Abstract 1726P
Background
The rising costs of innovative oncology agents is a global challenge. In Ireland, despite rising per capita spending, access to new agents is delayed compared to other European states. A strategy to optimise existing drug spending nationally in not in place. We aimed to review how existing prescribing in a cancer centre could be optimised to accelerate access to new agents.
Methods
We performed a retrospective review of expanded access programmes (EAPs, 2011-21, 3 hospitals) and biosimilar use (2020-22, 4 hospitals) within the southwest of Ireland, and a review of clinical trial availability nationally (2022). We surveyed oncology patients receiving treatment in 3 centres, and healthcare professionals (HPCs) nationally on their view on barriers to biosimilar integration (survey 1, 2020-22) and other potential mechanisms of cost optimisation (survey 2, 2023).
Results
Our review found 193 patients accessed EAPs over 10 years (33 agents, 50 indications & 189 programmes). No national database to ensure equity of access was in place; an increasing trend of availability over time was noted. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (55%); targeted therapies (35%) and antibody drug conjugates (6%) were available through EAPs, treating lung (28%), breast (17%) and ovarian (9%) cancers. Of the 287 patients accrued to clinical trials in 2022, 48% participated in immunotherapy trials. Biosimilar use of trastuzumab and rituximab ranged from 39-100%, and 0-89% respectively among 4 hospitals. Cost savings by using biosimilars compared with reference products ranged from 28% to 73%. Table: 1726P
Results of surveys on (1) barriers to biosimilar use & (2) other methods of optimisation
Survey 1 | Patients (n=16) | Pharmacists (n=205) & students (n=33) | Doctors (n=11) & students (n=64) |
Biosimilar awareness | 37% (n=61) † | 97% (n=231) † | 45% (n=34) † |
Agreeableness to biosimilar switching | 85% (n=141) | N/A | N/A |
Support pharmacist-led biosimilar substitution | N/A | 37% (n=87) † | 9% (n=7) † |
Support consistent nomenclature of biosimilars | N/A | 84% (n=200) | 80% (n=60) |
Survey 2 | Patients (n=53) | HPCs (n=60) | |
Support split fill dispensing initially | 82% (n=42) | 75% (n=45) | |
Support split fill dispensing long term | 60% (n=28)† | 30% (n=18)† | |
Support redispensing unused oral agents | 29% (n=14)* | 22% (n=13)* |
*p<0.05, † p<0.01
Conclusions
Multiple disparate mechanisms are in place to optimise drug costs. We found biosimilar use and split fill dispensing was acceptable to both patients and HCPs but the majority of HCPs do not approve of pill sharing. Additional optimisation could occur through prioritisation of biosimilar substitution and education of prescribers on their benefits, a national registry of EAPs, expansion of clinical trial portfolios, and modified drug dispensing.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Breakthrough Cancer (EAP data), Cancer Trials Ireland (trials accrual data).
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
1716P - Addressing clinical trial disparities in Spain: A digital solution
Presenter: Max Hardy-Werbin
Session: Poster session 23
1717P - Management of patients during a digital healthcare record system transition: A phase I unit experience
Presenter: Lyra Del Rosario
Session: Poster session 23
1718P - Impact of the economic status of the patient's country of residence on the outcome of oncology clinical trials
Presenter: Saki Nishiyama
Session: Poster session 23
1719P - Decentralized clinical trials: Is there a space in Italy?
Presenter: Celeste Cagnazzo
Session: Poster session 23
1720P - Experience in the provision of oncology services immediately after a major disaster
Presenter: Burak Aktas
Session: Poster session 23
1721P - Self-assessment tool and best-practice sharing to support hospitals in improving the quality of multi-disciplinary teams in lung cancer care
Presenter: Ernest Nadal
Session: Poster session 23
1722P - Factors contributing to differences in evidence compliance rate in cancer treatment among second opinion cases
Presenter: Tomomi Sanomachi
Session: Poster session 23
1723P - Improving access to molecular tumour boards for complex genomic profiles: A healthcare policy from the Netherlands
Presenter: Sahar van Waalwijk van Doorn-Khosrovani
Session: Poster session 23
1724P - Improving access to breast cancer diagnosis and treatment through navigation: Evaluation of a one-year pilot project in Botswana
Presenter: Ariane Migeotte
Session: Poster session 23
1725P - Genetic counselling for cancer in EU member states: Review and foundation for consensus recommendations
Presenter: J. Matt McCrary
Session: Poster session 23