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

October 6, 2017, Cancer Research UK
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

Report details possible conflict of interest issues for FDA advisors

July 6, 2018
Charles Piller, a contributing correspondent for the journal Science, has published a Feature piece in the journal detailing what he describes as possible conflicts of interest issues by people who serve as advisors to the ...

Opioid epidemic responses overlook gender

July 5, 2018
Yale health experts warn that current efforts to confront the growth of opioid addiction and overdose deaths must better incorporate an understanding of how women fit into this epidemic.

Study finds no strong evidence that cannabis reduces chronic pain

July 4, 2018
A four-year study suggests medicinal cannabis is not as effective at relieving chronic non-cancer pain as commonly assumed.

Expanding primary care buprenorphine treatment could curb opioid overdose crisis

July 4, 2018
Expanding the availability of medication treatment for opioid use disorder in primary care settings would be a major step toward reducing overdose deaths, write two physicians specializing in addiction medicine and health ...

Chronic pain remains the same or gets better after stopping opioid treatment: study

July 2, 2018
Stopping long-term opioid treatment does not make chronic, non-cancer-related pain worse and, in some cases, makes it better, Washington State University researchers have found.

Pain relief at a lower opioid dose

June 25, 2018
A team of researchers at Johns Hopkins have found that activating nerve cell receptors along two chemical pathways—one that has previously been linked to how the brain senses "itch"—may improve pain relief when combined ...

0 comments

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.