA disease. A DFS benefit of osimertinib was seen irrespective of whether or not patients received prior adjuvant chemotherapy. Overall survival (OS) data were very immature at the time of the analysis of DFS, and more mature OS data are awaited with interest. Osimertinib adjuvant therapy did not adversely affect health-related quality of life and was generally well tolerated, with a manageable safety profile and no new safety signals identified. Based on the available evidence, osimertinib is thus an appropriate targeted option for the adjuvant treatment of adults with completely resected, stage IB-IIIA, EGFRm+ NSCLC.

Deconstructing ADAURA: It is Time to Forgo Adjuvant Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Resected IB-IIIA EGFR+ NSCLC (Except with RB Alterations?) When Adopting Adjuvant Osimertinib

Adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy is considered the standard of care for resected stage IB (tumor ≥ 4m)-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The ADAURA trial is a randomized placebo-controlled Phase III trial that demonstrated statistically significant improved disease-free survival (DFS) with the use of 3-years of adjuvant osimertinib in resected stage IB-IIIA NSCLC harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) del 19 or L858R mutations. Subgroup analysis revealed that the DFS improvement with adjuvant osimertinib is independent of adjuvant chemotherapy in the primary analysis. A recent follow-up report suggested that adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy provided no additional 2-year DFS improvement on top of adjuvant osimertinib regardless of stage (IB, II, or IIIA) and minimal numerical DFS benefit in stage II or IIIA resected EGFR+ NSCLC for those patients who did not receive adjuvant osimertinib. Here, we argue that if clinicians adopt the use of 3 years of adjuvant osimertinib in resected early-stage EGFR+ NSCLC, there is no role for adjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy was balanced between the osimertinib and the placebo arms by stage even though adjuvant chemotherapy was not one of the three stratification factors (del 19 vs L858R; Stage IA vs II vs III; Asians versus non-Asian) in ADAURA. There may be a potential role of adjuvant cisplatin/vinorelbine in a small subgroup of EGFR+ NSCLC patients whose tumor harbors retinoblastoma (RB) gene alterations but requires further investigation.

Efficacy and safety of adjuvant EGFR-TKIs for resected non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized control trials

Background

Postoperative adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy had been the standard care in patients with completely resected high-risk stage IB to IIIA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) for decades. However, the survival benefits were far from satisfactory in clinical practice. Thus, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of adjuvant epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in patients with resected NSCLC based on updated literature and research.

Methods

A systematic literature search based on random control trials (RCTs) was conducted with keywords on PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases. All articles compared EGFR-TKIs to placebo or chemotherapy as adjuvant therapies for early-stage resected NSCLC. A meta-analysis was performed to generate combined hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI for disease recurrence and adverse events (AEs). The Stata statistical software (version 14.0) was used to synthesis the data.

Results

A total of 9 RCTs comprising 3098 patients were included. Adjuvant EGFR-TKIs could significantly prolong DFS in patient with resected NSCLC harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29–0.72), but had no impact on OS (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69–1.11). The subgroup analyses indicated that adjuvant EGFR-TKIs were superior in regard to DFS in most subgroups, including varied smoking status, EGFR mutations type, gender, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and adenocarcinoma. Osimertinib resulted in decreased brain recurrence than first generation of EGFR-TKIs (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.04–0.34 vs. RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.64–1.78, respectively). The AEs were generally manageable and tolerable. The incidence of high-grade (≥ 3) AEs including diarrhea (RR 5.68, 95% CI 2.94–10.98) and rash (RR 27.74, 95% CI 11.43–67.30) increased after adjuvant EGFR-TKIs treatment.

Conclusions

Adjuvant EGFR-TKIs therapy could significantly prolong DFS in patients with completely resected early-stage EGFR mutation-positive NSCLC, but had no impact on OS. Adjuvant EGFR-TKIs could be an important treatment option in patients with resected early-stage EGFR-mutant NSCLC.

Commercial ctDNA Assays for Minimal Residual Disease Detection of Solid Tumors

The detection of circulating tumor DNA via liquid biopsy has become an important diagnostic test for patients with cancer. While certain commercial liquid biopsy platforms designed to detect circulating tumor DNA have been approved to guide clinical decisions in advanced solid tumors, the clinical utility of these assays for detecting minimal residual disease after curative-intent treatment of nonmetastatic disease is currently limited. Predicting disease response and relapse has considerable potential for increasing the effective implementation of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies. As a result, many companies are rapidly investing in the development of liquid biopsy platforms to detect circulating tumor DNA in the minimal residual disease setting. In this review, we discuss the development and clinical implementation of commercial liquid biopsy platforms for circulating tumor DNA minimal residual disease detection of solid tumors. Here, we aim to highlight the technological features that enable highly sensitive detection of tumor-derived genomic alterations, the factors that differentiate these commercial platforms, and the ongoing trials that seek to increase clinical implementation of liquid biopsies using circulating tumor DNA-based minimal residual disease detection.

Recent advances and new insights in the management of early-stage epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer

Patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are candidates for curative surgery; however, despite multiple advances in lung cancer management, recurrence rates remain high. Adjuvant chemotherapy has been demonstrated to significantly prolong overall survival (OS), but this benefit is modest and there is an urgent need for effective new therapies to provide a cure for more patients. The high efficacy of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) against epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFR) in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC has led to the evaluation of these agents in early stages of the disease. Multiple clinical trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of EGFR TKIs as an adjuvant treatment, in patients with resected EGFR-mutated NSCLC, and shown that they significantly prolong disease-free survival (DFS), but this benefit does not translate to OS. Recently, an interim analysis of the ADAURA trial demonstrated that, surprisingly, osimertinib improved DFS. This led to the study being stopped early, leaving many unanswered questions about its potential effect on OS and its incorporation as a standard adjuvant treatment in this patient subgroup. These targeted agents are also being evaluated in locally-advanced disease, with promising results, although prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these results. In this article, we review the most relevant studies on the role of EGFR TKIs in the management of early-stage EGFR-mutated NSCLC.

Targeted therapy moves to earlier stages of non-small-cell lung cancer: emerging evidence, controversies and future challenges

Lung cancer continues to be the leading cause of cancer mortality and a serious health problem despite the numerous advances made in the last decade and the rapid advance of research in this field. In recent years, there has been a decrease in mortality from lung cancer coinciding with the approval times of targeted therapy. To date, targeted therapy has been used in the context of advanced disease in clinical practice, with great benefits in survival and quality of life. The next step will be to incorporate targeted therapy into the treatment of earlier stages of non-small-cell lung cancer, and there is already a randomized trial showing a disease-free survival benefit. However, there are many questions that need to be resolved first. In the present review, the authors discuss the findings of published reports and ongoing clinical trials assessing the role of targeted therapies in nonmetastatic disease.