Costo-efficacia della Costo-efficacia della terapia con Sorafenib nel terapia con Sorafenib nel trattamento dell’HCC trattamento dell’HCC Prof. C. Cammà Prof. C. Cammà Università degli studi di Palermo Università degli studi di Palermo
Jun 01, 2015
Costo-efficacia della terapia con Costo-efficacia della terapia con Sorafenib nel trattamento dell’HCCSorafenib nel trattamento dell’HCC
Prof. C. CammàProf. C. CammàUniversità degli studi di PalermoUniversità degli studi di Palermo
Mega-RCTMA Clinical
practice
Affordability
BCLC Staging and Treatment ScheduleBCLC Staging and Treatment Schedule
HCC
Stage 0 PST 0, Child-Pugh A
Stage A-C Okuda 1-2, PST 0-2, Child-Pugh A-
B
Stage D Okuda 3, PST>2, Child-Pugh
C
Early stage (A) Single or 3 nodules
< 3 cm, PS 0
Intermediate stage (B) Multinodular, Ps 0
Advanced stage (C)Portal invasion,N1, M1, PS 1-2
Terminalstage (D)
Very early stage (O) Single < 2 cm
Carcinoma in situ
Single 3 modules 3 cm
Portalpressure/bilirubin
Normal No Yes
AssociateddiseasesIncreased
Resection Liver Transplantation(CLT/LDLT) PEI/RF Chemoembolization Sorafenib
Curative Treatments (30%)5-yr survival: 50-70%
Randomized controlled trials (50%)3 yr survival: 20-40%
Symptomatic ttc (20%)1 yr survival: 10-20%
Portalinvasion, N1, M1
ttc: treatmentLlovet JM et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008
Multicenter, double blind, placebo-controlled trial
conducted at 121 centers in 21 countries in
Europe, North America, South America, and
Australasia
Phase III SHARP Trial: Phase III SHARP Trial: SHARP trial designSHARP trial design
•Multicenter, double blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at•121 centers in 21 countries in Europe, North America, South America, and Australasia
Primary endpoints
OS
TTSP
Secondary endpoints
TTP
DCR
Safety*
• Nexavar®
400 mg b.i.d.
•Placebo
Eligibility criteria Advanced HCC
Child–Pugh A status
ECOG PS 0–2
No prior systemictherapy
Stratification Region
ECOG PS(0 vs 1–2)
MVI/EHS(present/absent)
• Ran
dom
izat
ion
(1:1
)(n
=60
2)
•ECOG PS = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status; MVI = macroscopic vascular invasion; EHS = extrahepatic spread; BID = twice daily; OS = overall survival; TTSP = time to symptomatic progression;TTP = time to progression; DCR = disease control rate*Assessed using version 3.0 of the USA National Cancer InstituteCommon Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events
•Llovet JM et al. ASCO Annual Meeting 2007; Abstr LBA1/oral presentation available at www.asco.org
N=299N=299
N=303N=303
Llovet JM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:378-390.
The SHARP Trial: Overall SurvivalThe SHARP Trial: Overall Survival
Months Since Randomization
Pro
bab
ility
of
Su
rviv
al
0
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
SorafenibMedian: 10.7 months (95% CI: 9.4-13.3)
SorafenibMedian: 10.7 months (95% CI: 9.4-13.3)
PlaceboMedian: 7.9 months (95% CI: 6.8-9.1)
PlaceboMedian: 7.9 months (95% CI: 6.8-9.1)
HR (S/P): 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55-0.87)P < .001
HR (S/P): 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55-0.87)P < .001
THE CASE OF HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMATHE CASE OF HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA
Marcata eterogeneità
1) Biologica
2) Epidemiologica
3) Diagnostica
4) Clinica
Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2010
Range 0 – 75% Range 0 – 50%Range 0 – 75% Range 0 – 50%
p for heterogeneity < 0.0001
Untreated control groups of 30 RCTs Untreated control groups of 30 RCTs Untreated control groups of 30 RCTs Untreated control groups of 30 RCTs
17.5%17.5% 7.3%7.3%
• The quality and quantity of safety reporting in
randomized trials are largely inadequate (1);
• RCTs often fail to detect infrequent but serious
adverse drug reactions (1);
• Overall, 50% of approved drugs have serious
adverse effects not detected prior to approval (2).
Safety
1. Ioannidis JPA, Lau J. JAMA 2001
2. Moore TJ & al. JAMA 1998
RCTs can overestimate the magnitude of the treatment effect depending on the timing (ie, expected number of events) of
the decision to stop.
Lack of adequate safety data may in turn affect the perceived and actual risk-benefit ratios (overestimating the benefit,
underestimating the risk) of implementing the intervention in clinical practice.
These considerations suggest that clinicians should view results of RCTs stopped early for benefit with skepticism.
143 RCTs stopped early for benefit
Field-practice study of sorafenib therapy for
hepatocellular carcinoma:
a prospective multicenter study in Italy.
Hepatology 2011.
Iavarone M, Cabibbo G, Piscaglia F, Zavaglia C, Grieco A,
Villa E, Cammà C, Colombo M;
on behalf of the SOFIA (SOraFenib Italian Assessment) study group.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Study Multicenter, prospective, observational study
Centers Milan Policlinico, Palermo, Bologna, Milan
Niguarda, Rome, Modena
Patients Consecutive patients with BCLC-C or BCLC-
B with PD/unsuitable to locoregional therapy
Enrollment July 2008 – July 2010
Treatment Sorafenib 400 mg twice daily
Inclusion - compensated cirrhosis
- ECOG 0-2
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Management of HCC AASLD guidelines, 2005
Dose reduction 400 mg once daily
AE (grade 3/clinical
judgement)
Discontinuation Radiological or clinical
progression
SAE
DEMOGRAPHY
BCLC-C BCLC-B Overall
Patients 226 (76%) 70 (24%) 296
Age, yr* 6610 6910 6710
Male 185 (82%) 57 (81%) 242 (82%)
HCV/HBV/alcohol abuse/other 118/45/21/42 34/13/10/13 152/58/31/55
ECOG 0/1/2 89/126/11 70/0/0 159/126/11
Child-Pugh A 196 (87%) 63 (90%) 259 (88%)
Macroscopic vascular invasion 115 (51%) NA 115 (39%)
Extrahepatic spread 104 (46%) NA 104 (35%)
*mean±SD, §upper gastrointestinal endoscopy was performed in 256 patients
EFFECTIVENESS
1-yr survival rate 49%
Early radiological response (month 2)*
Complete
Partial
Stable
Progressive disease
2 (1%)
22 (7%)
217 (73%)
55 (19%)
Time to radiological progression, months 9.2 (5.5-12.9)
*according to modified RECIST criteria (Llovet JM et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:698-711)
Overall survival of patients treated with Overall survival of patients treated with sorafenibsorafenib
(from RCTs to clinical practice)(from RCTs to clinical practice)
Median Survival (n= 296): 10.5 mo
°Llovet JM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008. § Iavarone, Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2011.
Sorafenib Arm
Median Survival (n= 299): 10.7 mo
SHARP trial ° SOFIA study §
1-year survival: 44% 1-year survival: 49%
Months
0 4 8 12 160
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
Pro
bab
ility
of
Sur
viva
l
BCLC B (n= 54; 18%) Median: 14.5 mo
BCLC C (n= 245; 82%) Median: 9.7 mo
SHARP trial °* SOFIA study §
P =ns
BCLC B (n= 74; 25%) Median: 20.6 mo
BCLC C (n= 222; 75%) Median: 8.4 mo
Overall survival of patients treated with Overall survival of patients treated with sorafenibsorafenib
according to BCLCaccording to BCLC
°Llovet JM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008;
° Bruix J, et al. J Hep 2009; S28. § Iavarone, Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2011.
B
C
SHARP
SHARP
SOFIA
Liver dysfunction < 1% Liver function deteriorated 15%(≥ 2 points of Child-Pugh score)
Treatment compliance of patients Treatment compliance of patients treated with sorafenibtreated with sorafenib
(from RCTs to clinical practice)(from RCTs to clinical practice)
SHARP trial ° SOFIA study §
°Llovet JM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2008. § Iavarone, Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2011.
Discontinuation due to AEs
38%
Dose reductions due to AEs
26%
Dose interruptions due to AEs
44%
vs.
Discontinuation due to AEs
45%
Dose reductions due to AEs
54%
Dose interruptions due to AEs56%
Ma la riduzione di dose nel corso del trattamento, Ma la riduzione di dose nel corso del trattamento,
inficia l’efficacia della terapia?inficia l’efficacia della terapia?
- 77 (26%) patients received a half-dose of sorafenib for ≥ 70% of
the treatment period, which lasted a median of 6.8 months (95%
CI 4.2-9.4).
- Among the remaining 219 patients (74%),136 maintained a full
dose of sorafenib for a median of 3 months (95% CI 2.2-3.8),
whereas 83 received a half-dose for <70% of the whole treatment
period of 3 months.
§ Iavarone, Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2011.
Survival according to sorafenib dose reductionSurvival according to sorafenib dose reduction((Post-hoc analysisPost-hoc analysis))
--- Full dose No. = 219 --- Half-dose No. = 77
P = 0.0006
Median 21.6 months (95% CI 13.6-29.6) vs 9.6 months (95% CI 6.9-12.3)
Predictors of mortality in 296 HCC patients Predictors of mortality in 296 HCC patients treated with sorafenibtreated with sorafenib
Multivariate analysis
Predictor HR (95% CI) P-value
ECOG 1.9 (1.5 – 2.5) <.0001
Vascular invasion 1.9 (1.4 – 2.6) 0.0009
Full dose 1.8 (1.4 – 2.4 ) 0.001
Extrahepatic spread 1.4 (1.1 – 1.9) 0.01
Early radiological progression 1.4 (1.1 – 2.1) 0.02
Total bilirubin – mg/dl - -
Platelet x 103/mmc - -
Age - -
Albumin – g/dl - -
§ Iavarone, Cabibbo et al. Hepatology 2011.
“The SUN 1170 trial was stopped early because of a higher
incidence of serious adverse events in the sunitinib arm, and
because sunitinib did not demonstrate superiority or non-
inferiority to sorafenib.” Zhu A, et al. NATURE REVIEWS | CLINICAL ONCOLOGY 2011
OS
pro
bab
ility
(%
)
0 5 10 150.0
20 25 30 35 40
SunitinibMedian 7.9 months (95% CI: 7.4-9.2)
SunitinibMedian 7.9 months (95% CI: 7.4-9.2)
SorafenibMedian 10.2 months (95% CI: 8.9-11.4)
SorafenibMedian 10.2 months (95% CI: 8.9-11.4)
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
HR 1.30 (95% CI: 1.13-1.50)P=.0010
HR 1.30 (95% CI: 1.13-1.50)P=.0010
The open-label, Phase III SUN1170 trial compared the efficacy and safety of sunitinib with that of sorafenib
Ma uno studio pianificato per verificare se un farmaco è
«non peggiore» rispetto ai trattamenti standard, senza
nessun interesse per alcun valore aggiunto, non pone
alcuna domanda clinicamente rilevante.
Inoltre, a meno che non sia già nota una maggiore
tollerabilità del nuovo farmaco, comporta
inevitabilmente un inaccettabile eccesso di eventi
avversi nella popolazione dei pazienti.
Survival curves of BCLC B+C patients treated with full dose or dose-adjusted sorafenib
Kaplan-Meier curves: stair-step line
Estimated curves: smooth line
Kaplan-Meier curves: stair-step line
Estimated curves: smooth line
Survival curves of BCLC B patients treated with full dose or dose-adjusted sorafenib
Kaplan-Meier curves: stair-step line
Estimated curves: smooth line
Survival curves of BCLC C patients treated with full dose or dose-adjusted sorafenib
General structure of the Markov model
Treatment Strategies according BCLC and dose
Costs in 2012euros
QALY ICER/QALYbase-case analysis
(2012 euros)Full dose for BCLC B and C 16,081 0.16 69,344
Dose-adjusted for BCLC B and C 19,944 0.44 34,534
Full dose for BCLC B 24,224 0.32 57,385
Dose-adjusted for BCLC B 26,914 0.38 54,881
Full dose for BCLC C 14,841 0.16 65,551
Dose-adjusted for BCLC C 16,625 0.44 27,916
Results of cost-effectiveness analyses
Results of cost-effectiveness analyses
BCLC B
One-Way Sensitivity Analysis for dose-adjusted sorafenib in BCLC C
HCC patients
One-Way Sensitivity Analysis for dose-adjusted sorafenib in BCLC B
HCC patients
Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis by Montecarlo Simulation for dose-adjusted
sorafenib strategies
CONFRONTO CON ALTRI INTERVENTI
ICER = 10.000 € triplice terapia HCV
ICER = 60.000 € erlotinib Ca pancreas
ICER = 100.000 € epo nei dializzati
ICER = 15.000 € trapianto di cuore
ICER = 74.000 € sorafenib HCC
ICER/LYG
Cost/Risk/Benefit
400 mg/die
800 mg/die
ICER < 30.000 euro/LYG
Cammà, Hepatology, accepted
EBM ha implementato l’uso delle “evidenze” dalla ricerca clinica come strumento principale di decision making.
Tuttavia, i problemi maggiori degli RCTs sono:
• i risultati favorevoli ottenuti attraverso disegno, conduzione ed analisi inadeguati; • l’eccessiva fiducia nel risultato “medio” nonostante la verosimile eterogeneità tra pazienti;
• la sottovalutazione di sicurezza e tollerabilità; • la validità esterna insufficiente;
• l’influenza pervasiva dell’industria.
CONCLUSIONI
Farmaci innovativi:previsioni di spesa
10.000 pts200 mln
100-150 mln
120-150 mln
125 milioni euro
Farmaci innovativi:previsioni di spesa
Ciascun individuo è un esperimento biologico inripetibile, ……………..
nella storia dell’umanità.
Giovanni Paolo II