Search

Simple Summary: This study analyzes the use of rituximab (RTX) in the daily clinical practice of several Italian oncohematology centers, with a particular focus on the adoption of biosimilars. The results show that only a minority of patients (22%) switched between different biosimilars, while the majority continued treatment with the biosimilars Rixathon and Truxima. This finding suggests that the proactive sharing of guidelines between regulators and prescribers, from the outset, may be an effective strategy to further promote the adoption of biosimilars. This approach could be particularly useful in those areas where the use of biosimilars is still lower than the national average, helping to free up economic resources that could be redirected towards other healthcare opportunities. The clinical safety and efficacy of rituximab biosimilars compared to the reference rituximab (Mabthera) have been well established in randomized trials. However, concerns persist regarding the safety of changing from the reference product to biosimilars, and particularly between different biosimilars. This prospective multicenter observational study was conducted in 13 oncohematology units of eight Italian regions. The study included 800 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received rituximab between March 2018 and June 2022. To minimize survivorship bias, only newly diagnosed patients (i.e., those without prior rituximab treatment) were included in the analysis of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Thus, this study focused on 505 incident cases (79.8% of the initial cohort) from 13 centers. A total of 3681 rituximab infusions were administered, and 16.8% of the patients experienced at least one ADR. These were observed most frequently during the first infusion (44 patients, 52%) and the second infusion (17 patients, 20%). The most frequent reactions were general disorders and administration site conditions (n. 50, 8% serious). These findings support the clinical safety of rituximab biosimilars and suggest that switching between biosimilars does not increase the risk of adverse events. This evidence may alleviate concerns about biosimilar use, potentially leading to broader acceptance and reduced healthcare costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Palbociclib, a highly selective reversible CDK4-6 kinase inhibitor, is indicated in combination with an aromatase inhibitor or in combination with fulvestrant in women who had received prior endocrine treatment. Studies have demonstrated the efficacy of palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant in increasing progression-free survival in patients who relapsed or progressed on previous endocrine therapy, or in combination with aromatase inhibitor in patients who had not received previous treatments. We analysed the prescribing patterns of palbociclib in real practice correlating it with the evidence of treatment-related toxicity management and to time-to-treatment discontinuation and treatment adherence. Methods: For the observational, retrospective study, data were collected from five Italian hospital centres that prescribed palbociclib between April 2017 and April 2020. Each centre provided data derived from an administrative database of adult patients treated with palbociclib for the two therapeutic indications. Treatment adherence was calculated using the proportion of days covered method while time-to-treatment discontinuation was defined as the difference between the first and last date treatment was administered plus the days ideally covered by the last date treatment was given. Results: There were 375 patients enrolled during the study period, of whom 159 were treated with palbociclib and aromatase inhibitor and 216 were treated with palbociclib and fulvestrant. The time-to-treatment discontinuation was 8.9 months in the case of P + f (95% CI: 7.1−12.7) and 13.7 months in the case of P + ia (95% CI: 8.9−17.5). In both cohorts, treatments that received at least one dose reduction had a statistically higher time-to-treatment discontinuation than those without dose reduction (17.7 months vs. 9.2 and 16.6 vs. 7.4). The mean adherence in our study was 0.9 and remained high in treatments with one dose reduction (0.83) and this with two dose reductions (0.87). Conclusion: Based on these findings, it appears that the management of toxicities through reducing doses, as required by the Summary of Product Characteristics, results in a better outcome in terms of therapy duration, and therefore time to failure due to progression or toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Time To Discontinuation (TTD) is defined as the time from the start of treatment to the end of treatment, usually occurring due to loss of efficacy or occurrence of adverse events. It has become an important surrogate efficacy endpoint especially in real-world studies due to its correlation with endpoints such as Progression Free Survival (PFS). The aim of the study is to conduct a literature review of all studies reporting TTD in first-line therapy of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC). All articles that reported TTD for any first-line treatment of NSCLC as of 30 June 2022 were extracted from the PubMed search engine. From these articles, the drugs, study type, and TTD values were extracted. A descriptive analysis of the studies was made, dividing the TTD by subgroup according to the type of treatment (traditional chemotherapy, target therapy, immunotherapy) and study design (clinical trials, real world studies). Fifty-five studies were considered for the analysis, of which 12 were published in 2021; 28 were clinical trials and 27 were real-world studies. Thirty of the studies considered involved conventional chemotherapy and expressed TTD values from 1.4 to 4.5 months, 5 of the studies considered involved immunotherapy with TTD values from 2.1 to 7.4 months and 18 of the studies considered target therapy, with TTD values from 4 to 31 months. The clinical trials reported TTD values from 1.4 to 16 months and the real-world studies from 2 to 31 months. Studies reporting TTD are increasing, most notably real-world studies. Given the increasing importance of TTD as an efficacy endpoint, it becomes critical to measure and monitor it in various therapeutic settings such as NSCLC. This is the first study to review all TTD values of drugs used in first-line NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The treatment options available to children with cancer are limited. This is why for more than 10 years, the European Medicine Agency (EMA) has stated that all drugs to be marketed must be tested on the paediatric population in accordance with the Paediatric Investigation Plan (PIP). The objective of this study is to make a cross sectional analysis of the information related to the use of cancer drugs authorised on the European market in the paediatric population. Method: The European Public Assessment Reports and PIPs have been considered. The following data were extracted for onco-haematological drugs approved since 2016: paediatric indications, information about the paediatric population in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) and presence and characteristics of PIPs. A descriptive analysis of the characteristics of the drugs was made from the point of view of the paediatric population. Results: Forty-eight drugs with onco-haematological indications have been authorised for marketing since 2016, 7 (15%) of these have paediatric indications. Two (4%) drugs have no paediatric indication but have information related to the paediatric population within SmPC. Forty-one (85%) drugs have no reference to the paediatric population in SmPC. Seventeen (35%) drugs out of 48 do not have PIPs and 11 have been granted a waiver to present the results of paediatric studies. The other 19 active ingredients have a total of 28 PIPs. Conclusion and relevance: Most of the onco-haematological drugs approved by EMA since 2016 have neither paediatric indications nor mentions about paediatric use in SmPC. PIPs represent an opportunity, but demand for the paediatric population is still huge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Our objective was to determine what vial sharing techniques and other strategies were being used globally to reduce wastage from partially used single-use drug vials, what barriers are preventing these strategies being employed, and what savings are being achieved. Methods: A survey, comprising 19 questions, was distributed to the membership of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners and British Oncology Pharmacy Association. Questions asked included how parenteral cancer drugs are obtained and prepared, what vial sharing strategies are used, what means are employed to extend stability, how prepared products are reused and what cost savings are achieved. Results: In all, 74 responses were received from 20 countries, most from the United Kingdom. Some manufacturing is done by 60.8% of institution, with 41.9% making all products. Vial sharing strategies, for frequently used drugs, were employed in 53% of cases. Barriers preventing vial sharing being used included government legislation, USP 797 guidelines, and health insurance companies. Extension of stability was possible for 70.2% of centres. Most respondents reported reduction in cytotoxic and biological waste, and alleviation of drug shortages from vial sharing utilisation. Cost savings were achieved in 74% of cases and was significant in one third. Conclusions: The survey has determined that drug vial wastage and expenditure can be reduced, and vial sharing facilitates this. International collaboration plus the assistance of governments and the pharmaceutical industry is vital in achieving this aim. These findings can hopefully guide oncology pharmacy in establishing appropriate strategies to reduce wastage internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Pivotal Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) constitute scientific evidence in support of therapeutic choices when a drug is authorized in the market. In RCTs, patients are selected in a rigorous manner, in order to avoid bias that may influence efficacy assessments. Therefore, patients who take the drug in Real Life Studies (RLSs) are not the same as those participating in RCTs, which, in turn, leads to low data transferability from RCTs to RLS. The objective of this study was to evaluate the differences between RCTs and RLS, in terms of patient baseline characteristics. Materials and Methods: Our study includes all oral target therapies for RCC (Renal Cell Carcinoma) marketed in Europe before March 31, 2019. For each treatment, we considered both RCTs and RLSs, the former gathered from Summary of Product Characteristics published on the European Medicine Agency (EMA) website, and the latter yielded by our search in relevant literature. For each drug considered, we then compared the baseline characteristics of patients included in the RCT samples with those of the samples included in the RLSs using the Chi-squared and Mann-Whitney tests. Results: We considered six medicines, for a total of 9 pivotal RCTs and 31 RLSs. RCTs reported the same type of patient baseline characteristics, whereas RLSs are more varied in reporting. Some patient baseline characteristics (metastases, previous treatments, etc.) were significantly different between RCTs and RLs. Other characteristics, such as ECOG Performance Status, brain metastases, and comorbidities, liver and kidney failure, are comprised in exclusion criteria of RCTs, though are included in RLS. Discussion and Conclusion: While evaluating equal treatments for the same indications, RCTs and RLSs do not always assess patients with the same characteristics. It would be necessary to produce evidence from RLSs so as to have an idea of treatment effectiveness in patients groups that are not eligible or underrepresented in RCTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the safety profile of iso-osmolar contrast medium (CM) versus low osmolar CM in cancer patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >60 ml/min. In this multicenter, blind trial of patients seeking a chest-abdomen-pelvis contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) with iodated CM, participants were centrally randomized to iodixanol or iopromide. Contrast induced nephropathy (CIN) at 24 and/or 72 hr were our primary outcomes. We further considered irreversible CIN, average eGFR percentage variation (%Δ), and adverse events (AEs). Overall, 607 patients were enrolled. Among them, 497 eligible patients were randomized to iodixanol ( N: 247) or iopromide ( N: 250). No differences emerged by descriptive characteristics. Seven and 3 CIN at 24 hr ( p = 0.34) and 8 and 2 CIN at 72 hr ( p = 0.11) occurred in the iopromide and iodixanol group, respectively. Within the subgroup of individual patients who developed CIN ( N: 17), the event rate was higher in the iopromide arm ( p = 0.045). No cases of permanent CIN or significant differences in terms of AEs or GFR %Δ were observed. Our results suggest a more favorable safety profile of iodixanol versus iopromide. Adequately sized trials with similar design are warranted to confirm our findings and clarify the underlying biological mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study aims to evaluate the persistence, treatment adherence and drug cost associated with biologic and targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) in the management of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in Italy, with a focus on biosimilar drugs., Methods: This was a retrospective observational study involving eight hospital pharmacies, between January 2017 and December 2020, on naïve patients with at least one b/tsDMARD dispensation indicated for PsA. Patients were followed up for 12 months and persistence and adherence were evaluated by proportion of days covered (PDC). The originator and biosimilar for adalimumab and etanercept were compared. Furthermore, the real annual cost per patient based on adherence to therapy was calculated., Results: Patients initiating b/tsDMARDs for PsA had a mean persistence of 263 days and 48.6% remained persistent for 1 year. Adherent patients (PDC ≥ 0.8) were 47.6% for the overall population. Similar persistence and adherence were observed between patients treated with the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar, while patients treated with the etanercept originator showed lower persistence and adherence compared to those treated with its biosimilar (mean persistence: 222 vs. 267 days, patient persistent at 1 year: 29.4% vs. 51.5%, mean PDC: 0.53 vs. 0.70, adherent patients: 23.5% vs. 51.5%). The average annual drug cost ranged from €8,724 (etanercept) to €14,783 (ustekinumab), with an annual saving of more than €2,500 by using biosimilars., Conclusion: Poor adherence to medications contributes to suboptimal clinical outcomes. The comparison between biosimilar and originator offers further evidence in support of the biosimilar to optimizing resources in healthcare., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: Enrico Pasut declares consultancy for Biogen in 2020. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Introduction: In Italy, the monoclonal antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab are subjected to the AIFA monitoring registries for the indication "advanced melanoma (unresectable or metastatic) in adults". These two drugs have the same eligibility criteria, and they are indicated until failure due to progression or toxicity; both of these drugs have also undergone dosage changes from pro/kg to flat dose. In this observational study, also based on clinical eligibility parameters, we wanted to investigate the rwTTD, definitive and temporary suspensions, as well as dose modifications., Methods: We enrolled patients who started a treatment with nivolumab or pembrolizumab and were admitted to the Regina Elena National Cancer Institute in the period between 01/01/2016 and 31/12/2018. Treatments were followed up to 31/01/2021. Data were collected from the AIFA monitoring registries and from local therapy monitoring databases. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate rwTTD, and the differences between sample subgroups were evaluated using the Log-Rank Test., Results: In the 123 patients enrolled, the rwTTD was 11.67 months (IC 95%: 7,93-17,27). On average, about one out of five patients stopped the therapy before 2 months. The treatments suspended for at least 45 consecutive days and then resumed were 49 (47.6%) with rwTTD= 26.4 months (95% CI 17.3-43.6), significantly higher (p=0.008) compared to treatments suspended for less than or equal to 45 days (rwTTD= 8.4 months (95% CI 4.3-17.1). Dosage changes of nivolumab from pro/kg to flat dose ended in percentage ranging from -23.8% to +56.9%, mean +7.2%. In the case of pembrolizumab, the transition to the flat dose led to variations between +22% and +81.8%, average +39.9%., Discussion and Conclusions: Patients who temporarily stopped the treatment had a median rwTTD that is three times higher than patients who stopped permanently and had at least 45 days of therapy. Other studies suggest that patients who had immunological response and side effects, then had better PFS and OS than those without side effects. It is confirmed that it is therefore important to manage toxicities and then resume treatment, whenever possible. In patients who switched to a flat dose, there was an evident increase in the dose administered, especially for pembrolizumab.

Background: The availability of subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (EV) formulations of trastuzumab and the recent release of the biosimilar EV version (10/2018) increase the offer for the treatment of patients with breast or gastric cancer HER2 positive. In this context, it is necessary to build therapeutic scenarios form avalible data in order to estimate the potential savings for the Regional Health Service (RHS) taking into account the appropriateness of use and patient's preferences., Aim: To evaluate the available comparative evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of the different trastuzumab formulations; to analyze the supply of trastuzumab by type of administration (EV/SC) in Lazio in 2018, identifying the most appropriate use; to hypothesize a cost-effective scenario for the Regional Health Service (SSR) in 2019. Mehods. With the working group formed by clinicians and methodologists, we analysed the evidence of efficacy and safety available to date for the different formulations of trastuzumab, also taking into account the recent availability of biosimilars and with particular regard to the phenomenon of the potential switch between different therapeutic options. In addition, for the year 2019 the available economic impact assessments were also simulated with data from the Lazio Region. Through the datas from direct pharmaceutical products, the transtuzumab cycles supplied in 2018 were identified separately for the available formulations (EV/SC). For each cycle of therapy, starting from the date of delivery, the possible presence of a concomitant treatment (± 2 days) was investigated, tracing the type and method of administration. The treatments (concomitant with trastuzumab) were identified for which there were conflicting modes of administration. In addition, the supply of SC per dispensing structure was evaluated and, on the basis of this information, a scenario of use was hypothesized that takes into account costs and plausible consumption., Results: A review of the literature summarized the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of the use of trastuzumab in the recorded therapeutic indications. The review was discussed with the working group and used to reproduce, at regional level, the estimates of the economic impact of the different therapeutic choices possible with trastuzumab. As regards the data on the use of trastuzumab, in the Lazio Region in 2018, 22,214 treatment cycles were observed (at a cost of 33 million euro) for 2,407 patients; new users accounted for 52.2%. 46.8% of the cycles were administered via SC; the use of the biosimilar was observed from October onwards and involved 143 cycles (0.6%). In 68.4% of the cycles trastuzumab was administered in monotherapy; among the therapies associated with trastuzumab, the most frequent was pertuzumab (n=4,258, 19.2% of the total cycles), followed by paclitaxel (n=1,364, 6.1% of the total cycles). Among the cycles of trastuzumab in concomitant therapy (N=7,022), 17.3% was administered via SC despite the presence of other drugs administered via EV. The prescriptive pattern of trastuzumab was heterogeneous for the different delivery structures. The SC administration presents a variability in the supply from 26% to 70% (interquartile range) and does not seem to be related to the type and volume of activity of the hospital. If the biosimilar EV is expected to account for 55% of consumption by 2019, thus reducing the use of the EV originator to 10% and the SC originator to 35%, savings of more than €7 million., Conclusions: Through the use data of the different formulations available for trastuzumab and taking into account the prescriptive appropriateness (and patient preferences), it has been possible to identify a SSR scenario of economic convenience due to the greater use of the biosimilar.