No abstract

Background: Advances in cancer medicines have resulted in tangible health impacts, but the magnitude of benefits of approved cancer medicines could vary greatly. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a multidisciplinary process used to inform resource allocation through a systematic value assessment of health technology. This paper reviews the challenges in conducting HTA for cancer medicines arising from oncology trial designs and uncertainties of safety-efficacy data. Methods: Multiple databases (PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar) and grey literature (public health agencies and governmental reports) were searched to inform this policy narrative review. Results: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data from clinical trials and other relevant sources of evidence has made HTA for cancer medicines challenging. The approval of cancer medicines through expedited pathways has increased in recent years, in which surrogate endpoints or biomarkers for patient selection have been widely used. Using these surrogate endpoints has created uncertainties in translating surrogate measures into patient-centric clinically (survival and quality of life) and economically (cost-effectiveness and budget impact) meaningful outcomes, with potential effects on diverting scarce health resources to low-value or detrimental interventions. Potential solutions include policy harmonization between regulatory and HTA authorities, commitment to generating robust post-marketing efficacy-safety data, managing uncertainties through risk-sharing agreements, and using value frameworks. Conclusion: A lack of robust efficacy-safety data is a central problem for conducting HTA of cancer medicines, potentially resulting in misinformed resource allocation.

BACKGROUND:The trial assigning individualized options for treatment (Rx) (TAILORx) confirmed the predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay in hormone receptor (HR)-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative breast cancer and established thresholds for chemotherapy benefit in younger and older patients. Real-world chemotherapy use and RS-guided treatment costs in British Columbia post-TAILORx were examined. METHODS: The authors assembled 3 cohorts of HR-positive, HER2-negative, node-negative patients with breast cancer defined by diagnosis: before RS funding (cohort 1 [C1]: January 2013-December 2013), after introduction of public RS funding (cohort 2 [C2]: July 2015-June 2016), and after TAILORx results (cohort 3 [C3]: July 2018-June 2019). Chemotherapy use was compared between cohorts by age and RS. Budgetary impacts of RS testing on chemotherapy costs were evaluated pre-and post-TAILORx. RESULTS: Among the 2066 patients included, chemotherapy use declined by 19% after RS funding was introduced and by an additional 23% after TAILORx publication (P = .001). Reduction in chemotherapy use was significant for RS 11-20 tumors (C3 vs C2, P = .004). There was no significant change in chemotherapy use in patients >50 years old (C2:12% vs C3:10%, P = .22). RS testing was associated with higher cost savings post-TAILORx, except in patients 70 to 80 years old, where testing led to excess costs when adjusting for the low rate of RS-concordant chemotherapy prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: TAILORx has had population-based impacts on chemotherapy prescribing in intermediate RS tumors and patients ≤50 years old. The lower clinical use of RS and increased spending in patients 70-80 years old highlights the importance of careful selection of older candidates for high-cost genomic testing. Cancer 2022;128:665-674.

Although breast cancer is rare and understudied in adults age 40 and younger, recent epidemiologic data show an increasing incidence of breast cancer among young women in the United States and ongoing inferior long-term outcomes. Given breast cancers arising at a young age are more likely to present at advanced stages and to have aggressive biology, multimodal treatments are often indicated. Elevated local recurrence risks and greater propensity for germline cancer predisposition mutations can impact local therapy choices. Recently, escalated systemic therapy regimens for triple-negative breast cancer incorporating immunotherapy, de-escalated anti-HER2 therapy, and emerging targeted agents, including CDK4/6 inhibitors and PARP inhibitors, for early-stage disease may be employed in younger and older patients alike, with some special considerations. Prognostic genomic signatures can spare low-risk young women with hormone receptor–positive breast cancer adjuvant chemotherapy, but management of intermediate-risk patients remains controversial. Ovarian function suppression and extended endocrine therapy are improving outcomes in hormone receptor–positive breast cancer, but treatment adherence is a particular problem for young patients. Young women may also face greater challenges in long-term survivorship, including impaired fertility, difficulties in psychosocial adjustment, and other treatment-related comorbidities. Consideration of these age-specific issues through dedicated multidisciplinary strategies is necessary for optimal care of young women with breast cancer.

Germline pathogenic variants in the BRCA1-associated protein-1 (BAP1) gene cause the BAP1 tumor predisposition syndrome (TPDS). BAP1 TPDS is associated with an increased risk of uveal and cutaneous melanoma, mesothelioma, renal cell carcinoma, and several other cancer subtypes. Here, we report a germline nonsense BAP1 variant (c.850G>T, p.Glu284Ter) in a patient with bladder cancer and a strong family history of malignancy. Concurrently, we identified a somatic frameshift BAP1 variant, and as expected, immunostaining validated the loss of BAP1 protein in patient-derived tumor specimens. Together, these data provide strong evidence of pathogenicity in this case. With the addition of bladder cancer to the tumor types reported with germline BAP1 mutations, our understanding of the BAP1 TPDS continues to evolve, and may affect future screening and surveillance guidelines.