Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto.
Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, Ottawa.
Curr Oncol. 2020 Oct;27(5):e495-e500. doi: 10.3747/co.27.6489. Epub 2020 Oct 1.
Phase ii data are increasingly being used as primary evidence for public reimbursement for oncologic drugs. We compared the frequency of reimbursement recommendations for phase ii and phase iii submissions and assessed for variables associated with a positive or conditional recommendation.
We identified submissions made to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review's Expert Review Committee (perc), of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, July 2011 to July 2019, that were supported only by phase ii data. We identified variables within the perc's deliberative framework, including clinical and economic factors, associated with the final reimbursement recommendation. We conducted a multivariable analysis with logistic regression for these variables: feasibility of phase iii study, hematologic indication, and unmet need.
We identified 139 submissions with a perc final recommendation. In 27 instances (19%), the submission had only phase ii evidence, and a positive recommendation was issued for 63% of them (the positive recommendation rate was 82% for submissions with phase iii evidence). Clinical benefit ( < 0.001), unmet need ( = 0.047), and patient alignment ( = 0.015) were associated with a positive recommendation. If a future phase iii study was deemed feasible for submissions with only phase ii evidence, then in univariable ( = 0.040) and multivariable analysis ( = 0.024), the perc was less likely to recommend reimbursement (odds ratio: 0.132).
Although more than half the oncologic submissions with phase ii data were recommended for public reimbursement, compared with submissions having phase iii data, they were less likely to be recommended. A positive or conditional recommendation was more likely if clinical benefit and alignment with patient values was demonstrated. The perc was less likely to recommend reimbursement for submissions with phase ii evidence if a phase iii trial was deemed possible.
越来越多的二期数据被用作肿瘤药物公共报销的主要证据。我们比较了二期和三期提交物获得报销建议的频率,并评估了与阳性或有条件建议相关的变量。
我们确定了在 2011 年 7 月至 2019 年 7 月期间,向加拿大药品和技术评估机构的全加肿瘤药物审查专家审查委员会(perc)提交的仅由二期数据支持的申请。我们在 perc 的审议框架内确定了与最终报销建议相关的变量,包括临床和经济因素。我们对这些变量进行了多变量分析,包括可行性研究、血液学适应证和未满足的需求。
我们确定了 139 项有 perc 最终建议的申请。在 27 例(19%)情况下,申请仅提供了二期证据,其中 63%(阳性建议率为 82%,三期证据提交物)获得了阳性建议。临床获益(<0.001)、未满足的需求(=0.047)和患者一致性(=0.015)与阳性建议相关。如果未来的二期研究被认为对仅提供二期证据的申请可行,则在单变量(=0.040)和多变量分析(=0.024)中,perc 不太可能建议报销(比值比:0.132)。
尽管超过一半的肿瘤二期数据申请被推荐用于公共报销,但与三期数据申请相比,它们不太可能被推荐。如果显示出临床获益和与患者价值观一致,则更有可能获得阳性或有条件的建议。如果认为二期试验可行,perc 不太可能推荐报销提供二期证据的申请。