Related News
New tool promises clarity on true costs and benefits of cancer treatment regimes
Print Edition
As options for cancer patients become increasingly complicated, and expensive, the most influential source for US oncology treatment guidelines will for the first time offer a tool to assess the costs versus benefits of available therapies.
The National Comprehensive Cancer Network says its new tool will provide a clearer picture of the relative value of medication options, particularly in cases where a very expensive therapy does little to improve survival.
Doctors developing the measures expect them to shift demand away from less effective treatments, influencing the prices drugmakers are able to charge. They say they are responding to the needs of patients who are having to pay much more for their own care, with higher health insurance premiums, co-payments and deductibles, and want to know the value of their treatments.
The NCCN, an alliance of 26 cancer centers, envisions the new tool as a supplement to its widely followed guidelines for oncology care, which set out protocols for treating a range of cancers based on diagnosis, disease stage and other factors, such as age.
Other medical groups are also trying to address the cost issue, but not as directly as the NCCN. The American Society of Clinical Oncology is developing its own tool for valuing treatments, but says that its 鈥渘et health benefit鈥 scores will not consider costs, although prices will be noted alongside the scores. In June, New York鈥檚 Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center launched an interactive calculator, called 鈥淒rugAbacus,鈥 that allows users to decide how much one of 54 newer drugs should cost based on factors like side effects and novelty.
The NCCN scale, to be launched in mid-October, will employ 鈥渆vidence blocks鈥 that assign a score of up to five points for each of five measures 鈥 price, effectiveness, safety, quality and consistency of clinical data. Initially, it will evaluate drugs used for multiple myeloma and chronic myeloid leukemia. Similar guidelines are expected for most other types of cancer by the end of 2016.
鈥淎 company that has an effective drug that鈥檚 appropriately priced should welcome these blocks,鈥 said Dr Robert Carlson, NCCN鈥檚 chief executive. If a drug is overpriced, 鈥渢hat鈥檚 very important information for everybody.鈥
Currently, prescribing patterns can be inconsistent, determined by an individual physician鈥檚 understanding of published data about a drug, patient preferences and habit. US oncologists also can make a profit on intravenous drugs administered in their offices 鈥 calculated as a percentage of a drug鈥檚 cost 鈥 creating a possible financial incentive for choosing higher-priced therapies.
The NCCN says the assessment of each medication will be presented in a simple, tabular form 鈥 with each of the five components colored in to represent a score of one to five.
Eventually, the comparison tool will be incorporated into healthcare technology systems used by hospitals, including products from IBM Watson and McKesson.
Threat to drugmakers
The sort of cost-benefit analysis NCCN has undertaken could threaten drugmakers like Roche Holding AG, Novartis AG and Celgene Corp, which earn billions of dollars annually from cancer therapies that may do little to extend a patient鈥檚 life or come with severe side effects.
Worldwide spending on cancer medications reached US$100 billion in 2014, up from US$75 billion just five years earlier, according to IMS Health. US spending accounted for 42 percent of the total.
Drugmakers are already concerned about the accuracy of the information NCCN plans to present and worried that health insurers will seize on the new guidelines to drop coverage of some drugs, said Randy Burkholder, vice president of policy and research at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.
The trade group does not have full details of the NCCN鈥檚 plans, and will comment on the guidelines once they are public, he said.
The NCCN website has some 700,000 registered users, and more than 6 million copies of its guidelines were downloaded last year. The two largest US payers of health costs 鈥 UnitedHealth Group and the federal government鈥檚 Medicare plan for seniors 鈥 rely on NCCN guidelines to shape their oncology reimbursement policies.
鈥淢any, if not most, of the others use our guidelines either directly or indirectly,鈥 Carlson said.
But the current guidelines don鈥檛 analyze costs, and top oncologists have questioned whether some treatments are worth the price. For example, Roche鈥檚 Avastin offers lung cancer patients an additional 1.5 to 2 months before their disease worsens, 鈥渂ut that changes the cost per month of treatment from something in the hundreds of dollars, to close to US$10,000,鈥 said Dr. Lowell Schnipper, chief of hematology/oncology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. He chairs the ASCO task force studying the value of cancer care.
A recent study showed Stivarga, sold by Bayer AG, added about two weeks of 鈥渜uality adjusted鈥 life, at a median price of nearly US$40,000, for previously treated patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The researchers said the drug, which causes side effects including swelling of the hands and feet, has become the standard of care for that indication since entering the US market in 2012.
Patient advocates have traditionally warned against treatment decisions that factor in a drug鈥檚 price, saying such considerations could lead to 鈥渞ationed鈥 healthcare. But at the same time, patients worry about costs. A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found than 87 percent of Americans surveyed want changes to US law that would allow Medicare to negotiate drug discounts.
Dr. Derek Raghavan, president of Levine Cancer Institute at Carolinas HealthCare System, says doctors need much more real-world information at their disposal, including a cost-benefit analysis of side effects.
鈥淚f Drug B costs 70 percent of Drug A, but has a side effect profile that brings every second patient to the hospital for a four-day admission, then it does not have value,鈥 he said.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 娌狪CP璇侊細娌狪CP澶05050403鍙-1
- |
- 浜掕仈缃戞柊闂讳俊鎭湇鍔¤鍙瘉锛31120180004
- |
- 缃戠粶瑙嗗惉璁稿彲璇侊細0909346
- |
- 骞挎挱鐢佃鑺傜洰鍒朵綔璁稿彲璇侊細娌瓧绗354鍙
- |
- 澧炲肩數淇′笟鍔＄粡钀ヨ鍙瘉锛氭勃B2-20120012
Copyright 漏 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
