Some cancer drugs approved in Europe might not have sufficient evidence of survival benefits, says study

October 6, 2017
Some cancer drugs approved in Europe might not have sufficient evidence of survival benefits, says study
Credit: Cancer Research UK

Most cancer drugs approved in Europe from 2009-2013 weren't backed by sufficient scientific evidence that they work, according to a new study.

At the time of approval, around a third of European approvals were backed up by robust from showing improved survival, and 1 in 10 approvals followed evidence that the improved quality of life.

After further evidence was gathered around half of approvals had evidence of improving survival or quality of life.

Emma Greenwood, Cancer Research UK's director of policy, said the findings were useful, but might not reflect the drugs that are available in the UK as it has another layer of approval for drugs, and that the system has changed since the period under study.

"While the European Medicines Agency (EMA) grants market authorisations for , it is national bodies such as NICE that are responsible for approving drugs for routine use on the NHS," she said.

In the case of , in England some treatments not initially approved by NICE may be prescribed on the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) while more evidence is gathered.

The CDF was initially established in 2010, but didn't monitor the effectiveness of drugs once prescribed. It was reformed in 2016 to give access to treatments while their effectiveness is evaluated.

The study, published in the BMJ , looked at evidence for 48 drugs that the EMA approved for 68 uses in specific patient settings from 2009-2013.

It found that at the time of approval 24 of these 68 'indications' (35%) had evidence for increased survival, but for an average of less than 3 months. Only 7 of 68 (10%) had evidence that they improved quality of life.

Although small, survival benefits can accumulate as drugs are often used in sequence, bringing greater benefit to patients towards the end of their life.

After approval, drugs were found to increase survival in 3 more settings, and to improve quality of life in 5 more settings.

Cancer development has changed with an increased focus on personalised treatments targeted to the biology of a patient's cancer, rather than for all patients with a particular disease.

This means that often there is a smaller number of patients being treated with these drugs and that clinical trials may include fewer patients.

Many new drugs, such as immunotherapies, are the first of their kind, raising additional questions for drug bodies looking to assess their effectiveness.

In an attempt to deal with these issues, programmes like the CDF aim to add to gold standard clinical trial data with evidence of how a treatment performs after being licenced.

"The study does highlight the importance of using real-world evidence from patients, on top of data from clinical trials, to build our understanding of how drugs work in a real-life setting," said Greenwood.

"We're already starting to see this happen through the CDF in England, where patients can access promising new drugs while more data is collected on their effectiveness. This type of evidence is becoming increasingly important as more innovative and targeted treatments are developed."

The study's authors said that patients can be harmed, money wasted, and the aims of health services undermined when expensive drugs paid for by public money are approved without clinical evidence.

Dr Vinay Prasad, an expert in public health at Oregon Health & Science University in the US, and a critic of the current costs of , said that rigorous testing and randomised clinical trials should be used to determine effectiveness.

"The expense and toxicity of cancer drugs means we have an obligation to expose patients to treatment only when they can reasonably expect an improvement in survival or quality of life," he said. The findings suggest "we may be falling far short of this important benchmark", he added.

Explore further: No clear evidence that most new cancer drugs extend or improve life

More information: Courtney Davis et al. Availability of evidence of benefits on overall survival and quality of life of cancer drugs approved by European Medicines Agency: retrospective cohort study of drug approvals 2009-13, BMJ (2017). DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j4530

Related Stories

No clear evidence that most new cancer drugs extend or improve life

October 4, 2017
Even where drugs did show survival gains over existing treatments, these were often marginal, the results show.

Promising immunotherapy drug now available for some lung cancer patients in England

September 21, 2017
Some lung cancer patients in England can now be offered a potentially life-extending immunotherapy drug.

Expensive new cancer drugs have little effect on survival of many cancers

November 9, 2016
Despite considerable investment and innovation, new cancer drugs approved in the past 10 years may have little effect on survival in adults with cancer, raising a number of concerns, argues an expert in The BMJ today.

Study examines quality of evidence for drugs granted accelerated FDA approval

August 15, 2017
Among drugs granted accelerated approval by the FDA in 2009-2013, efficacy was often confirmed in subsequent trials a minimum of 3 years after approval, and the use of nonrandomized studies and surrogate measures, instead ...

Study compares cancer drug cost, benefit

June 6, 2017
Queen's University researcher Christopher Booth reveals the price of new cancer therapies is not associated with treatment effectiveness.

More patients OK'd for cancer trials under Obamacare: study

July 20, 2017
(HealthDay)—The Affordable Care Act has enabled more privately insured patients to enroll in clinical trials for new cancer treatments, a new study contends.

Recommended for you

Fighting opioid addiction in primary care—new study shows it's possible

October 18, 2017
For many of the 2 million Americans addicted to opioids, getting good treatment and getting off prescription painkillers or heroin may seem like a far-off dream.

With no morphine, 25 million die in pain each year: report

October 13, 2017
Every year, some 25 million people—one in ten of them children—die in serious pain that could have been alleviated with morphine at just a few cents per dose, researchers said Friday.

Study finds few restrictions on Rx opioids through Medicare

October 9, 2017
Medicare plans place few restrictions on the coverage of prescription opioids, despite federal guidelines recommending such restrictions, a new Yale study finds. The research results highlight an untapped opportunity for ...

Nocebo effect: Does a drug's high price tag cause its own side effects?

October 5, 2017
Pricey drugs may make people more vulnerable to perceiving side effects, a new study suggests—and the phenomenon is not just "in their heads."

Pre-packaged brand version of compounded medication to prevent preterm births costs 5,000 percent more

October 2, 2017
Preventing a preterm birth could cost as little as $200 or as much as $20,000, depending on which one of two medications a doctor orders, according to a new analysis from Harvard Medical School.

Cancer drugs' high prices not justified by cost of development, study contends

September 12, 2017
(HealthDay)— Excusing the sky-high price tags of many new cancer treatments, pharmaceutical companies often blame high research and development (R&D) costs.


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.