Search

In clinical trials of oncology drugs, overall survival (OS) is a direct measure of clinical efficacy and is considered the gold standard primary efficacy end point. The purpose of this study was to discuss the difficulties in using OS as a primary efficacy end point in the setting of evolving cancer therapies. We suggest that progression-free survival is an appropriate efficacy end point in many types of cancer, specifically those for which OS is expected to be prolonged and for which subsequent treatments are expected to affect OS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: International guidelines for hormone-receptor-positive (HR(+)), human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 negative (HER2(-)) advanced breast cancer (BC) recommend sequential lines of hormonal therapy (HT), and only recommend chemotherapy for patients with extensive visceral involvement or rapidly progressive disease. This study evaluated actual physician-reported treatments for advanced BC in Europe., Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 355 postmenopausal women with HR(+), HER2(-) advanced BC who progressed on ≥1 line of HT (adjuvant or advanced) and completed ≥1 line of chemotherapy (advanced). Treatment choice was evaluated for each line of therapy., Results: Of 355 patients, 111 (31%) received first-line chemotherapy, whereas 218 (61%) and 26 (7%) switched from HT to chemotherapy in second and third line, respectively. More patients receiving first-line HT had bone metastases (73% vs 27% chemotherapy). Patients treated with first-line chemotherapy had more brain (12% vs 3% HT) or extensive liver (13% vs 6% HT) metastases. Subgroup analysis of 188 patients who received first-line HT and had de novo advanced BC or relapsed/recurrent disease more than 1 year after adjuvant therapy found that the majority (89%; n = 167) of these patients switched to chemotherapy in second line. However, among these 167 patients, 27% had no significant changes in metastases between first and second line. Among the 73% of patients who had significant changes in metastases, 20% had no brain metastases or extensive visceral disease., Conclusions: Our study suggests that the guideline-recommended use of multiple HT lines is open to interpretation and that optimal treatment for European postmenopausal women with HR(+), HER2(-) advanced BC who responded to HT may not be achieved.

Background: A recent indirect comparison study showed that sunitinib-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with everolimus are expected to have improved overall survival outcomes compared to patients treated with sorafenib. This analysis examines the likely cost-effectiveness of everolimus versus sorafenib in this setting from a US payer perspective., Methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate a cohort of sunitinib-refractory mRCC patients and to estimate the cost per incremental life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Markov states included are stable disease without adverse events, stable disease with adverse events, disease progression, and death. Transition probabilities were estimated using a subset of the RECORD-1 patient population receiving everolimus after sunitinib, and a comparable population receiving sorafenib in a single-arm phase II study. Costs of antitumor therapies were based on wholesale acquisition cost. Health state costs accounted for physician visits, tests, adverse events, postprogression therapy, and end-of-life care. The model extrapolated beyond the trial time horizon for up to 6 years based on published trial data. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted., Results: The estimated gain over sorafenib treatment was 1.273 LYs (0.916 QALYs) at an incremental cost of $81,643. The deterministic analysis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $64,155/LYG ($89,160/QALY). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that results were highly consistent across simulations., Conclusions: As the ICER fell within the cost per QALY range for many other widely used oncology medicines, everolimus is projected to be a cost-effective treatment relative to sorafenib for sunitinib-refractory mRCC., (Copyright © 2011 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The critical role of increased activity of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) in the pathophysiology of multiple diseases is well established. Inhibition of the mTOR pathway may block disease progression and improve patient outcomes. Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, began in clinical development as part of a regimen (Certican, Zortress) for prevention of organ transplant rejection and is now an approved oncology agent., Areas Covered: The objective of this review is to discuss the history of key findings and innovative cancer research undertaken to successfully develop everolimus as an oncology therapy (Afinitor) now approved for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and for subependymal giant cell astrocytomas (SEGAs) associated with tuberous sclerosis. In addition, data for the use of everolimus in the treatment of other cancers and rare diseases are also discussed. A PubMed search of English articles without time restrictions was conducted using the search terms 'everolimus or rapamycin' and 'cancer'. Bibliographies of retrieved articles were manually searched for additional relevant articles. Major cancer congresses were also searched., Expert Opinion: The clinical efficacy of everolimus alone and in combination with other agents has been observed in recently completed Phase II-III studies in a wide spectrum of tumors, including RCC, neuroendocrine tumors, tuberous sclerosis complex, SEGAs and angiomyolipomas, lymphoma and gastric, breast and hepatocellular cancers. These findings emphasize the importance of mTOR in diverse cancers and rare diseases and underscore the potential role for everolimus as an effective agent in multiple indications.

Introduction: The Satisfaction with Iron Chelation Therapy (SICT) instrument was developed based on a literature review, in-depth patient and clinician interviews, and cognitive debriefing interviews. An, open-label, single arm, multicenter trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of deferasirox in patients diagnosed with transfusion-dependent iron overload, provided an opportunity to assess the psychometric measurement properties of the instrument., Methods: Psychometric analyses were performed using data at baseline from 273 patients with a range of transfusion-dependent iron overload conditions who were participating in a multinational study. Responsiveness was further evaluated for all patients who also had subsequent satisfaction domain scores collected at week 4., Results: Baseline SICT domain scores had acceptable floor and ceiling effects and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.75-0.85). Item discriminant and item convergent validity were both excellent although one item in each analysis did not meet the specified criterion. Small to moderate correlations were observed between SICT and Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) domain scores. Patients with the highest levels of serum ferritin at baseline (>3100 ng/mL) were the least satisfied about the Perceived Effectiveness of ICT and vice versa. Satisfaction improved in all patients, although there were no clear differences observed between groups of patients defined according to changes in serum ferritin levels from baseline to week 4 (stable, improved, or worsened)., Conclusions: The SICT domains are reliable and valid. Further testing using a more specific criterion (such as assessing patient global ratings of change in satisfaction domains that correspond to the SICT domains) could help to establish with greater confidence the responsiveness of the instrument.

Patient-reported outcomes of once-daily oral deferasirox (Exjade) in iron-overloaded patients with beta-thalassemia not achieving successful chelation with prior deferoxamine and/or deferiprone were investigated in a prospective, open-label, 1-year, multicenter study in the Middle East (ESCALATOR). The initial dose of deferasirox was 20 mg/kg/day, with subsequent dose adjustments. At baseline and the end of study (EOS), patients (n = 237) completed a 5-point rating scale for treatment satisfaction and convenience, and recorded time lost to treatment. At EOS, 90.7% of patients were 'satisfied'/'very satisfied' with their iron chelation therapy (ICT) versus 23.2% at baseline. 92.8% (EOS) versus 21.5% (baseline) of patients considered their therapy to be 'convenient'/'very convenient'. Time lost to therapy for daily activities was substantially reduced (3.2 +/- 8.6 [mean +/- SD; EOS] vs. 30.1 +/- 44.2 [baseline] h/month). Patients reported greater satisfaction and convenience, and lower impact on daily activities, with deferasirox than with previous ICT. This may help improve adherence to lifelong ICT in iron-overloaded beta-thalassemia patients., (2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

In clinical trials of oncology drugs, overall survival (OS) is a direct measure of clinical efficacy and is considered the gold standard primary efficacy end point. The purpose of this study was to discuss the difficulties in using OS as a primary efficacy end point in the setting of evolving cancer therapies. We suggest that progression-free survival is an appropriate efficacy end point in many types of cancer, specifically those for which OS is expected to be prolonged and for which subsequent treatments are expected to affect OS.

Objectives: This study assesses satisfaction with iron chelation therapy (ICT) based on a reliable and valid instrument, and explores the relationship between satisfaction and adherence to ICT., Methods: Patients in the USA and UK completed a new "Satisfaction with ICT" (SICT) instrument consisting of 28 items, three pertaining to adherence. Simple and multivariate regression analyses assessed the relationship between satisfaction with different aspects of ICT and adherence., Results: First assessments of the SICT instrument indicate its validity and reliability. Recommended thresholds for internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and floor and ceiling effects were met. A number of variables were identified in the simple linear regression analyses as significant predictors of "never thinking about stopping ICT," a proxy for adherence. These significant variables were entered into the multivariate model to assess the combined factor effects, explaining 42% of the total variance of "never thinking about stopping ICT." A significant and positive relationship was demonstrated between "never thinking about stopping ICT" and age (P = 0.04), Perceived Effectiveness of ICT (P = 0.003), low Burden of ICT (P = 0.002), and low Side Effects of ICT (P = 0.01)., Conclusions: The SICT is a reliable and valid instrument which will be useful in ICT clinical trials. Furthermore, the administration of ICT by slow subcutaneous infusion negatively impacts on satisfaction with ICT which was shown to be a determinant of adherence. This points to the need for new more convenient and less burdensome oral iron chelators to increase adherence, and ultimately to improve patient outcomes.

Introduction: This study of UK patients examines clinical, health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and economic outcomes associated with iron chelation therapy (ICT). Desferrioxamine (DFO) (Desferal; Novartis, Switzerland) and Deferiprone (Ferriprox; Apotex, Canada) are ICTs used to treat iron overload. DFO requires 8-to 12-hour infusions a minimum of five times per week. Deferiprone is administered in an oral daily regimen. Although pharmacologically efficacious, clinical effectiveness of ICT within the real-world setting is yet to be fully elucidated., Methods: A naturalistic cohort study of 60 patients (beta-thalassaemia, n=40; sickle cell disease, n=14; myelodysplastic syndromes, n=6; 63% female) receiving ICT in four UK treatment centres was conducted. Serum ferritin level data were abstracted from medical charts. Compliance, HRQOL, satisfaction and resource utilisation data were collected from interviews. Maximum ICT costs were estimated using the resource utilisation data associated with DFO., Results: Mean serum ferritin levels, generally, remained elevated despite ICT. Compliance was suboptimal and HRQOL scores were lower than population norms. The total estimated mean weighted annual per-patient cost of DFO treatment was approximately pound19,000. DFO-related equipment, DFO drug, and home healthcare were estimated to account for 43%, 19% and 24% of costs, respectively. Other more minor components of total annual costs were for in-patient infusions, ICT home delivery services and monitoring costs., Conclusion: Generally, patients are not achieving target serum ferritin thresholds despite chronic treatment for iron overload. ICT appears to negatively impact HRQOL; compliance with ICT is poor; and, in the case of DFO, treatment costs well exceed the cost of DFO alone. These results suggest that current ICT in the real-world setting is suboptimal with respect to various clinical, HRQOL and economic outcomes.

Deferoxamine mesylate (DFO) reduces morbidity and mortality associated with transfusional iron overload. Data on the utilization and costs of care among U.S. patients receiving DFO in typical clinical practice are limited however. This was a retrospective study using a large U.S. health insurance claims database spanning 1/97-12/04 and representing 40 million members in >70 health plans. Study subjects (n = 145 total, 106 sickle cell disease [SCD], 39 thalassemia) included members with a diagnosis of thalassemia or SCD, one or more transfusions (whole blood or red blood cells), and one or more claims for DFO. Mean transfusion episodes were 12 per year. Estimated mean DFO use was 307 g/year. Central venous access devices were required by 20% of patients. Cardiac disease was observed in 16% of patients. Mean total medical costs were $59,233 per year including $10,899 for DFO and $8,722 for administration of chelation therapy. In multivariate analyses, potential complications of iron overload were associated with significantly higher medical care costs. In typical clinical practice, use of DFO in patients with thalassemia and SCD receiving transfusions is low. Administration costs represent a large proportion of the cost of chelation therapy. Potential complications of iron overload are associated with increased costs., ((c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background/aims: There is increasing evidence demonstrating the value of transfusions in sickle cell disease (SCD). However, resultant iron overload can be life threatening if untreated. Chelation therapy with deferoxamine requires parenteral infusions that can negatively impact quality of life and adherence to treatment., Methods: As part of a phase II trial, SCD patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. One hundred and ninety-five patients were randomized (2:1) to receive oral deferasirox (5-30 mg/kg/day) or deferoxamine (20-50 mg/kg, 5 days per week); 121 had previously received deferoxamine., Results: At each time point, significantly more patients who had previously received deferoxamine were 'satisfied/very satisfied' with deferasirox, or found treatment to be 'convenient/very convenient' compared with deferoxamine (p < 0.001). In these patients, fewer hours were lost from daily activities with deferasirox than deferoxamine treatment. Most patients (77%) preferred deferasirox, and more were willing to continue taking deferasirox than deferoxamine at end-of-study (84 vs. 11%, respectively)., Conclusions: Patients with SCD are therefore more satisfied with deferasirox, which has a lower impact on daily activities than deferoxamine. Given the high levels of satisfaction, it is likely that quality of life will be improved. These results also suggest that treatment adherence with deferasirox may be better than with deferoxamine, which should lead to improved long-term outcomes., (2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Patients with thalassemia major require iron chelation therapy (ICT) to prevent complications from transfusional iron overload. Deferoxamine is effective, but requires administration as a slow continuous subcutaneous or intravenous infusion five to seven times per week. Deferiprone is a three-times-daily oral iron chelator, but has limited availability in the United States. Deferasirox is a once-daily oral iron chelator that was approved in the United States in 2005 for patients older than 2 years of age with transfusional iron overload., Study Design and Methods: Published evidence on rates of compliance with ICT and the association between compliance, and the incidence and costs of complications of iron overload, in patients with thalassemia major was reviewed., Results: A total of 18 studies were identified reporting data on compliance with ICT, including 7 that examined deferoxamine only, 6 that examined deferiprone only, and 5 that compared deferoxamine and deferiprone; no studies reporting compliance with deferasirox were identified. In studies of deferoxamine only, estimated mean compliance ranged from 59 to 78 percent. Studies of deferiprone generally reported better compliance, ranging from 79 to 98 percent. Results of comparative studies of deferoxamine and deferiprone suggest that compliance may be better with oral therapy. Numerous studies demonstrate that that poor compliance with ICT results in increased risk of cardiac disease and endocrinopathies, as well as lower survival. Although data on the costs of noncompliance are limited, a recent model-based study estimated the lifetime costs of inadequate compliance with deferoxamine to be $33,142., Conclusions: Inadequate compliance with ICT in thalassemia major is common and results in substantial morbidity and mortality, as well as increased costs.

Background: Patients requiring chronic blood transfusions are at risk for iron overload, which, if not treated by iron chelation therapy (ICT), can create serious organ damage and reduce life expectancy. Current ICT requires burdensome 8- to 12-hour infusions five to seven times per week., Study Design and Methods: A naturalistic study of the burden of infused ICT was conducted in four US centers. Data from the initial and most recent years of ICT were collected from medical charts of consenting thalassemia (n = 40) and sickle cell disease (n = 9) patients. Quality of life (QoL), treatment satisfaction, and ICT-related resource utilization data were also collected from a patient interview., Results: Mean serum ferritin levels during the initial (2519 +/- 1382 ng/mL) and most recent (2741 +/- 2532 ng/mL) years remained unacceptably high and increased over time (306 +/- 2200 ng/mL; mean of 20+/- years of therapy). Within 30 days before interview, 55 percent of patients suffered at least one ICT-related adverse event; 76 percent missed at least one dose. QoL, measured by the SF-36, and treatment satisfaction appear compromised in this cohort. Although total annual costs of ICT were estimated at USD $30,000 to $35,000, drug accounted for only 50 to 60 percent of this amount., Conclusions: Infused ICT may not provide adequate effectiveness in the real world. High ferritin levels seem to be associated with ICT noncompliance, likely in relation to the bothersome mode of administration and side effects. The total cost of ICT appears to well exceed that of drug alone.

Background: Iron chelation therapy (ICT) with deferoxamine (DFO), the current standard for the treatment of iron overload in patients with transfusion-dependent disorders such as beta-thalassemia, requires regular subcutaneous or intravenous infusions. This can lead to reduced quality of life and poor adherence, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality in iron-overloaded patients with beta-thalassemia. Deferasirox is an orally administered iron chelator that has been approved for use in the United States, Switzerland, and other countries., Objective: This analysis was conducted to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during receipt of DFO infusions or once-daily oral therapy with deferasirox (ICL670)., Methods: PROs were prospectively evaluated as part of a randomized, Phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety profile of DFO 20 to 60 mg/kg per day with those of deferasirox 5 to 30 mg/kg per day in patients (age > or =2 years) with beta-thalassemia who were receiving regular transfusions and had a liver iron concentration of > or =2 mg/g dry weight. PRO questionnaires were completed by patients or a parent or legal guardian at baseline, week 4, week 24, and end of study (EOS). Patients assessed their level of satisfaction with study treatment (very satisfied, satisfied, neutral, dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied) and rated its convenience (very convenient, convenient, neutral, inconvenient, or very inconvenient). Time lost from normal activities due to ICT in the previous 4 weeks was recorded using a single global assessment. At week 4, patients who had previous experience with DFO were asked to indicate their preference for treatment (ICT received before the study, ICT received during the study, no preference, or no response) and the reason for that preference. At EOS, all patients were asked if they would be willing to continue using the ICT they had received during the study. All study analyses were performed in all patients who received at least 1 dose of study medication., Results: Five hundred eighty-six patients (304 females, 282 males; age range, 2-53 years) received treatment with DFO (n = 290) or deferasirox (n = 296). Significantly more patients treated with deferasirox reported being very satisfied or satisfied with treatment compared with those treated with DFO (week 4: 92.0% vs 50.4%, respectively; week 24: 89.6% vs 44.0%; EOS: 85.1% vs 38.7%; all, P < 0.001). At the same time points, the majority of those treated with deferasirox reported that treatment was very convenient or convenient compared with those treated with DFO (95.5% vs 21.3%, 91.7% vs 17.4%, and 92.7% vs 11.3%, respectively; all, P < 0.001). Among patients who had previously taken DFO and were randomized to receive deferasirox during the study, 96.9% reported a preference for deferasirox over DFO. At EOS, the proportion of patients indicating a willingness to continue study therapy was significantly greater in those receiving deferasirox than in those receiving DFO (85.8% vs 13.8%; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: In this study, patient-reported satisfaction and convenience were significantly higher for the once-daily, oral ICT deferasirox than for DFO infusions. Among patients who had received DFO before the study, the majority indicated a preference for deferasirox over DFO. Most patients receiving deferasirox indicated that they would be willing to continue taking it. These results suggest that deferasirox had a positive impact on patients' daily lives.

Objectives: Identify treatment interruptions and non-adherence with imatinib; examine the clinical and patient characteristics related to treatment interruptions and non-adherence; and estimate the association between treatment interruptions and non-adherence with imatinib and healthcare costs for US managed care patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML)., Methods: This retrospective analysis utilised electronic healthcare claims data from a US managed care provider. Adult patients with CML (as determined by International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] diagnosis code) were identified who began treatment with imatinib from 1 June 2001 through 31 March 2004. Treatment interruptions (i.e. failure to refill imatinib within 30 days from the run-out date of the prior prescription) were identified during the 12-month follow-up period. Medication possession ratio (MPR), calculated as total days' supply of imatinib divided by 365, was also examined. Healthcare costs (i.e. paid amounts for all prescription medications and medical services received, including health plan and patient liability) were examined in three ways: (i) total healthcare costs; (ii) total healthcare costs exclusive of imatinib costs; and (iii) total medical costs. All costs were converted to US dollars (2004 values) using the medical component of the Consumer Price Index. MPR was modelled using ordinary least squares regression. Presence of treatment interruptions was modelled using logistic regression. The association between MPR and healthcare costs was estimated using a generalised linear model specified with a gamma error distribution and a log link. All models included adjustment for age, gender, number of concomitant medications, starting dose of imatinib and cancer complexity., Results: A total of 267 patients were identified. Average age was approximately 50 years, and 43% were women. Mean MPR was 77.7%, with 31% of patients having a treatment interruption. However, all of these patients resumed imatinib within the study period. In this population, MPR decreased as the number of concomitant medications increased (p = 0.002), and was lower among women (p = 0.003), patients with high cancer complexity (p = 0.003) and patients with a higher starting dose of imatinib (p = 0.04). Women were approximately twice as likely as men to have a treatment interruption (p = 0.009), as were patients with a high cancer complexity (p = 0.03). After adjusting for the aforementioned covariates, MPR was found to be inversely associated with healthcare costs excluding imatinib (p < 0.001) and medical costs (p < 0.001). A 10% point difference in MPR was associated with a 14% difference in healthcare costs excluding imatinib and a 15% difference in medical costs. For example, patients with an MPR of 75% incur an additional 4072 US dollars in medical costs annually compared with patients with an MPR of 85%., Conclusions: Treatment interruptions and non-adherence with imatinib, both of which could lead to undesired clinical and economic outcomes, appear to be prevalent. Physicians and pharmacists should educate patients and closely monitor adherence to therapy, as improving adherence and limiting treatment interruptions may not only optimise clinical outcomes but also reduce the economic burden of CML.

Background: Deferasirox is a recently approved once-daily oral iron chelator that has been shown to reduce liver iron concentrations and serum ferritin levels to a similar extent as infusional deferoxamine., Objective: To determine the cost effectiveness of deferasirox versus deferoxamine in patients with beta-thalassaemia major from a US healthcare system perspective., Methods: A Markov model was used to estimate the total additional lifetime costs and QALYs gained with deferasirox versus deferoxamine in patients with beta-thalassaemia major and chronic iron overload from blood transfusions. Patients were assumed to be 3 years of age at initiation of chelation therapy and to receive prescribed dosages of deferasirox and deferoxamine that have been shown to be similarly effective in such patients. Compliance with chelation therapy and probabilities of iron overload-related cardiac disease and death by degree of compliance were estimated using data from published studies. Costs ($US, year 2006 values) of deferoxamine administration and iron overload-related cardiac disease were based on analyses of health insurance claims of transfusion-dependent thalassaemia patients. Utilities were based on a study of patient preferences for oral versus infusional chelation therapy, as well as published literature. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were employed to examine the robustness of the results to key assumptions., Results: Deferasirox resulted in a gain of 4.5 QALYs per patient at an additional expected lifetime cost of $US126,018 per patient; the cost per QALY gained was $US28,255. The cost effectiveness of deferasirox versus deferoxamine was sensitive to the estimated costs of deferoxamine administration and the quality-of-life benefit associated with oral versus infusional therapy. Cost effectiveness was also relatively sensitive to the equivalent daily dose of deferasirox, and the unit costs of deferasirox and deferoxamine, and was more favourable in younger patients., Conclusion: Results of this analysis of the cost effectiveness of oral deferasirox versus infusional deferoxamine suggest that deferasirox is a cost effective iron chelator from a US healthcare perspective.

Background: To assess the literature for the impact of iron overload and infusion Iron Chelation Therapy (ICT) on patients' quality of life (QoL), and the availability of QoL instruments for patients undergoing infusion ICT. Also, to obtain patients' experiences of having iron overload and receiving infusion ICT, and experts' clinical opinions about the impact of treatment on patients' lives., Methods: A search of studies published between 1966 and 2004 was conducted using Medline and the Health Economic Evaluation Database (HEED). Qualitative results from patient and expert interviews were analysed. Hand searching of relevant conference abstracts completed the search., Results: Few studies measuring the impact of ICT with deferoxamine (DFO) on patients QoL were located (n = 15). QoL domains affected included: depression; fatigue; dyspnoea; physical functioning; psychological distress; decrease in QoL during hospitalization. One theme in all articles was that oral ICT should improve QoL. No iron overload or ICT-specific QoL instruments were located in the articles. Interviews revealed that the impact of ICT on patients with thalassemia, sickle cell disease, and myelodysplastic syndromes is high., Conclusion: A limited number of studies assessed the impact of ICT or iron overload on QoL. All literature suggested a need for easily administered, efficacious and well tolerated oral iron overload treatments, given the impact of current ICT on adherence. Poor adherence to ICT was documented to negatively impact survival. Further research is warranted to continue the qualitative and quantitative study of QoL using validated instruments in patients receiving ICT to further understanding the issues and improve patients QoL.

As well as the significant clinical effects of Parkinson's disease (PD), the disease places a high economic burden on society. Given the scarcity of health care resources, it is becoming increasingly necessary to demonstrate that new therapies for PD provide value for money in comparison with other potential interventions. This paper outlines the basic techniques of cost-effectiveness analysis and its application to PD. These techniques are illustrated by a recent economic evaluation of entacapone for use in Canada.

Background: Basiliximab is a chimeric monoclonal directed against the alpha-chain of the interleukin-2 receptor. International studies have shown that it is highly effective in preventing acute rejection in patients receiving Neoral, and causes no measurable incremental toxicity, but its economic value remains unknown., Methods: This study employed an economic model to examine the potential economic benefit of basiliximab. Parameter estimates were derived from a randomized, prospective, double-blind study conducted in 21 renal transplant centers in seven countries in which 380 adult primary allograft recipients were randomized within center to receive basiliximab (20 mg i.v.) on days 0 and 4 or placebo in addition to dual immunosuppression with Neoral and steroids. Key clinical events included primary hospitalization, immunosuppressive drug use, patient and graft survival, graft rejection, treatment of rejection, dialysis, and repeat hospitalization. Health resources were valued via a comprehensive electronic cost dictionary, based upon a detailed economic evaluation of renal transplantation in Canada. Medication costs were calculated from hospital pharmacy acquisition costs; basiliximab was assessed a zero cost., Results: The average estimated cost per patient for the first year after transplant was $55,393 (Canadian dollars) for placebo and $50,839 for basiliximab, rising to $141,690 and $130,592, respectively, after 5 years. A principal component of the cost in both groups was accrued during the initial transplant hospitalization ($14,663 for standard therapy and $14,099 for basiliximab). An additional $15,852 and $14,130 was attributable to continued care, graft loss, and dialysis in the two groups, whereas follow-up hospitalization consumed an additional $15,538 for placebo and $13,916 for basiliximab. The mean incremental cost of dialysis was $5,397 for placebo compared with $3,821 for basiliximab, whereas incremental costs of graft loss were $2,548 compared with $2,295 in the two treatment groups. The principal costs associated with repeat admission to the transplant ward and the general ward were marginally higher for placebo ($7,395 vs. $6,300 and $5,986 vs. $4,625). Treatment of acute rejection and maintenance immunosuppressive drug use were associated with only limited savings as a result of basiliximab (savings <$200 each). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the most influential parameters affecting the savings as a result of using basiliximab were a reduction in the duration of initial and repeat hospitalization followed by the reduced risks of acute rejection and graft loss., Conclusions: Before accounting for the cost of the therapy itself, basiliximab produces an estimated economic saving of $4,554 during the first year after transplant, of which $3,344 is attributable to the reduced costs of graft dysfunction, including graft loss and dialysis ($1,722) and follow-up hospitalizations ($1,622). When marketed, basiliximab is expected to cost approximately $3,000 per course (two doses of 20 mg), resulting in a net first-year saving of $1,554. Under these circumstances, basiliximab can be considered a dominant therapy in renal transplantation.

Background: Clinical studies have shown that patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) who are treated with rivastigmine have statistically significantly better scores on 5 scales used to assess AD than control patients receiving placebo. However, the clinical meaning and cost implications of these differences are not clear., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical meaning and cost implications of statistically significant results obtained in clinical trials of rivastigmine for the treatment of AD. Potential cost implications for the health care system, caregivers, and society are considered., Methods: Data on clinical effects of rivastigmine were obtained from published North American and European clinical studies of patients with mild to moderately severe AD receiving rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/d (n = 828) or placebo (n = 647). Differences in scores on the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Function, Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change with both clinical and caregiver information considered, Progressive Deterioration Scale, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and Global Deterioration Scale were assessed. A convenience panel of 9 Canadian specialists experienced in the treatment of AD provided their opinions on the clinical importance of the trial results. Chart review was performed to identify specific behaviors that improved, and cost implications of improvements were assessed., Results: The panel determined that statistically significant differences in scores on all scales except the MMSE were likely associated with functional or cognitive differences that were clinically relevant for patients, reflecting stabilization that would have beneficial consequences for caregivers and health care resource use. Subsequent chart review showed that improvement on specific scale items confirmed the physician panel's opinion. Analysis of possible cost implications to society indicated that medication expenditures would be offset largely by delays in the need for paid home care and institutionalization, positive effects on caregiver health, and less time lost from work for the caregiver., Conclusions: From the perspective of a Canadian specialist panel, rivastigmine treatment for AD produces clinically relevant effects for patients that are beneficial to caregivers. These effects suggest decreased use of caregiver resources and delays in the need for institutionalization, both of which reduce societal costs.

The first edition of the Guidelines for Economic Evaluation of Pharmaceuticals: Canada was published in November 1994. At that time, the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA) was assigned the task of maintaining and regularly updating the Canadian Guidelines. Since their introduction, a great deal of experience has been gained with the practical application of the guidelines. Their role has also evolved over time, from being a framework for pharmacoeconomic research to the point where a wide variety of decision-makers use economic evaluations based on the principles set out in the guidelines as a means of facilitating their formulary decisions. In addition, methodologies in certain areas (and the body of related research literature in general) have developed considerably over time. Given these changes in the science and the experience gained, CCOHTA convened a multi-disciplinary committee to address the need for revisions to the guidelines. The underlying principles of the review process were to keep the guidance nature of the document, to focus on the needs of 'doers' (so as to meet the information needs of 'users') and to provide information and advice in areas of controversy, with sound direction in areas of general agreement. The purpose of this review is three-fold: (i) to outline the process which lead to the revision of the Canadian Guidelines; (ii) to describe the major changes made to the second edition of this document; and (iii) to consider the 'next steps' as they relate to the impact of such guidelines and the measurement of outcomes related to economic assessments of pharmaceuticals in general.

Considerable effort has been expended in recent years in the development of methodology guidelines for economic evaluation of pharmaceutical products, driven in part by the desire to improve the rigour and quality of economic evaluations and to help decision making. Canada was one of the first countries to develop such guidelines and to encourage their use. This paper examines the extent to which the economic evaluations that were submitted to the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment in the last two years adhered to Canadian guidelines. The analytic technique employed by twelve studies as well as the comparator used, the perspective taken, the outcome measure selected, the cost items that were taken into consideration and the extent of sensitivity analyses that were performed are reviewed in this paper. It can be concluded that although studies have been of variable quality, the majority of them were well presented, complete and transparent, due in part to the guidelines. Except for the perspective of the analysis, guidelines were, in many respects, adhered to and did not restrict investigators to specific methodologies or specific techniques. They were also instrumental in ensuring a minimum set of standards.

This paper addresses the issue of biases in cost measures which used in economic evaluation studies. The basic measure of hospital costs which is used by most investigators is unit cost. Focusing on this measure, a set of criteria which the basic measures must fulfil in order to approximate the marginal cost (MC) of a service for the relevant product, in the representative site, was identified. Then four distinct biases--a scale bias, a case mix bias, a methods bias and a site selection bias--each of which reflects the divergence of the unit cost measure from the desired MC measure, were identified. Measures are proposed for several of these biases and it is suggested how they can be corrected.

This evaluation was conducted at the request of a Canadian provincial government considering finasteride for formulary inclusion. The comparator therapies, in accordance with Canadian pharmacoeconomic guidelines, were the most prevalent treatment [transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)] and the lowest cost treatment (watchful waiting). All costs were measured in 1994 Canadian dollars ($Can), and both costs and outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were calculated, and were found to be dependent on initial symptom severity and the anticipated duration of treatment with finasteride. The drug was shown to be the dominant alternative compared with both TURP and watchful waiting for patients with moderate symptoms, when the duration of drug therapy is 3 years or less. However, finasteride is a weak alternative for patients with severe symptoms who are treated for 4 years or more. For other groups of patients (i.e. moderate symptoms and on finasteride for 4 years or more; severe symptoms and on treatment for 3 years or less), the drug can improve health-related quality of life, but at a cost of between $Can3000 and $Can97,000 per incremental quality-adjusted life year (1994 dollars). Our study also indicated that it would cost between $Can2.7 million and $Can5.6 million, depending on the severity mix of the patients, to treat cohort of 10,000 men aged 60 years or older with finasteride.

We have reviewed 4 international sets of guidelines for the economic evaluation of pharmaceutical products-those of the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, the Canadian Coordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment, the Ontario Ministry of Health, and the England and Wales Department of Health. Comparison of these guidelines reveals that there are a number of differences between them, including disparities in outcome selection, costs and perspectives. These observations were attributed to differences in study purpose, conceptual approach, measurement techniques and value judgements. Uniformity can be achieved only in conceptual approach and measurement technique. Guidelines should be flexible to accommodate differences in the study purposes and value judgements of the analysts.