Publicly accessible evidence of health-related quality of life benefits associated with cancer drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency between 2009 and 2015. (April 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Grössmann, Nicole; Robausch, Martin; Rothschedl, Eleen; Wild, Claudia; Simon, Judit
• Is Part Of: European journal of cancer. Volume 129(2020)
• Page Start: 23
• Page End: 31
• Publication Date: 2020-04
• Subjects: Antineoplastic agents -- Health-related quality of life -- Clinical efficacy -- Drug approvals -- Patient-relevant outcomes; Cancer -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Périodiques; Cancer; Tumors; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 616.994
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2020.01.020
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0959-8049

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is one of the most important patient-relevant study end-points for the direct measurement of the benefit of cancer drugs. Therefore, our aim is to detect cancer indications with no published information on HRQoL at the time of European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval and monitor any reported HRQoL evidence updates after at least three years of follow-up. Methods: We included all cancer indications that were approved by the EMA between January 2009 and October 2015. Our main sources of information were the EMA website, clinicaltrials.gov and a systematic literature search in PubMed. Information on HRQoL outcomes was extracted alongside evidence on median overall survival. Results: In total, we identified 110 indications, of which more than half (n = 58, 53%) were lacking available information on HRQoL assessments at the time of EMA approval. After a monitoring period of at least three years, 24 updates were identified, resulting in 34 (31%) therapies where information on HRQoL was still not available. For the 76 therapies with reported information on HRQoL, cancer-specific instruments were mostly used (n = 49/76). Regarding cumulative evidence on median overall survival and HRQoL, 33 (n = 33/110, 30%) as well as 15 (n = 15/110, 14%) cancer drugs were lacking information on both study end-points at the time of approval and after monitoring, respectively. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that there is an urgent need of routine re-evaluation of reimbursed cancer drugs with initially missing information on major outcomes. Standardisation of the typology and quality of HRQoL assessments need to be improved to allow better comparability of results. Highlights: Monitoring updates of EMA-approved cancer drugs that initially lack HRQoL data. Combined analysis of the two most important patient-relevant cancer trial end-points. In-depth characterisation of cancer drugs with uncertain benefit–risk profiles. Investigation of all recently applied HRQoL instruments in cancer trials.