Assessing the efficacy-effectiveness gap for cancer therapies : A comparison of overall survival and toxicity between clinical trial and population-based, real-world data for contemporary parenteral cancer therapeutics
© 2020 American Cancer Society..
BACKGROUND: Although increasing evidence has suggested that an efficacy-effectiveness gap exists between clinical trial (CT) and real-world evidence (RWE), to the authors' knowledge, the magnitude of this difference remains undercharacterized. The objective of the current study was to quantify the magnitude of survival and toxicity differences between CT and RWE for contemporary cancer systemic therapies.
METHODS: Patients receiving cancer therapies funded under Cancer Care Ontario's New Drug Funding Program (NDFP) were identified. Landmark CTs with data regarding survival and adverse events (AEs) for each drug indication were identified. RWE for survival and hospitalization rates during treatment were ascertained through Canadian population-based databases. The efficacy-effectiveness gap for each drug indication was calculated as the difference between RWE and CT data for median overall survival (OS), 1-year OS, and generated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs from Kaplan-Meier OS curves. Toxicity differences were calculated as the difference between RWE of hospitalization rates and CT serious AE rates.
RESULTS: Twenty-nine indications from 20 systemic therapies were included. Twenty-eight of 29 indications (97%) demonstrated worse survival in RWE, with a median OS difference of 5.2 months (interquartile range, 3.0-12.1 months). Lower effectiveness in RWE also was demonstrated through a meta-analysis of an OS hazard ratio of 1.58 (95% CI, 1.39-1.80). The median difference between RWE for hospitalization rates and CT serious AEs was 14% (95% CI, 9%-22%).
CONCLUSIONS: An efficacy-effectiveness gap exists for contemporary cancer systemic therapies, with a 5.2-month lower median OS observed in RWE compared with CT data. These data supports the use of RWE to better inform real-world decision making regarding the use of cancer systemic therapies.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2020 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:126 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Cancer - 126(2020), 8 vom: 15. Apr., Seite 1717-1726 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Phillips, Cameron M [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Antineoplastic Agents |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 10.11.2020 Date Revised 10.11.2020 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1002/cncr.32697 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM305128787 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM305128787 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225120513.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1002/cncr.32697 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1017.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM305128787 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)31913522 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Phillips, Cameron M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Assessing the efficacy-effectiveness gap for cancer therapies |b A comparison of overall survival and toxicity between clinical trial and population-based, real-world data for contemporary parenteral cancer therapeutics |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 10.11.2020 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 10.11.2020 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © 2020 American Cancer Society. | ||
| 520 | |a BACKGROUND: Although increasing evidence has suggested that an efficacy-effectiveness gap exists between clinical trial (CT) and real-world evidence (RWE), to the authors' knowledge, the magnitude of this difference remains undercharacterized. The objective of the current study was to quantify the magnitude of survival and toxicity differences between CT and RWE for contemporary cancer systemic therapies | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: Patients receiving cancer therapies funded under Cancer Care Ontario's New Drug Funding Program (NDFP) were identified. Landmark CTs with data regarding survival and adverse events (AEs) for each drug indication were identified. RWE for survival and hospitalization rates during treatment were ascertained through Canadian population-based databases. The efficacy-effectiveness gap for each drug indication was calculated as the difference between RWE and CT data for median overall survival (OS), 1-year OS, and generated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs from Kaplan-Meier OS curves. Toxicity differences were calculated as the difference between RWE of hospitalization rates and CT serious AE rates | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Twenty-nine indications from 20 systemic therapies were included. Twenty-eight of 29 indications (97%) demonstrated worse survival in RWE, with a median OS difference of 5.2 months (interquartile range, 3.0-12.1 months). Lower effectiveness in RWE also was demonstrated through a meta-analysis of an OS hazard ratio of 1.58 (95% CI, 1.39-1.80). The median difference between RWE for hospitalization rates and CT serious AEs was 14% (95% CI, 9%-22%) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSIONS: An efficacy-effectiveness gap exists for contemporary cancer systemic therapies, with a 5.2-month lower median OS observed in RWE compared with CT data. These data supports the use of RWE to better inform real-world decision making regarding the use of cancer systemic therapies | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Comparative Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Meta-Analysis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | |
| 650 | 4 | |a clinical trials | |
| 650 | 4 | |a patient selection | |
| 650 | 4 | |a phase 3 as topic | |
| 650 | 4 | |a population | |
| 650 | 4 | |a survival | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Antineoplastic Agents |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Parmar, Ambica |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Guo, Helen |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Schwartz, Deborah |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Isaranuwatchai, Wanrudee |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Beca, Jaclyn |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dai, Wei |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Arias, Jessica |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gavura, Scott |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Chan, Kelvin K W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Cancer |d 1948 |g 126(2020), 8 vom: 15. Apr., Seite 1717-1726 |w (DE-627)NLM000028649 |x 1097-0142 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:126 |g year:2020 |g number:8 |g day:15 |g month:04 |g pages:1717-1726 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32697 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 126 |j 2020 |e 8 |b 15 |c 04 |h 1717-1726 | ||