Addressing the dichotomy between individual and societal approaches to personalised medicine in oncology

Exploring uncertainty and use of real-world data in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence single technology appraisals of targeted cancer therapy

OBJECTIVES

Dealing with uncertainty is one of the critical topics in health technology assessment. The greater decision uncertainty in appraisals, the less clear the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of the health technology. Although the development of targeted cancer therapies (TCTs) has improved patient health care, additional complexity has been introduced in drug appraisals due to targeting more specific populations. Real-world data (RWD) are expected to provide helpful information to fill the evidence gaps in appraisals. This study compared appraisals of TCTs with those of non-targeted cancer therapies (non-TCTs) regarding sources of uncertainty and reviewed how RWD have been used to supplement the information in these appraisals.

METHODS

This study reviews single technology appraisals (STAs) of oncology medicines performed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) over 11 years up to December 2021. Three key sources of uncertainty were identified for comparison (generalisability of clinical trials, availability of direct treatment comparison, maturity of survival data in clinical trials). To measure the intensity of use of RWD in appraisals, three components were identified (overall survival, volume of treatment, and choice of comparators).

RESULTS

TCTs received more recommendations for provision through the Cancer Drugs Fund (27.7, 23.6% for non-TCT), whereas similar proportions were recommended for routine commissioning. With respect to sources of uncertainty, the external validity of clinical trials was greater in TCT appraisals (p = 0.026), whereas mature survival data were available in fewer TCT appraisals (p = 0.027). Both groups showed similar patterns of use of RWD. There was no clear evidence that RWD have been used more intensively in appraisals of TCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Some differences in uncertainty were found between TCT and non-TCT appraisals. The appraisal of TCT is generally challenging, but these challenges are neither new nor distinctive. The same sources of uncertainty were often found in the non-TCT appraisals. The uncertainty when appraising TCT stems from insufficient data rather than the characteristics of the drugs. Although RWD might be expected to play a more active role in appraisals of TCT, the use of RWD has generally been limited.

Clinical cancer genomic profiling

Technological innovation and rapid reduction in sequencing costs have enabled the genomic profiling of hundreds of cancer-associated genes as a component of routine cancer care. Tumour genomic profiling can refine cancer subtype classification, identify which patients are most likely to benefit from systemic therapies and screen for germline variants that influence heritable cancer risk. Here, we discuss ongoing efforts to enhance the clinical utility of tumour genomic profiling by integrating tumour and germline analyses, characterizing allelic context and identifying mutational signatures that influence therapy response. We also discuss the potential clinical utility of more comprehensive whole-genome and whole-transcriptome sequencing and ultra-sensitive cell-free DNA profiling platforms, which allow for minimally invasive, serial analyses of tumour-derived DNA in blood.

The evolving paradigm of biomarker actionability: Histology-agnosticism as a spectrum, rather than a binary quality

Precision medicine is progressively revolutionizing oncology, through the identification of biomarkers predictive of treatment response in cancer patients. For three of such biomarkers, namely NTRK-fusions, microsatellite instability and high tumor mutational burden, drugs have been approved by regulatory agencies regardless of tumor histology, realizing the paradigm of histology-agnostic actionability. Several additional biomarkers are being studied in a histology-agnostic manner, and may in the future expand this list. However, most available evidence suggest that histology-agnosticism may be the extreme of a continuous spectrum of actionability, rather than a binary quality. The present review recapitulates such evidence, highlighting opportunities and challenges posed by the emergence of the spectrum of biomarker actionability in the context of a prevalently histology-based oncology.

Clinical Molecular Marker Testing Data Capture to Promote Precision Medicine Research Within the Cancer Research Network

PURPOSE

To evaluate health care systems for the availability of population-level data on the frequency of use and results of clinical molecular marker tests to inform precision cancer care.

METHODS

We assessed cancer-related molecular marker test data availability across 12 US health care systems in the Cancer Research Network. Overall, these systems provide care to a diverse population of more than 12 million people in the United States. We performed qualitative analyses of test data availability for five blood-based protein, nine germline, and 14 tissue-based tumor marker tests in each health care system's electronic health record and tumor registry using key informants, test code lists, and manual review of data types and output. We then performed quantitative analyses to estimate the proportion of patients with cancer with test utilization data and results for specific molecular marker tests.

RESULTS

Health systems were able to systematically capture population-level data on all five blood protein markers, six of 14 tissue-based tumor markers, and none of the nine germline markers. Successful, systematic data capture was achievable for tests with electronic data feeds for test results (blood protein markers) or through prior manual abstraction by tumor registrars (select tumor-based markers). For test results stored in scanned image files (particularly germline and tumor marker tests), information on which test was performed and test results was not readily accessible in an electronic format.

CONCLUSION

Even in health care systems with sophisticated electronic health records, there were few codified data elements available for evaluating precision cancer medicine test use and results at the population level. Health care organizations should establish standards for electronic reporting of precision medicine tests to expedite cancer research and facilitate the implementation of precision medicine approaches.

The path to a better biomarker: application of a risk management framework for the implementation of PD-L1 and TILs as immuno-oncology biomarkers in breast cancer clinical trials and daily practice

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies targeting PD-1/PD-L1 are now the standard of care in oncology across several hematologic and solid tumor types, including triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Patients with metastatic or locally advanced TNBC with PD-L1 expression on immune cells occupying ≥1% of tumor area demonstrated survival benefit with the addition of atezolizumab to nab-paclitaxel. However, concerns regarding variability between immunohistochemical PD-L1 assay performance and inter-reader reproducibility have been raised. High tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have also been associated with response to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in patients with breast cancer (BC). TILs can be easily assessed on hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides and have shown reliable inter-reader reproducibility. As an established prognostic factor in early stage TNBC, TILs are soon anticipated to be reported in daily practice in many pathology laboratories worldwide. Because TILs and PD-L1 are parts of an immunological spectrum in BC, we propose the systematic implementation of combined PD-L1 and TIL analyses as a more comprehensive immuno-oncological biomarker for patient selection for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition-based therapy in patients with BC. Although practical and regulatory considerations differ by jurisdiction, the pathology community has the responsibility to patients to implement assays that lead to optimal patient selection. We propose herewith a risk-management framework that may help mitigate the risks of suboptimal patient selection for immuno-therapeutic approaches in clinical trials and daily practice based on combined TILs/PD-L1 assessment in BC. © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy and radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of liver metastases: How and when?

Limited liver metastases represent a clinical challenge. Surgical approach is the most frequently reported treatment option, however, some patients are not eligible for surgical interventions. Relatively recent technologic advances have permitted the safe use of ablative techniques employed in the cure of hepatic metastases. Among these, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) have emerged as valid treatments in a significant proportion of patients with intrahepatic oligometastatic disease. This review offers an up-to-date of current available literature on this issue focusing on the use and outcomes of RFA and SBRT, according to the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes) criteria.