Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Proffered Paper - Public Policy

1583O - Clinical benefit of cancer drugs approved in Switzerland during the last decade

Date

21 Sep 2020

Session

Proffered Paper - Public Policy

Presenters

Roman Adam

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2020) 31 (suppl_4): S903-S913. 10.1016/annonc/annonc287

Authors

R. Adam1, A. Tibau2, C. Molto Valiente2, B. Seruga3, A. Ocaña4, E. Amir5, A.J. Templeton6

Author affiliations

  • 1 Faculty Of Medicine, University of Basel, 4051 - Basel/CH
  • 2 Oncology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau and Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 8041 - Barcelona/ES
  • 3 Department Of Medical Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, 1000 - Ljubljana/SI
  • 4 Experimental Therapeutics Unit, Medical Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos and IdISSC, 28040 - Madrid/ES
  • 5 Division Of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Department Of Medicine, Princess Margaret Cancer Center and the University of Toronto, M5G 2M9 - Toronto/CA
  • 6 Department Of Medical Oncology, St. Claraspital, 4058 - Basel/CH
More

Resources

Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

Abstract 1583O

Background

It is unknown to what extent cancer drugs approved in Switzerland by Swissmedic fulfil criteria of clinical benefit according to ESMO, ASCO and the Swiss OLUtool criteria.

Methods

An electronic search of studies that led to new marketing authorisations in Switzerland between 2010 and 2019 was performed. Studies were evaluated according ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) v1.1, ASCO-Value Framework v2 (ASCO-VF) and OLUtool v2. Substantial benefit for ESMO-MCBS, was defined as a grade A or B for (neo)adjuvant intent and 4 or 5 for palliative intent. For ASCO-VF and OLUtool clinical benefit was defined as score >45 and A or B, respectively. Correlation between the frameworks was calculated with Cohen’s Kappa (κ). Factors associated with clinical benefit were evaluated by logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

In the study period, 48 cancer drugs were approved for 92 evaluable indications, based on 100 studies. Of all studies 93% were in the palliative setting and 81% were phase III studies. Ratings for ESMO-MCBS, ASCO-VF and OLUtool could be performed for 100, 86, and 97 studies, respectively. Overall, 39 (39%), 44 (51%), 45 (46%) of the studies showed substantial clinical benefit according to ESMO-MCBS, ASCO-VF, OLUtool criteria, respectively. There was fair concordance between ESMO-MCBS and ASCO-VF in the palliative setting (κ = 0.31, p=0.004) and moderate concordance between ESMO-MCBS and OLUtool (κ = 0.41, p<0.001). There was no concordance between ASCO-VF and OLUtool (κ = 0.18, p=0.12). Factors associated with clinical benefit in the palliative setting in multivariable analysis are shown in the table. Table: 1583O

Factor OR (p-value)
ESMO-MCBS 1.1 Breast cancer (vs. lung cancer) Melanoma (vs. lung cancer) 0.21 (0.093) 0.21 (0.073)
ASCO-VF v2* CPI combination tx (vs. small molecule) Chemo mono tx (vs. small molecule) CDK4/6 inhibitor plus endocrine tx (vs. small molecule) 0.08 (0.028) 0.13 (0.093) 0.06 (0.017)
OLUtool v2.0 Blinded study (vs. open label) Phase III study (vs. phase I or II) 3.30 (0.012) 3.47 (0.080)

CPI, checkpoint inhibitor; OR, odds ratio (adjusted); tx, therapy.* no adjustments were made since no other covariates had a p-value <0.1 in univariable analysis.

Conclusions

Only around half of the trials supporting marketing authorisation of recently approved cancer drugs in Switzerland meet the criteria for substantial clinical benefit when evaluated with ESMO-MCBS, ASCO-VF or OLUtool. At best, there was only moderate concordance between the grading systems.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings