Guest editorial: Children and new technology

R. Joiner,D. Fraser,R. Luckin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.00015.x

2003-06-01

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Alternative dosing strategies for immune checkpoint inhibitors to improve cost-effectiveness: a special focus on nivolumab and pembrolizumab

Ruben Malmberg,Michiel Zietse,Daphne W Dumoulin,Jeroen J M A Hendrikx,Joachim G J V Aerts,Astrid A M van der Veldt,Birgit C P Koch,Stefan Sleijfer,Roelof W F van Leeuwen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(22)00554-x

IF: 54.433

2022-11-30

The Lancet Oncology

Abstract:Summary Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionised cancer treatment by offering durable responses to many patients with solid and haematological cancers. The high prices and increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors put considerable strain on health-care budgets globally. This financial strain could jeopardise patients' access to these anti-cancer therapies. However, substantial evidence suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are being administered at doses that exceed the minimum dose required for maximum anti-tumour efficacy. Therefore, investigating and implementing the most cost-effective dosing strategies for immune checkpoint inhibitors are urgently necessary. This Personal View provides an overview of existing data on immune checkpoint inhibitor pharmacology and (novel) dosing strategies for anti-PD-1 therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab, with a special focus on cost-effectiveness and saving potential. Furthermore, specific recommendations to guide health-care professionals are provided, through the process of prescribing, rounding, preparing, and administering nivolumab and pembrolizumab in the most practical and cost-effective way possible.
Economics of alternative dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab at a single academic cancer center

Evan Hall,Jenny Zhang,Eun Jeong Kim,Grace Hwang,Gilbert Chu,Shailender Bhatia,Sunil Reddy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2888

IF: 4.711

2020-01-28

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Background</h3><p>The FDA initially approved pembrolizumab and nivolumab for doses based on patient weight, but subsequently amended approval to fixed doses. We estimated savings from novel dosing strategies based on real‐world patient data from a single cancer center.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>We analyzed all outpatient doses of pembrolizumab and nivolumab administered at three infusion centers affiliated with our academic hospital between July 1, 2018 and Oct 31, 2018. We estimated savings from several dosing strategies with and without vial sharing between patients.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>A total of 1029 doses of pembrolizumab or nivolumab were administered for multiple cancer types. For 77% of doses, the weight‐based dose was less than the fixed dose. "Dose‐minimization" (DM), defined as the lesser of weight‐based and fixed dose decreased nivolumab spending by 9% without affecting pembrolizumab spending. DM <i>plus</i> vial sharing decreased pembrolizumab spending by 19% without affecting nivolumab. The differences in savings were due to availability of multiple vial sizes for nivolumab but not pembrolizumab. DM plus vial sharing for both drugs would have saved $1.5 million USD over the 4‐month study period. </p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusion</h3><p>New dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab can generate large savings without anticipated decrease in efficacy. Barriers include FDA dosing labels, hospital policies against vial sharing, and inaccessibility of smaller vial sizes, which are currently available in other worldwide markets.</p></section>

oncology
Model-Informed Development of a Cost-Saving Dosing Regimen for Sacituzumab Govitecan

Dirk J. A. R. Moes,Jeroen J. M. A. Hendrikx,Henk-Jan Guchelaar,Ron H. J. Mathijssen,J. L. Bakker,Vincent O. Dezentjé,Nikki de Rouw,Nielka P. van Erp,Egbert F. Smit,Michel M. van den Heuvel,Thijs H. Oude Munnink,Maartje van Kats,Sander Croes,Judith R. Kroep,Juliette Zwaveling,Rob ter Heine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11523-024-01075-8

2024-06-20

Targeted Oncology

Abstract:The antibody–drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan is approved for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and has shown promising results in various other types of cancer. Its costs may limit patient access to this novel effective treatment modality.

oncology
Real-world overall survival after alternative dosing for pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A nationwide retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective

Geeske F Grit,Esmée van Geffen,Ruben Malmberg,Roelof van Leeuwen,Stefan Böhringer,Hans Jm Smit,Pepijn Brocken,Job Fh Eijsink,Esther Dronkers,Pim Gal,Eva Jaarsma,Regine Jhm van Drie-Pierik,Anne Mp Eldering-Heldens,A N Machteld Wymenga,Peter Gm Mol,Juliëtte Zwaveling,Doranne Hilarius

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2024.107950

IF: 6.081

Lung Cancer

Abstract:Background: High and increasing expenses on pembrolizumab ask for more cost-effective and sustainable treatment strategies to improve affordability of healthcare. Therefore, a part of the Dutch hospitals implemented an alternative, partially lower, weight-based dosing protocol for pembrolizumab. This provided the unique opportunity to compare the overall survival (OS) of the alternative pembrolizumab dosing protocol to standard dosing using a nationwide registry in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective. Forty hospitals in the Dutch Medication Audit and Dutch Lung Cancer Audit treated 1966 patients with NSCLC with first line pembrolizumab (mono- or combination therapy) between Jan 1st 2021, and Mar 31st, 2023. Alternative weight-based pembrolizumab dosing (100/150/200 mg Q3W or 200/300/400 mg Q6W) was administered to 604 patients, and 1362 patients received standard pembrolizumab dosing (200 mg Q3W or 400 mg Q6W). A Cox proportional hazard model with selected covariates was used to compare the OS between alternative and standard dosing protocols. The non-inferiority margin was set at a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.2 for OS. Non-inferiority is established by showing that the upper limit of the 95 % confidence interval (CI) of the HR of OS is smaller or equal to 1.2. Results: Distribution of age (66.7 years +/-9.4), sex (45 % female) and treatment combinations were similar for both groups, comorbidity score was higher in the standard group. Median daily dose in the alternative dosing group was 22 % lower compared to the standard dosing group, 7.14 mg/day (interquartile range (IQR):5.48-8.04 mg/day) vs. 9.15 mg/day (IQR:8.33-9.52 mg/day), respectively. Alternative dosing was non-inferior to standard dosing regarding overall survival (adjusted HR 0.83, 95 %CI:0.69-1.003). Conclusion: This large, retrospective real-world analysis supports the hypothesis that the alternative, partially lower pembrolizumab dosing protocol in NSCLC maintains treatment effectiveness while reducing treatment costs.
Economic analysis of alternative pembrolizumab and nivolumab dosing strategies at an academic cancer center.

Evan Thomas Hall,Jenny Zhang,Eun-Jeong Kim,Grace Hwang,Shailender Bhatia,Sunil A. Reddy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.6504

IF: 45.3

2019-10-07

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:6504 Background: Pembrolizumab (P) and nivolumab (N) were initially investigated and FDA-approved with weight-based dosing strategies, but later the approval label was amended to a fixed dose administration. Given increasing concerns about financial toxicity of cancer therapies, we hypothesize that weight-based dosing of P and N and allowing vial sharing among patients will result in substantial cost savings. Methods: We obtained IRB approval to retrospectively examine all outpatient doses of P and N given at three Stanford Medicine infusion centers between July 1, 2018 and Oct 31, 2018 using the Stanford Medicine Research Data Repository (STARR) database. We performed cost-minimization analysis modeling the impact of dosing strategies based upon patient weight versus fixed dosing (2 mg/kg vs 200 mg q3wks for P; 3 mg/kg vs 240 mg q2wks or 6 mg/kg vs 480 q4wks for N). "Dose-minimization" (DM) was defined as whichever dose was lower (weight-based or fixed dose). The impact of allowing vial sharing (considering commercially available vial sizes) between patients treated at the same site and on the same date was assessed. Average sales price (ASP) from Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for Part B drugs was used for cost estimates. Results: A total of 1,029 doses of P or N were administered across a variety of cancer types. For most doses (N = 789, 77%), the calculated weight-based dose was less than the fixed dose. DM resulted in decreased usage and expenditures of both P and N, and a further decrease was observed with vial sharing. Total savings estimated with DM and vial sharing strategy were > $1.4 million (Table). This amounted to savings of > 22,000 mg of P (112 fixed doses) and > 11000 mg of N (47 fixed doses). Savings were greatest at the highest volume infusion center. Conclusions: Alternative dosing strategies of P and N would result in significantly less drug utilization and pharmaceutical expenditure without anticipated impact on efficacy. Potential barriers to this approach include existing policies regarding vial sharing and drug vial sizes. Drug Name Actual cost ($) of Ab used Estimated cost ($) of Ab used with DM w/o vial sharing Estimated cost ($) of Ab used with DM w/ vial sharing Est savings ($) with DM + vial sharing Pembrolizumab $6,419,497 $6,371,085 $5,310,060 $1,109,437 Nivolumab $3,300,090 $3,000,207 $2,987,539 $312,551 Total $1,421,988

oncology
Dose Rationalization of Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab Using Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation and Cost Analysis

Kayode Ogungbenro,Alkesh Patel,Robert Duncombe,Richard Nuttall,James Clark,Paul Lorigan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.875

2017-10-16

Abstract:Pembrolizumab and nivolumab are highly selective anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibodies approved for the treatment of advanced malignancies. Variable exposure and significant wastage have been associated with body size dosing of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). The following dosing strategies were evaluated using simulations: body weight, dose banding, fixed dose, and pharmacokinetic (PK)-based methods. The relative cost to body weight dosing for band, fixed 150 mg and 200 mg, and PK-derived strategies were -15%, -25%, + 7%, and -16% for pembrolizumab and -8%, -6%, and -10% for band, fixed, and PK-derived strategies for nivolumab, respectively. Relative to mg/kg doses, the median exposures were -1.0%, -4.6%, + 27.1%, and +3.0% for band, fixed 150 mg, fixed 200 mg, and PK-derived strategies, respectively, for pembrolizumab and -3.1%, + 1.9%, and +1.4% for band, fixed 240 mg, and PK-derived strategies, respectively, for nivolumab. Significant wastage can be reduced by alternative dosing strategies without compromising exposure and efficacy.

pharmacology & pharmacy
A real-world data approach to determine the optimal dosing strategy for pembrolizumab

Ashley Jang,Lynne Nakashima,Tonya Ng,Mayo Fung,Samarah Jiwani,Kimberly Schaff,Jennifer Suess,Randy Goncalves,Dennis Jang,Kimberly Kuik,Sylvie Labelle,Alison Pow

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1078155220929756

2020-06-15

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice

Abstract:Introduction Cancer drug therapy costs continue to rise and threaten the sustainability of Canada’s public healthcare system. Previous studies have calculated potential savings utilizing different dosing regimens of cancer treatments. Our objectives were to determine the financial impact of drug wastage and to explore cost-effective dosing regimens for pembrolizumab. Methods This was a retrospective study reviewing data for non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma patients at all six BC Cancer Regional Centres during fiscal years 2017 and 2018. Pembrolizumab waste amounts recorded in pharmacy wastage logs were totalled. Estimates of the number of vials used were compared between vial sharing and non-vial sharing practices to determine the cost differences. Costs for dosing regimens used during fiscal years 2017 and 2018 were compared to 2 mg/kg weight-based dosing (to a maximum of 200 mg), 2 mg/kg dosing rounding down within 5% and 10%, and flat dosing of 200 mg. Results There were a total of 202 non-small cell lung cancer and 182 melanoma patients with 2948 doses dispensed. Documented wastage was valued at $1,829,047.44 (8.65%) and across all six centres, vial sharing could reduce costs by $3,207,600.00 using the 100 mg vials. Compared to fiscal years 2017 and 2018, 2 mg/kg dosing (to a maximum of 200 mg) was the most cost-effective, decreasing costs by $222,719.20; flat dosing of 200 mg was the most expensive, increasing costs by $6,625,260.40. Conclusions Having smaller vial sizes, practicing vial sharing, and using weight-based dosing all improve cost savings. Further investigations on the allocation of resources to optimize drug use and minimize wastage are needed.

oncology,pharmacology & pharmacy
Cost-effectiveness and drug wastage of immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies: a systematic review

Ziyan Chen,Yue Cheng,David DeRemer,Vakaramoko Diaby

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2021.1913056

2021-05-02

Abstract:<span><b>Introduction</b>: Novel immunotherapeutic agents (e.g. monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, bispecific T-cell engagers) as treatment options for hematologic malignancies continue to emerge. These agents have been used as the standard of care in specific disease states and are associated with high costs. Value assessment of these therapies is of critical importance for coverage and reimbursement decision-making.<b>Areas covered</b>: We identified 15 immunotherapeutic agents through the U.S. FDA approvals for hematologic malignancies until 2018 and systematically reviewed related cost-effectiveness studies. Additionally, we examined whether drug wastage was accounted for in these studies.<b>Expert opinion</b>: We reviewed 51 studies for 14 identified immunotherapeutic agents that met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Three studies were observational-based, one study was model-based and incorporated observational data. The remaining studies were model-based with the majority of the model parameters extracted from randomized control trials (RCTs). Among 43 model-based economic evaluations, 13 studies accounted for drug wastage. Most of the studies showed favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens when compared with no immunotherapeutic agents-containing regimens. Alemtuzumab, brentuximab vedotin, and daratumumab were not considered cost-effective across all the studies. Further investigations are warranted to establish the value of recent immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies.</span>

pharmacology & pharmacy,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Management of bevacizumab-associated bowel perforation: a case series and review of the literature.

B. Badgwell,E. Camp,B. Feig,R. Wolff,C. Eng,Lee M. Ellis,J. Cormier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ANNONC/MDM508

IF: 51.769

Annals of Oncology

Abstract:BACKGROUND This study examined the various approaches to the management of perforation and the associated outcomes in patients with bevacizumab-associated bowel perforation at a tertiary cancer center. PATIENTS AND METHODS Our institutional pharmacy database was searched to identify all patients who had received bevacizumab over a 2-year period (January 2004 to October 2006). Medical records of these patients were examined for reports of confirmed bowel perforation or fistula, associated clinicopathological factors, treatment, and outcomes. RESULTS We identified 1442 patients who had been treated with bevacizumab over the study period with perforation occurring in 24 (1.7%). The breakdown of these 24 patients by disease site was as follows: ovarian (3 of 50, 6%), gastroesophageal (2 of 38, 5.3%), pancreatic (7 of 141, 5%), unknown primary (1 of 60, 1.7%), lung (1 of 67, 1.5%), colorectal (6 of 478, 1.3%), and renal cell (4 of 269, 1.5%). The majority of patients (n = 19, 79%) were initially managed nonoperatively. Only five (21%) patients ultimately underwent surgical exploration, with a subsequent anastomotic leak developing in one patient. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 12.5%. CONCLUSIONS Bevacizumab-associated bowel perforation occurs in patients with various malignancies, with an incidence of 1.7%. Nonoperative treatment is a viable approach to management in selected patients.
Bolusing IV Administration Sets With Monoclonal Antibodies Reduces Cost and Chair Time: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Francesca Boyte,Brighid Scanlon,Robyn Matthews,Elise Button,Lee Jones,Therese Hayes,Grant Partridge,Michael Smith,Glen Andrew Kennedy,Melissa Eastgate,Nicole Clare Gavin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1188/24.cjon.e9-e15

IF: 1.283

2024-10-16

Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies are widely used anticancer therapies. Increasing demand for ambulatory care necessitates exploration of efficiency measures.

nursing,oncology
What's the buzz; tell me what's a happening!

Adrian Jones

2011-08-01

Journal of Perioperative Practice

Abstract:
Applying a cost-based pricing model for innovative cancer treatments subject to indication expansion: A case study for pembrolizumab and daratumumab

R. J. S. D. Heine,F. W. Thielen,R. H. J. Mathijssen,R. W. F. van Leeuwen,M. G. Franken,C. A. Uyl-de Groot

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293264

IF: 3.7

2024-02-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:Background Expanding the indication of already approved immuno-oncology drugs presents treatment opportunities for patients but also strains healthcare systems. Cost-based pricing models are discussed as a possibility for cost containment. This study focuses on two drugs, pembrolizumab (Keytruda) and daratumumab (Darzalex), to explore the potential effect of indication broadening on the estimated price when using the cost-based pricing (CBP) model proposed by Uyl-de Groot and Löwenberg (2018). Methods The model was used to calculate cumulative yearly prices, cumulative prices per indication, and non-cumulative indication-based prices using inputs such as research and development (R&D) costs, manufacturing costs, eligible patient population, and a profit margin. A deterministic stepwise analysis and scenario analysis were conducted to examine how sensitive the estimated price is to the different input assumptions. Results The yearly cumulative cost-based prices (CBPs) ranged from €52 to €885 for pembrolizumab per vial and €823 to €31,941 for daratumumab per vial. Prices were higher in initial years or indications due to smaller patient populations, decreased over time or after additional indications. Sensitivity analysis showed that the number of eligible patients had the most significant impact on the estimated price. In the scenario analysis the profit margin contributed most to a higher CBPs for both drugs. Lower estimates resulted from assumed lower R&D costs. Discussion The estimated CBPs are consistently lower than Dutch list prices for pembrolizumab (€2,861), mainly resulting from larger patient populations in registered indications. However, daratumumab’s list prices fall within the range of modeled CBPs depending on the year or indication (€4,766). Both CBPs decrease over time or with additional indications. The number of eligible patients and initial R&D costs have the most significant influence on the CBPs. These findings contribute to the ongoing discussions on pharmaceutical pricing, especially concerning cancer drugs with expanding indications.

multidisciplinary sciences
Opportunities for using in silico-based extended dosing regimens for monoclonal antibody immune checkpoint inhibitors

Cody J Peer,Daniel A Goldstein,Jennifer C Goodell,Ryan Nguyen,William D Figg,Mark J Ratain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14369

Abstract:Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) involves frequent measurements of drug concentrations to ensure levels remain within a therapeutic window, and it is especially useful for drugs with narrow therapeutic indices or extensive interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. This technique has never been applied to immuno-oncology drugs, but, given recent examinations of clinical data (both exposure and response) on a number of these drugs, further investigations into TDM may be justified to reduce costs as well as potentially reducing the severity and/or duration of immune-related adverse events. Specifically, all but one of the approved PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, cemiplimab-rwlc, atezolizumab, avelumab, durvalumab) have been shown to exhibit a plateaued exposure-response (E-R) curve at doses evaluated extensively to date, as well as time-dependent changes in drug exposure. Furthermore, responders have a greater decrease in drug clearance over time and would, therefore, have supratherapeutic serum concentrations. With frequent trough measurements, it is possible to use pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation to estimate drug clearance via Bayesian methods. Based on patient-specific estimates for clearance, optimal alternative dosing strategies can be simulated to lower drug and cost burden yet maintain therapeutic levels, especially as the clearance of the drug decreases over time. This review will comprehensively discuss each of the FDA approved PD-1, PD-L1/2 and CTLA-4 inhibitors regarding their indications and current recommended dosing, with evidence supporting the investigation of these types of TDM strategies.
Therapeutic drug monitoring of oral anticancer drugs - preliminary results of a prospective study

S.L. Groenland,R.A.G. Van Eerden,S.L. Koolen,D J A R Moes,I.M.E. Desar,D.J. Touw,A.L.T. Imholz,A.K.L. Reyners,H. Gelderblom,N.P. van Erp,R.H.J. Mathijssen,A.D.R. Huitema,N. Steeghs

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz244.004

IF: 51.769

2019-10-01

Annals of Oncology

Abstract:<span class="paragraphSection">BackgroundOral anticancer drugs show a high interpatient variability in pharmacokinetics (PK). Even though exposure has been linked to efficacy and toxicity for many of these drugs, they are still dosed using a one-size-fits-all approach. Consequently, individual patients (pts) have a high probability to be either underdosed or overdosed, potentially leading to decreased antitumor efficacy or increased toxicity. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), which is personalised dosing based on measured drug levels, can be used to address these problems and thereby optimize treatment outcomes.MethodsThis prospective clinical study (www.trialregister.nl, NL6695) evaluates the feasibility, tolerability and efficacy of TDM of oral anticancer drugs. In total, 600 pts will be included for 23 different drugs. Pts starting regular treatment with one of these drugs at the approved dose are included. PK sampling is performed 4, 8, and 12 weeks after start of treatment and every 12 weeks thereafter. Drug concentrations are measured and trough concentrations (C<sub>min</sub>) are estimated. In case of C<sub>min</sub> below the predefined target and acceptable toxicity, a PK-guided intervention is recommended. This may include emphasizing compliance, adaptations in concomitant medication (due to drug-drug interactions), concomitant intake with food, splitting intake moments or dose increments.ResultsIn total, 274 pts were included (trametinib (n = 43), abiraterone (n = 38), enzalutamide (n = 35), imatinib (n = 33), pazopanib (n = 23), other (n = 102)), of whom 246 pts had available PK data. 83 pts (34%) were underdosed and had ≥ 1 PK samples below the predefined target. In 48 of 246 pts (20%) a PK-guided intervention was performed, which was successful (i.e. target attainment without additional toxicities) in 39 pts (81%). In 35 pts, a PK-guided intervention could not be performed, due to toxicity (17 pts), logistical reasons (13 pts) or lack of physician adherence (5 pts).ConclusionsThis prospective study shows that PK-guided dose optimization of oral anticancer drugs is feasible in clinical practice. A PK-guided intervention was recommended in 20% of the patients and resulted in target attainment without additional toxicities in 81% of these patients.Clinical trial identificationNL6695; release date: 6 December 2017.Legal entity responsible for the studyNetherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital.FundingUnrestricted research grant of Novartis, Pfizer and Roche.DisclosureS.L. Koolen: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen. D.J.A.R. Moes: Advisory / Consultancy: Sandoz; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Chiesi Pharmaceuticals. I.M.E. Desar: Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy: Lilly; Advisory / Consultancy: Eisai. D.J. Touw: Advisory / Consultancy: Sanguin; Research grant / Funding (institution): Chiesi Pharmaceuticals. N.P. van Erp: Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Janssen-Cilag; Research grant / Funding (institution): Ipsen; Research grant / Funding (institution): BMS; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Gilead. R.H.J. Mathijssen: Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Honoraria (institution), Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pamgene; Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Sanofi; Honoraria (institution): Servier. N. Steeghs: Research grant / Funding (institution): AstraZeneca/MedImmune; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bristol-Myers Squibb; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): GlaxoSmithKline; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer Ingelheim; Research grant / Funding (institution): Blueprint Medicines; Research grant / Funding (institution): AB Science; Research grant / Funding (institution): Deciphera; Research grant / Funding (institution): Genentech; Research grant / Funding (institution): Merck Sharp & Dohme; Research grant / Funding (institution): Amgen; Research grant / <p>-Abstract Truncated-</p>

oncology
Pharmacokinetic Simulation Analysis of Less Frequent Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab Dosing: Pharmacoeconomic Rationale for Dose Deescalation

Cody J. Peer,Brian L. Heiss,Daniel A. Goldstein,Jennifer C. Goodell,William D. Figg,Mark J. Ratain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.1984

2022-01-05

The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology

Abstract:Nivolumab and pembrolizumab, anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies, have revolutionized oncology, but are expensive. Using an interventional pharmacoeconomic approach, these drugs can be administered less often to reduce costs and increase patient convenience while maintaining efficacy. Both drugs are good candidates for less frequent dosing because of long half-lives and no evidence of a relationship of dose to efficacy. Established population pharmacokinetic models for both nivolumab and pembrolizumab were utilized to simulate profiles for multiple dosing regimens on 1000 randomly generated virtual patients. Simulations were initially performed on standard dose regimens to validate these in silico predictions. Next, simulations of 0.3 mg/kg q3wk nivolumab revealed that >95% of patients maintained ≥1.5 μg/mL at steady-state, which was inferred as the MEC for both drugs. Various alternative dosing regimens were simulated for both drugs to determine which regimen(s) can maintain this MEC in >95% of patients. Extended dosing regimens of nivolumab 240 mg q4w and 480 mg q8w along with pembrolizumab 200 mg q6w were simulated, showing >95% of patients maintained concentrations ≥MEC. These simulations demonstrate the potential to reduce drug exposure by at least 50%, thus substantially reducing patient visits (as well as costs), while maintaining equivalent efficacy. These models provide the scientific justification for an ongoing prospective randomized clinical trial comparing standard interval fixed dosing with extended interval fixed dosing, and ultimately an efficacy-driven comparative trial.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
Real-world assessment of attenuated dosing anti-PD1 therapy as an alternative dosing strategy in a high-income country (as defined by World Bank)

Jia Li Low,Yiqing Huang,Kenneth Sooi,Zhi Yao Chan,Wei Peng Yong,Soo Chin Lee,Boon Cher Goh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.932212

IF: 4.7

2022-11-18

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:The rising cost of oncological drugs poses a global challenge to patients, insurers, and policy makers, with the leading drugs worldwide by revenue from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Despite its cost, ICI is marked as a paradigm shift, offering the potential of a long-term cure. To reduce cost, an attenuated dose of ICI based on pharmacological principles can be used while maintaining efficacy. This real-world study aims to examine the prescribing patterns, the effect of financial constraints, and the outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). All patients receiving palliative intent ICI treatment for advanced NSCLC between January 2014 and April 2021 in National University Hospital, Singapore were recruited. Demographics, prescription trends, factors affecting the prescription of attenuated dose ICI (AD ICI) versus standard dose ICI (SD ICI), and the effect of dose on survival outcomes, toxicities, and costs were examined. Two hundred seventy-four received ICI. The majority of them were treated in first-line setting. One hundred sixty-two (59%) of patients received AD ICI, whereas 112 (41%) received SD ICI. Patients who did not have a supplemental private as-charged health insurance plan were more likely to have received AD ICI (OR: 4.53 [2.69–7.61] p < 0.001). There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)—adjusted HR 1.07 CI [0.76, 1.50] p = 0.697 and HR 0.95 CI [0.67, 1.34] p = 0.773, respectively, between patients who received AD versus SD ICI. A cost minimization analysis evaluating the degree of cost savings related to drug costs estimated a within study cost saving of USD 7,939,059 over 7 years. Our study provides evidence for AD-ICI as a promising strategy to maximize the number of patients who can be treated with ICI. This has the potential to make significant economic impact and allow more patients to benefit from novel therapies.

oncology
Exploring the Cost Effectiveness of a Whole-Genome Sequencing-Based Biomarker for Treatment Selection in Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer Ineligible for Targeted Therapy

Zakile A. Mfumbilwa,Martijn J. H. G. Simons,Bram Ramaekers,Valesca P. Retèl,Joanne M. Mankor,Harry J. M. Groen,Joachim G. J. V. Aerts,Manuela Joore,Janneke A. Wilschut,Veerle M. H. Coupé

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-023-01344-w

2024-01-11

PharmacoEconomics

Abstract:We aimed to perform an early cost-effectiveness analysis of using a whole-genome sequencing-based tumor mutation burden (WGS-TMB), instead of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), for immunotherapy treatment selection in patients with non-squamous advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer ineligible for targeted therapy, from a Dutch healthcare perspective.

pharmacology & pharmacy,health care sciences & services,health policy & services,economics
A note on decoding of block codes (Corresp.)

S. Reddy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.1969.1054345

IF: 2.5

1969-09-01

IEEE Transactions on Information Theory

Abstract:A decoding scheme is given for some block codes for which it is known how to decode a subcode. It is shown that the proposed decoding scheme can be applied to several BCH codes making it possible to correct many errors beyond the ones guaranteed by the known minimum distance and also the codes will be "effectively" majority decodable.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer ineligible for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen: a United Kingdom health care perspective

Yunlin Jiang,Mingye Zhao,Jiayi Xi,Jiaqi Li,Wenxi Tang,Xueping Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1282374

IF: 5.2

2023-09-30

Frontiers in Public Health

Abstract:Background: Cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab, as a treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who cannot receive a platinum-containing regimen,was still unknown. Our objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab vs. chemotherapy in this indication from the perspective of UK healthcare system. Methods: From the global, randomised, open-label, phase III IPSOS trial, clinical inputs and patient characteristics were obtained. A partitioned survival model with three health states was built: Progression-free survival, progressed disease and death. A lifetime time horizon was applied, with an annual discount rate of 3.5%. Additionally, the willingness-to-pay threshold of £50,000/QALY was utilized. Primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity, scenario, and subgroup analyses were used to assess the reliability of base-case results. Price simulations were carried out in order to provide information for the pricing strategy at specific willingness-to-pay threshold. Results: In the base-case analysis, atezolizumab resulted in a gain of 0.28 QALYs and an ICER of £94,873/QALY compared to chemotherapy, demonstrating no cost-effectiveness. Price simulation results revealed that atezolizumab would be preferred at a price lower than £2,215 (a reduction of 41.8%) at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £50,000. Sensitivity, scenario and subgroup analyses revealed these conclusions were generally robust, the model was most sensitive to the price of atezolizumab and subsequent medication. Furthermore, atezolizumab was found to be more cost-effective for patients displaying a positive PD-L1 expression, with an ICER of £72,098/QALY as compared to chemotherapy. Conclusion: Atezolizumab is not cost-effective for patients with advanced NSCLC ineligible for platinum-containing regimen, potential price reduction is necessary.

public, environmental & occupational health
Anticancer drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for gastrointestinal malignancies: Clinical benefit and price considerations

Di Maria Jiang,Kelvin K W Chan,Raymond W Jang,Christopher Booth,Geoffrey Liu,Eitan Amir,Robert Mason,Louis Everest,Elena Elimova,Kelvin K. W. Chan,Raymond W. Jang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2058

IF: 4.711

2019-03-07

Cancer Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The cost of new anticancer drugs is rising. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit and price of anti-cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for advanced gastrointestinal cancers.METHODS: Drugs approved between 2006 and 2017 for advanced GI malignancies were identified from FDA.gov, and their updated supporting trial data were searched. Incremental clinical benefit was quantified by using ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale version 1.1 (grade 0-5) and ASCO Value Framework version 2 (score range -20 to 180). Higher scores indicate larger net benefit, and substantial benefit was defined as score 4 or 5 by the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). The Micromedex REDBOOK was used to estimate the monthly average wholesale price (AWP) and total drug price (TDP) over the median treatment duration per patient. Clinical benefit, AWP and TDP of each drug class were assessed.RESULTS: In total, 16 GI cancer drugs received FDA approval for 24 indications, including five monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), five oral targeted therapies (TT), two immunotherapeutics (IO), three cytotoxic chemotherapies (CT), and one recombinant fusion protein (aflibercept). Most supporting trials (82%) reported overall survival benefit of less than 3 months and no significant improvement in quality of life. Only five agents (including one TT and one IO) with 21% the of approved indications met the ESMO's threshold of substantial clinical benefit. Median incremental benefit scores of TT and IO were comparable to other drug classes. However their median TDP was much higher at $153 402 and $98 208, respectively, compared to $30 330 USD per patient for CT. The estimated TDP did not correlate with clinical benefit scores.CONCLUSION: Most FDA-approved gastrointestinal cancer drugs do not meet the ESMO threshold of substantial clinical benefit. TT and IO are estimated to carry significant drug costs, and further cost analysis of these drugs is urgently needed.

oncology

Guest editorial: Children and new technology

Alternative dosing strategies for immune checkpoint inhibitors to improve cost-effectiveness: a special focus on nivolumab and pembrolizumab

Economics of alternative dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab at a single academic cancer center

Model-Informed Development of a Cost-Saving Dosing Regimen for Sacituzumab Govitecan

Real-world overall survival after alternative dosing for pembrolizumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: A nationwide retrospective cohort study with a non-inferiority primary objective

Economic analysis of alternative pembrolizumab and nivolumab dosing strategies at an academic cancer center.

Dose Rationalization of Pembrolizumab and Nivolumab Using Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation and Cost Analysis

A real-world data approach to determine the optimal dosing strategy for pembrolizumab

Cost-effectiveness and drug wastage of immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies: a systematic review

Management of bevacizumab-associated bowel perforation: a case series and review of the literature.

Bolusing IV Administration Sets With Monoclonal Antibodies Reduces Cost and Chair Time: A Randomized Controlled Trial

What's the buzz; tell me what's a happening!

Applying a cost-based pricing model for innovative cancer treatments subject to indication expansion: A case study for pembrolizumab and daratumumab

Opportunities for using in silico-based extended dosing regimens for monoclonal antibody immune checkpoint inhibitors

Therapeutic drug monitoring of oral anticancer drugs - preliminary results of a prospective study

Pharmacokinetic Simulation Analysis of Less Frequent Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab Dosing: Pharmacoeconomic Rationale for Dose Deescalation

Real-world assessment of attenuated dosing anti-PD1 therapy as an alternative dosing strategy in a high-income country (as defined by World Bank)

Exploring the Cost Effectiveness of a Whole-Genome Sequencing-Based Biomarker for Treatment Selection in Patients with Advanced Lung Cancer Ineligible for Targeted Therapy

A note on decoding of block codes (Corresp.)

Cost-effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer ineligible for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen: a United Kingdom health care perspective

Anticancer drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration for gastrointestinal malignancies: Clinical benefit and price considerations