Derek Tang

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor–methotrexate combination therapy versus triple therapy in rheumatoid arthritis

Objective Clinical trials have not consistently demonstrated differences between tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) plus methotrexate and triple therapy (methotrexate plus hydroxychloroquine plus sulfasalazine) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The study objective was to estimate the efficacy, radiographic benefits, safety and patient-reported outcomes of TNFi–methotrexate versus triple therapy in patients with RA. Methods A systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials of TNFi–methotrexate or triple therapy as one of the treatment arms in patients with an inadequate response to or who were naive to methotrexate was conducted. American College of Rheumatology 70% response criteria (ACR70) at 6 months was the prespecified primary endpoint to evaluate depth of response. Data from direct and indirect comparisons between TNFi–methotrexate and triple therapy were pooled and quantitatively analysed using fixed-effects and random-effects Bayesian models. Results We analysed 33 studies in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate and 19 in patients naive to methotrexate. In inadequate responders, triple therapy was associated with lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi–methotrexate (OR 0.35, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.19 to 0.64). Most secondary endpoints tended to favour TNFi–methotrexate in terms of OR direction; however, no clear increased likelihood of achieving these endpoints was observed for either therapy. The odds of infection were lower with triple therapy than with TNFi−methotrexate (OR 0.08, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.57). There were no differences observed between the two regimens in patients naive to methotrexate. Conclusions In this NMA, triple therapy was associated with 65% lower odds of achieving ACR70 at 6 months compared with TNFi–methotrexate in patients with inadequate response to methotrexate. Although secondary endpoints numerically favoured TNFi–methotrexate, no clear differences were observed. The odds of infection were greater with TNFi–methotrexate. No differences were observed for patients naive to methotrexate. These results may help inform care of patients who fail methotrexate first-line therapy.

Real-world palbociclib dosing patterns and implications for drug costs in the treatment of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer

ABSTRACT Background: This study described real-world palbociclib dosing patterns and associated impacts on treatment costs for HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in the US. Methods: Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who initiated palbociclib-based therapy (initiation date = index date) between 02/03/2015 (palbociclib approval) and 02/29/2016, and continuous quarterly activity 1 year before and 6 months after the index date, were identified in the Symphony Health Solutions database. Rates of 1) dose reduction (≥25 mg dose decrease/daily), and 2) reduction or interruption (>60 day gap in continuous drug supply) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Drug wastage cost was estimated based on overlapping days between two prescription fills: the last original dose fill and the first reduced dose fill. Results: 1,242 patients initiated palbociclib-based therapy (mean age = 62.7 years, median follow-up = 8.7 months). During the 12-month post-index period, across the first four lines, dose reduction rates were 31.9–33.7% and dose reduction/interruption rates were 63.5–80.9%. A total of 411 (33.1%) patients changed dose, among whom 128 (31.1%) experienced prescription fill overlap (average = 11.1 days). Mean potential drug wastage cost among patients with fill overlap was

First-line treatment disruption among post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2– metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective US claims study

5,471. Conclusions: Most patients receiving palbociclib experienced dose reduction or interruption early in treatment; the associated drug wastage may lead to considerable costs.

Treatment patterns and factors associated with the use of everolimus among post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer: a retrospective US claims study

Abstract Objective: This study assessed disruption of first-line treatments initiated after the approval of the first CDK 4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, among post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2– metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in the US. Methods: Post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2– mBC who initiated first-line endocrine therapy or chemotherapy (index therapy) between February 3, 2015 (palbociclib approval date) and February 29, 2016 (end of data) were identified from the Symphony Source Lx database. Patients were required to have continuous quarterly activity (defined as ≥1 pharmacy or medical claim) for 12 months prior to and 1 month after the initiation of the index therapy (index date). Treatment disruption was defined as a treatment gap of ≥60 days or adding an agent after the original therapy. Kaplan-Meier analyses were conducted to estimate treatment disruption rates during the 6 months following the index date. Patients without treatment disruption were censored at the end of continuous quarterly activity or end of data. Results: A total of 8,160 and 2,153 eligible patients initiated endocrine therapy or chemotherapy as their first-line mBC treatment, with a median follow-up of 6.7 and 7.6 months, respectively. The three most prevalent metastatic sites were bone (28.1–42.2%), liver (8.8–17.3%), and lung (8.6–9.5%). Overall, 37.7% (n = 3,074) of patients receiving endocrine therapy and 86.1% (n = 1,852) of patients receiving chemotherapy encountered treatment disruption at 6 months (log-rank test p < .05). Conclusions: Treatment disruption rates of first-line therapies were sub-optimal among post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2– mBC, primarily driven by chemotherapy users. New therapies or interventions are needed to reduce treatment disruption in this patient population.

Cost-Effectiveness of Ribociclib plus Letrozole Versus Palbociclib plus Letrozole and Letrozole Monotherapy in the First-Line Treatment of Postmenopausal Women with HR+/HER2- Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer: A U.S. Payer Perspective

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess the real-world use of everolimus in the treatment of hormone-receptor-positive/human-epidermal-growth-factor-receptor-2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic-breast-cancer (mBC). Methods: Postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who initiated a new therapy for mBC between 20 July 2012 and 31 March 2014 after a non-steroidal-aromatase-inhibitor were identified from two commercial claims databases. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with everolimus use versus endocrine-monotherapy or chemotherapy. Dosing patterns and adherence to everolimus were summarized. Results: A total of 940 everolimus, 6,134 endocrine-monotherapy, and 3,410 chemotherapy regimens were included across patients’ first four lines of therapy. Patients with bone and visceral metastases were more likely to use everolimus versus endocrine-monotherapy. Patients with more comorbidities, visceral or central-nervous-system metastases, and prior chemotherapy use for mBC were less likely to use everolimus versus chemotherapy. Approximately 80% of patients initiated everolimus at label-recommended-dose of 10 mg daily; 60–70% of patients had a medical possession ratio >0.8 to everolimus, and consistently high adherence was observed across lines of therapy. Conclusions: For HR+/HER2- mBC, patients treated with everolimus had more severe disease than patients treated with endocrine-monotherapy but less severe disease than patients treated with chemotherapy. Most patients used everolimus according to label-recommended dose and adherence was high across lines of therapy.

Budget impact of including ribociclib in combination with letrozole on US payer formulary: first-line treatment of post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2− advanced or metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND U.S. regulatory approvals of the cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitors ribociclib and palbociclib as add-ons to letrozole greatly enhance the prospects for treating postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Clinical trials have established that the combination of a CDK 4/6 inhibitor with letrozole can significantly improve progression-free survival (PFS) versus letrozole monotherapy and is safe and well tolerated. Cost-effectiveness studies are required to inform payers and clinical decision makers on the money value of combination treatment in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus letrozole versus palbociclib plus letrozole and versus letrozole monotherapy in the first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer from a U.S. private third-party payer perspective. METHODS A partitioned survival model including 3 health states (progression free, with either overall response or stable disease; progressed disease; and death) simulated lifetime costs and outcomes over a 40-year lifetime horizon with a 1-month cycle length. Clinical efficacy data (PFS and overall survival [OS]) were derived from a phase III trial of ribociclib plus letrozole (MONALEESA-2; NCT01958021), a phase II trial of palbociclib plus letrozole (PALOMA-1; NCT00721409), and a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Health care costs included drug acquisition and monitoring, disease management, subsequent therapies, and serious drug-related adverse events. Effectiveness was measured in life-years, derived from survival projections, and in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), calculated from time spent in each state combined with health-state utility values. A one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis explored the impact of uncertainty in key model parameters on results, and probabilistic uncertainty was assessed through a Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS Ribociclib plus letrozole was dominant versus palbociclib plus letrozole, with a cost saving of

Progression-free survival with endocrine-based therapies following progression on non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor among postmenopausal women with hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative metastatic breast cancer: a network meta-analysis

43,037 and a gain of 0.086 QALYs. Compared with letrozole monotherapy, ribociclib plus letrozole was associated with an incremental cost of

Predictors of systemic therapy sequences following a CDK 4/6 inhibitor-based regimen in post-menopausal women with hormone receptor positive, HEGFR-2 negative metastatic breast cancer

144,915 and an incremental QALY of 0.689, equating to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of

Progression-free Survival With First-line Endocrine-based Therapies Among Postmenopausal Women With HR+/HER2– Metastatic Breast Cancer:: A Network Meta-analysis

210,369 per QALY. Key model drivers included OS HRs for palbociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole and for ribociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole, the PFS HR for palbociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole, PD health-state costs, utility of response, and cost discount rate. The probabilities that ribociclib plus letrozole was cost-effective versus letrozole at thresholds of

Burden of Infections Among Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients Receiving Dasatinib or Nilotinib: A Real-World Retrospective Healthcare Claims Study in the United States

50,000,