Health Technology Assessment Process for Oncology Drugs: Impact of CADTH Changes on Public Payer Reimbursement Recommendations.

Public reimbursement systems face the challenge of balancing provision of needed treatments and the reality of limited resources. Canada has a complex system for drug approval and public reimbursement, with jurisdiction divided between the federal government and the provinces/territories. A pivotal role is that of health technology assessment (HTA), which relies primarily on health economic principles to analyze the value of drugs on a population health basis and make recommendations about public reimbursement. The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) provides recommendations to all provinces but Quebec. This article provides an overview of Canada's approval and public reimbursement pathway, including the role of HTA and the economic principles on which it relies. Starting in late 2020, CADTH reduced the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) threshold, the metric relied upon in making recommendations to public payers. An analysis of all 56 oncology drug final recommendations issued from January 2020 to January 2022 was conducted and confirms this reduction in the cost per QALY threshold. As a result of this threshold reduction, recommendations to the provinces include, in a number of cases, substantially greater price reductions. The potential implications for successful price negotiation with the pan-Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance (pCPA), the public negotiating body for the provinces, are discussed.

Real-World Treatment Patterns, Clinical Outcomes, and Health Care Resource Utilization in Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer in Canada.

The prognosis for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is poor. Real-world evidence can highlight the unmet clinical need within this population. We conducted a population-based cohort study of ES-SCLC patients diagnosed in a large Canadian province (2010-2018) using electronic medical records and administrative claims data. In all, 1941 ES-SCLC patients were included, of which 476 (25%) were recurrent cases. Median age at diagnosis was 70 years (range: 39-94) and 50.2% were men. Of the 1941 ES-SCLC patients, 29.5% received chemotherapy and radiotherapy, 17.0% chemotherapy alone, 8.7% radiotherapy alone, and 44.8% received best supportive care. Chemotherapy was initiated by 46.5%, 8.5%, and 1.4% of first-, second-, and third-line patients, with lower uptake for recurrent cases. Median survival from first-, second-, and third-line chemotherapy was 7.82 months (95% CI: 7.50-8.22), 5.72 months (95% CI: 4.90-6.87), and 3.83 months (95% CI: 2.99-4.60). Among patients who received first-line therapy, the 2-year and 5-year survival was 7.3% (95% CI: 5.7-9.2) and 2.9% (95% CI: 1.8-4.5). In conclusion, initiation of first-line treatment in ES-SCLC was low with significant attrition in subsequent lines. These results underscore the need for effective front-line treatments and highlight the potential for novel therapies to improve patient outcomes.

Value assessment of oncology drugs using a weighted criterion-based approach.

BACKGROUND: Globally, the rising cost of anticancer therapy has motivated efforts to quantify the overall value of new cancer treatments. Multicriteria decision analysis offers a novel approach to incorporate multiple criteria and perspectives into value assessment. METHODS: The authors recruited a diverse, multistakeholder group who identified and weighted key criteria to establish the drug assessment framework (DAF). Construct validity assessed the degree to which DAF scores were associated with past pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) funding recommendations and European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS; version 1.1) scores. RESULTS: The final DAF included 10 criteria: overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, quality of life, toxicity, unmet need, equity, feasibility, disease severity, and caregiver well-being. The first 5 clinical benefit criteria represent approximately 64% of the total weight. DAF scores ranged from 0 to 300, reflecting both the expected impact of the drug and the quality of supporting evidence. When the DAF was applied to the last 60 drugs (with reviewers blinded) reviewed by pCODR (2015-2018), those drugs with positive pCODR funding recommendations were found to have higher DAF scores compared with drugs not recommended (103 vs 63; Student t test P = .0007). DAF clinical benefit criteria mildly correlated with ESMO-MCBS scores (correlation coefficient, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.009-0.59). Sensitivity analyses that varied the criteria scores did not change the results. CONCLUSIONS: Using a structured and explicit approach, a criterion-based valuation framework was designed to provide a transparent and consistent method with which to value and prioritize cancer drugs to facilitate the delivery of affordable cancer care.

Translation of Knowledge to Practice-Improving Awareness in NSCLC Molecular Testing.

BACKGROUND: Molecular testing in advanced lung cancer is standard in guiding treatment selection. However, population-wide implementation of testing remains a challenge. We developed a knowledge translation intervention to improve understanding among diagnostic specialists about molecular testing and appropriate diagnostic sampling in lung cancer. METHODS: Specialty-specific education programs were developed from existing literature and input from Canadian leaders in lung pathology, respirology, interventional radiology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology. The programs, including key messages, review of current data, existing guidelines, group discussion, and participant feedback, were administered at provincial and national specialty meetings. Participant knowledge was assessed before and after the intervention by using anonymous questionnaires. Molecular (EGFR) testing rates in Ontario were also evaluated before and after the intervention period. RESULTS: Ten programs were administered to diagnostic specialists, including respirologists, pathologists, thoracic surgeons, radiologists, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists, with completion of 255 preintervention and 219 postintervention surveys. At baseline, 30% were unsure of tissue handling methods for molecular testing, 20% chose an incorrect technique, and half were unfamiliar with how to initiate testing. After intervention, specialist knowledge improved regarding tissue handling and appropriate fixation techniques and uncertainty decreased from 30% to 2% (p < 0.001). A 12% increase (relative increase 57%) in molecular (EGFR) testing requests in Ontario was observed over the intervention period (p = 0.0032). CONCLUSIONS: Significant knowledge gaps exist among diagnostic specialists regarding molecular testing and targeted therapy in lung cancer. This initiative significantly improved understanding of the importance and methods of successful molecular testing and correlated with increased testing rates.

Physician preferences for accredited online continuing medical education.

INTRODUCTION: The need for up-to-date and high-quality continuing medical education (CME) is growing while the financial investment in CME is shrinking. Despite online technology's potential to efficiently deliver electronic CME (eCME) to large numbers of users, it has not yet displaced traditional CME. The purpose of this study was to explore what health care providers want in eCME and how they want to use it. METHODS: This was a qualitative study. Two 3-hour focus groups were held with physicians in both academic and community practices as well as trainees knowledgeable in the hypertension clinical practice guidelines with a willingness to discuss eCME. Content/thematic analysis was used to examine the data. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: credibility, content/context, and control. Credibility was the most consistent and dominant theme. Affiliations with medical organizations and accreditation were suggested as methods by which eCME can gain credibility. The content and need for discussion of the content emerged as a key pivot point between eCME and traditional CME: a greater need for discussion was linked to a preference for traditional face-to-face CME. Control over the content and how it was accessed was an emergent theme, giving learners the ability to control the depth of learning and the time spent. They valued the ability to quickly find information that was in a format (podcast, video, mobile device) that best suited their learning needs or preferences at the time. DISCUSSION: This study provides insight into physician preferences for eCME and hypotheses that can be used to guide further research.