Phase III Study of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide with concomitant versus sequential docetaxel as adjuvant treatment in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–normal, node-positive breast cancer: BCIRG-005 trial

Purpose: Anthracyclines, taxanes, and alkylating agents are among the most active agents in treatment of adjuvant breast cancer (BC), but the optimal schedule for their administration is unknown. We performed an adjuvant trial to compare the sequential regimen of doxorubicin with cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by docetaxel (ie, AC\u3eT) with the combination regimen of TAC. Patients and Methods: Women with node-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–nonamplified, operable BC were stratified by number of axillary nodes and hormone receptor status and were randomly assigned to adjuvant chemotherapy with six cycles of TAC (75/50/500 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) or four cycles of AC (60/600 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) followed by four doses of docetaxel at 100 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (AC\u3eT). After completion of chemotherapy, radiation therapy was given as indicated, and patients with hormone receptor (HR) –positive disease received adjuvant hormonal therapy with tamoxifen and/or aromatase inhibitors. Results: In 30 months, 3,298 patients were enrolled (n = 1,649 in each arm). The major baseline characteristics were well balanced between the groups. At a median follow-up of 65 months, estimated 5-year disease-free survival rates were 79% in both groups (log-rank P = .98; hazard ratio [HR], 1.0; 95%CI, 0.86 to 1.16), and 5-year overall survival rates for both arms were 88% and 89%, respectively (log-rank P = .37; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.11). TAC was associated with more febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, and AC\u3eT was associated with more sensory neuropathy, nail changes, and myalgia. The incidence of neutropenic infection was similar in both groups. Conclusion: The sequential and combination regimens incorporating three drugs were equally effective but differed in toxicity profile

Patients' preferences for subcutaneous trastuzumab versus conventional intravenous infusion for the adjuvant treatment of HER2-positive early breast cancer: final analysis of 488 patients in the international, randomized, two-cohort PrefHer study

PrefHer revealed compelling and consistent patient preference for subcutaneous (s.c.) trastuzumab, regardless of delivery by single-use injection device or hand-held syringe. s.c. trastuzumab was well-tolerated and safety data, including immunogenicity, were consistent with previous reports. No new safety signals were identified compared with the known intravenous trastuzumab profile in early breast cance

Sunitinib toxicity management – a practical approach

This article summarizes the adverse events (AEs) of sunitinib that are commonly encountered in a community oncology practice, and provides practical recommendations for their management based on the available literature and on the author’s own experience.</jats:p

Is It Time to Commit to a Process to Re-Evaluate Oncology Drugs? A Descriptive Analysis of Systemic Therapies for Solid Tumour Indications Reviewed in Canada from 2017 to 2021

We undertook an analysis of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)’s health technology assessments (HTAs) of systemic therapies for solid tumour indications to determine if a mechanism to re-evaluate HTA decisions is needed based on the level of certainty supporting the original recommendation. To measure the certainty in the evidence, we analysed if: (1) overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint in the pivotal trial, (2) median OS was available at the time of the recommendation, and (3) the expert review committee explicitly identified gaps in the evidence. There were 96 drugs approved by Health Canada that met our eligibility criteria between 1 January 2017 and 31 October 2021. Median OS was not estimable at the time of the recommendation in 57% of the positive recommendations, and the uncertainty in the magnitude of clinical benefit was identified by the expert review committee in 21% of the positive recommendations. There is uncertainty at the time of the HTA recommendation for many drugs, and thus a need to implement a process to re-evaluate drugs in Canada to allow patients timely access to promising therapies while ensuring long-term value of therapies to patients and the healthcare system.</jats:p

Is It Time to Commit to a Process to Re-Evaluate Oncology Drugs? A Descriptive Analysis of Systemic Therapies for Solid Tumour Indications Reviewed in Canada from 2017 to 2021

We undertook an analysis of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)&rsquo;s health technology assessments (HTAs) of systemic therapies for solid tumour indications to determine if a mechanism to re-evaluate HTA decisions is needed based on the level of certainty supporting the original recommendation. To measure the certainty in the evidence, we analysed if: (1) overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint in the pivotal trial, (2) median OS was available at the time of the recommendation, and (3) the expert review committee explicitly identified gaps in the evidence. There were 96 drugs approved by Health Canada that met our eligibility criteria between 1 January 2017 and 31 October 2021. Median OS was not estimable at the time of the recommendation in 57% of the positive recommendations, and the uncertainty in the magnitude of clinical benefit was identified by the expert review committee in 21% of the positive recommendations. There is uncertainty at the time of the HTA recommendation for many drugs, and thus a need to implement a process to re-evaluate drugs in Canada to allow patients timely access to promising therapies while ensuring long-term value of therapies to patients and the healthcare system

Impact of Systemic Delays for Patient Access to Oncology Drugs on Clinical, Economic, and Quality of Life Outcomes in Canada: A Call to Action

Canada has one of the most complex and rigorous drug approval and public reimbursement processes and is, unfortunately, one of the countries with the longest delays in drug access. To assess the overall impact of systemic delays in access to cancer therapy, a targeted literature review (TLR) was performed to identify studies associated with the clinical, economic, and quality of life impacts of delayed access to oncology drugs. Using MEDLINE/PubMed databases and snowballing, four unique records met the eligibility criteria. Results revealed that clinical outcomes were the most impacted by systemic delays in access to oncology drugs (e.g., life years lost, overall survival, and progression-free survival). The four articles retrieved by the TLR specifically illustrated that a substantial number of life years could potentially be saved by increasing systemic efficiency regarding the development, approval, and reimbursement processes of new drugs for advanced malignancies. It is imperative that initiatives are put in place to improve the performance and speed of Canadian drug regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) processes, especially for new cancer therapeutics. The proposed solutions in this paper include better coordination between HTA and Canadian payers to harmonize coverage decisions, international collaborations, information sharing, and national standards for timeliness in oncology drug access

Challenges to Implementation of an Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Testing Strategy for Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer in a Publicly Funded Health Care System

Background:Data from seven recent randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that epidermal growth factor (EGFR) mutation status is predictive of improved progression-free survival and quality of life from first-line EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy compared with platinum-based chemotherapy. We examined barriers to the initial implementation of a national EGFR testing policy in Canada.Methods:Five laboratories across Canada underwent a validation and quality-control exercise for EGFR mutation testing using reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction with financial support from the pharmaceutical industry for the initial 12 months. Oncologists registered patients with nonquamous histology for EGFR mutation testing using a Web-based platform. Basic demographics were collected including age, histology, sex, smoking status, and ethnicity. The decision to prescribe gefitinib was subsequently registered on the system.Results:Between March and December 2010, 2104 requests were received for EGFR mutation testing. Demographic details are as follows: adenocarcinoma (91.6%); Asian ethnicity (13.9%); female (58%); light/never smoker (41.3%); stage IV disease (87.1%). The number of tests requested each month ranged from 200 to 250. Mutation testing was conducted in 1771 of 2104 requests (84%). The median turnaround time for EGFR testing was 18 days (standard deviation 9.7). Gefitinib was prescribed in 302 patients (17.1%). The number of test requests dropped to 50 to 100 per month at the end of the initial 12 months.Conclusion:There was rapid uptake of EGFR mutation testing into routine clinical practice in Canada. Uptake of EGFR mutation testing dropped substantially once funding from pharmaceutical industry was discontinued. There is a need for a national strategy to ensure resources are in place to implement molecular testing for new molecularly targeted agents

Access Denied? The Unintended Consequences of Pending Drug Pricing Rules

The government of Canada now plans to bring into force new federal drug pricing regulations on 1 July 2022. We do not take issue with the goal of medication affordability, which is vital in healthcare the world over. Our concern is that the new guidelines are being implemented without due consideration for three major unintended consequences: regulatory changes will lower the number of clinical trials for new medications in Canada, fewer clinical trials will mean lower research and development investments, and changes will reduce patients&rsquo; access to new medications. Access to effective medications is a cornerstone of healthcare for Canadian patients. As physicians, our duty to patient care demands that we tell the government to protect the right of Canadians to timely access to life-changing medicines