University of York – not helpful

Leave a comment

I’ve been highly critical of NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) in the past but I’ll give credit where it’s due. In this BBC report University of York researchers suggest the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) is particularly poor value, diverting money from other patient services. They argue the drugs advice body, NICE, has set its price threshold too high.

Researchers at York say the funding level should be closer to £13,000 to provide the most benefit across the NHS instead of a £20,000 to £30,000 limit that NICE currently work with. Thankfully Sir Andrew Dillon, chief executive of NICE, said: “Unless you think that drug companies will be prepared to lower their prices in an unprecedented way, using a threshold of £13,000 per QALY would mean the NHS closing the door on most new treatments.” I applaud his position on this occasion.

What the researchers at the University of York have failed to take into account is the cost to develop a drug can run to hundreds of millions of pounds and someone has to pay for this. I’m not a defender of pharma and I still believe pharma should do more to make drugs more affordable but this type of scaremongering is unhelpful. We need to work with pharma and not impose dangerous limits on treatment. Readers of this blog will know that the new CML treatments which cost much more than £13,000 per year are, essentially, curing people with Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia. Who knows where these advances will take us, impose limits and we halt progress.

I need to read the report in its entirety but from this overview it appears the conclusions from York aren’t helpful, aren’t clever and don’t take into account the future of cancer treatment. Their recommendations would mean people would die. Perhaps if someone from York is reading this they would get in touch, perhaps we could meet up and perhaps they could tell me just how much my life is worth. I’d also like to ask them what price they put on a cure for cancer and if their report took this into account?

Kris Griffin
Access CML Drugs

BBC Health: NICE ‘sets price too high for NHS medicines’

Trial evidence shows that dasatinib works faster and deeper

Leave a comment

I’m delighted to be able to share these results on the blog. The DASISION trial shows that dasatinib is more effective than imatinib. These findings prove that dasatinib works at twice the speed and with better results than imatinib and it makes the recent NICE decision and consultation completely irresponsible.
Many patients do extremely well on imatinib but this data shows how important it is to ensure our consultants have total access to dasatinib. In the meantime this serves as excellent evidence in persuading each SHA (Strategic Health Authority) to fund dasatinib locally and ensure we don’t allow this drug to become embroiled in a postcode lottery.

I urge you to, again, write to NICE and write to Sir Andrew Dillon updating them with this research and, again, ask them how they can justify their recent decisions, denying access to a drug that we now KNOW works better than the one they have recommended.

The original press release can be found here.

Results Presented at 17th Congress of the European Hematology Association;  June 14-17, 2012; Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (NYSE:BMY) and Otsuka Pharmaceutical Europe Ltd., today announced results from the 3-year follow-up of the DASISION trial, which show that first-line treatment with SPRYCEL(R) 100 mg results in faster and deeper response rates compared with Glivec(R) (imatinib) 400 mg [as defined by time to achieve Complete Cytogenic Response (CCYR) or Major Molecular Response (MMR)].

Additionally, an exploratory landmark analysis of the study suggests that patients with a deeper molecular response at three months (defined as having a less than or equal to 10% BCR-ABL) show a trend towards improved outcomes [such as Progression Free Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS) and a lower risk of disease transformation to Accelerated Phase or Blast Phase (AP/BP)] than the patients who did not achieve this level of response at three months. In this analysis, a deeper molecular response at three months was achieved in 84% of dasatinib treated patients and 64% of imatinib treated patients.[1]

“These findings are meaningful for newly diagnosed patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia (CML),” said Dr Andreas Hochhaus, Professor of Internal Medicine and Head of the Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology at the Jena University Hospital, Germany. “We are now seeing that, in general, in CML an early and deep level of response to treatment appears to be associated with a lower rate of disease progression, and may be a promising indicator of better long-term outcomes for patients. However, longer follow up is needed.”

Faster and Deeper Response by 3 Months

Research suggests that achieving a deep response earlier may predict better long-term outcomes for patients.[2,3] In this 3 year follow up of the DASISION study, the median time to response (Complete Cytogenic Response, or CCYR) for dasatinib was 3.2 months vs 6.0 months for imatinib. The median time to major molecular response (MMR) was 15 vs 36 months, respectively.[4]By 3 years, MMR was achieved in 68% of dasatinib treated and in 55% of imatinib treated patients (p<0.0001)[1]

Additional exploratory analyses of the three year follow-up of DASISION show:

    - At 3 months, 84% of evaluable patients receiving dasatinib achieved less than or equal to 10% BCR-ABL levels vs 64% of imatinib treated patients (p=0.0001)[1]
    - A higher probability of 3-year PFS and OS was seen in patients achieving less than or equal to 10% BCR-ABL compared to patients who had >10% BCR-ABL levels at 3
      months[1]
    - A lower level of transformation to AP/BP was seen in patients achieving less than or equal to 10% BCR-ABL (dasatinib 3%: 6 of 198 patients; imatinib 2.6%: 4 of 
      154 patients) compared with patients who had >10% BCR-ABL levels at 3 months (dasatinib 13%: 5 of 37 patients; imatinib 13%: 11 of 85 patients) during this three year
      follow-up.[1]

Continued Tolerability at 3 Years

The overall three-year data also showed that the safety profile for dasatinib continues to be generally well-tolerated. Specifically, the data show:

    - Minimal changes in the tolerability profile at three years and with a similar pattern of adverse events as previously observed[1]
    - Rates of grade 3/4 non-hematologic AEs at 3 years in both arms remained low (0-3%)[1]
    - By the third year of treatment, 11% of patients discontinued dasatinib and 6% discontinued imatinib due to intolerance[5]

Efficacy and safety Results in the European Subpopulation

Results of an exploratory analysis of the European subpopulation (defined as patients treated in the European Union) of DASISION were also presented at the 17th Congress of the European Hematology Association. This analysis demonstrated that the efficacy and safety profile of dasatinib in the European population (170 out of 519 included in DASISION) appeared comparable to that seen in the total study population. The exploratory data for the EU subgroup show:

    - Rates of MMR (65% for dasatinib and 56% for imatinib by 3 years)[5]
    - Level of transformation; no patients treated with dasatinib vs 3 patients on imatinib had transformation of CP-CML to AP/BP at or by 3 years [5]
    - Tolerability generally consistent with previously reported at 3 years for entire population[5]

For full information on SPRYCEL (dasatinib) please refer to SmPC at http://www.ema.europa.eu.

About the DASISION Trial

The DASISION trial is a pivotal Phase 3, randomised open-label study looking at the efficacy and safety of dasatinib versus imatinibin newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve CP-CML patients. Patients were randomised to receive treatment with dasatinib 100 mg once-daily (n=259) or imatinib 400 mg once-daily (n=260).[6] Dasatinib was superior to imatinib for the primary endpoint of the study, confirmed complete cytogenetic response (cCCyR) by 12 months (77% vs 66%; p=0.007).[6] Given the established relationship between achieving CCyR by 12 months and improved survival rates, longer follow-up may demonstrate that dasatinib improves long-term outcomes.[6] Three-year data is now available. Patients will be followed for a planned 5 years.

About SPRYCEL(R)

Discovered and developed by Bristol-Myers Squibb, dasatinib was initially approved by the FDA and the European Commission in 2006 as a treatment for adults for all phases of Ph+ CML (chronic, accelerated, or myeloid or lymphoid blast phase) with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib and Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) intolerant or resistant to prior therapy. In the U.S., dasatinib received accelerated FDA approval for this indication. Since then, dasatinib has been approved for this indication in more than 60 countries worldwide.

In 2010, dasatinib 100 mg once daily was approved by the FDA and European Commission for the treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML in chronic phase. In the U.S., dasatinib received accelerated FDA approval for this indication. The effectiveness of dasatinib is based on cytogenetic response and major molecular response rates. Now, more than 50 countries have approved dasatinib for this indication.

About Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

CML is a slow-growing type of leukaemia in which the body produces an uncontrolled number of abnormal white blood cells.[7] CML accounts for 15% of all leukaemias.[8] The incidence is estimated at 1-2 cases per 100,000.[9]

CML occurs when pieces of two different chromosomes (9 and 22) break off and attach to each other. The new chromosome is called the Philadelphia chromosome, which contains an abnormal gene called BCR-ABL that signals cells to make too many white blood cells. There is no known cause for the genetic change that causes CML.

Response to treatment can be measured either by Complete Cytogenetic Response (CCYR) or Major Molecular Response (MMR). CCYR is the absence of Philadelphia+ chromosomes in a Cytogenetic Testing made from a bone marrow aspiration. MMR is a 3-log reduction of BCR-ABL compared to a standardized baseline sample usually measured in peripheral blood.

About Bristol-Myers Squibb

Bristol-Myers Squibb is a global biopharmaceutical company whose mission is to discover, develop and deliver innovative medicines that help patients prevail over seriousdiseases.

About Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Founded in 1964, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. is a global healthcare company with the corporate philosophy: ‘Otsuka-people creating new products for better health worldwide.’ Otsuka researches, develops, manufactures and markets innovative and original products, with a focus on pharmaceutical products for the treatment of diseases and consumer products for the maintenance of everyday health.

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Otsuka Holdings Co., Ltd., the holding company for the Otsuka Group. The Otsuka Group has business operations in 23 countries and regions around the world.

Visit Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. at http://www.otsuka.co.jp/en.

References:

1. Hochhaus A, et al. Molecular response kinetics and BCR-ABL reductions in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) receiving dasatinib vs imatinib: DASISION 3-year follow-up. To be presented at: 17th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA); June 14-17, 2012; Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

2 Hanfstein B, et al. Early molecular and cytogenetic response is predictive for long-term progression-free and overall survival in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Leukemia accepted article preview 26 March 2012; doi: 10.1038/leu.2012.85.

3. Marin D, et al. Assessment of BCR-ABL1 transcript levels at 3 months is the only requirement for predicting outcome for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:232-8.

4. Jabbour E, et al. An exploratory analysis from 3-year DASISION follow-up examining the impact on patient outcomes of early complete cytogenetic response at 3 months and major molecular response at 12 months. To be presented at: 17th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA); June 14-17, 2012; Amsterdam, The Netherlands

5. Mayer J, et al. Efficacy and safety of dasatinib vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP): European subpopulation analysis of the phase 3 DASISION trial. To be presented at: 17th Congress of the European Hematology Association (EHA); June 14-17, 2012; Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

6. Kantarjian H et al. Dasatinib versus imatinib in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2010; 362:2260-2270.

7. Macmillan Cancer Support. Leukaemia Overview.

Available at: http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Cancerinformation/Cancertypes/Leukaemia/Leukaemiaoverview.aspx . Last accessed April 2012.

8. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia – Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology – v.1.2007.

9. Baccarani, M. and Dreyling, M. Annals of Oncology. 2010;21:165-167.

A reply from Sir Andrew Dillon

1 Comment

I simply had to write today to let you know about the reply I have received from Sir Andrew Dillon by way of Janet Fahie from the Enquiry Handling Team. I’ve scanned the letter in below but I will bring to your attention this:

In this case Dasatinib and high-dose imatinib did not provide enough benefit to patients to justify their high cost, so NICE did not recommend them.”

I have to ask exactly what benefits NICE are looking for from Dasatinib? This is a drug that is saving lives and allowing people, like me to live normal healthy existences. These aren’t in isolated incidences, all over the world, every day lives are being saved by Dasatinib. In the UK we are in danger of relying on old drug therapy. At a recent conference I attended Dr Jorge Cortes stated that he had not used imatinib since 2001 because there were more effective treatments to use. Jorge Cortes, MD, is deputy chair and professor of medicine in the Department of Leukemia at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston Texas where he directs the CML Program.

It is estimated that 1 in 5 patients will benefit from dasatinib treatment yet NICE once again insist on their gold standard of research which, as we know, is impossible to conduct on such a rare disease.

I will be writing back to Sir Andrew with these points and I’d urge you to do the same.

Sir Andrew Dillon CML reply

All my best wishes,

Kris

ACTION – Letters to NICE and BMS

Leave a comment

Further to my post this evening I think we have to register our incredulity with BMS and NICE for these terrible decisions. These decisions will cost lives and I’m really not sure they realise the implications they will have on human lives, our lives. Let’s put faces to these lives.

Can I ask you to write 2 letters. The first to Sir Andrew Dillon who is the Chief Executive of NICE:

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
MidCity Place
71 High Holborn
London WC1V 6NA

Perhaps telling him YOUR story and how important FULL access to these life changing drugs are. It may be worth asking him in terms of his “cost effectiveness” just how much is a human life worth. Finally you could ask him how he feels to be in charge of an organisation that is restricting access, to what is effectively, a cure for cancer. Today it’s CML but with usage and research it could be lung, brain, colon, any type of cancer. Just how will history judge such a decision? Why are we restricting access to life saving treatment. To ensure a balanced argument it is important that you mention that you will write to BMS about their reluctance to offer a Patient Access Scheme (PAS).

I have cut and pasted the first part of the responsibility statement of BMS by Lamberto Andreotti, where their declared ambition is to, “strive to do the right thing for the benefit of the patients.”  My question is how can this be the case when they are denying patients access to treatment by stubbornly refusing to offer patient access scheme to CML patient in the UK in the face of recalcitrance of NICE.

Béatrice Cazala has control over what happens to BMS products in Europe, we should ask her to explain this contradiction in their stance to patients in the UK and the declared responsibility message (below).  Patients need access to dasatinib, and this reluctance to negotiate is helping no one.

Béatrice Cazala
Executive Vice President
Commercial Operations
Bristol-Myers Squibb Corporate Headquarters
345 Park Avenue
New York
New York 10154
USA

Responsibility Message from Lamberto Andreotti, Chief Executive Officer At Bristol-Myers Squibb: “We are firmly focused on our Mission to discover, develop and deliver innovative medicines that help patients prevail over serious diseases. In addition, we are steadfast in our Commitment to economic, social and environmental sustainability.

Integrity is the foundation from which we operate. As a BioPharma leader, we take our responsibilities seriously, and always strive to do the right thing for the benefit of the patients we serve around the world, our company, our employees, our shareholders and our communities.”

If you need help in writing a letter please contact me but I do urge you to write. It is important our voices are heard. Further to this I think our battle continues with the Cancer Drug Fund (CDF) and ensuring it meets the needs of patients accessing ALL CML drugs.

Thank you.

 

Dasatinib: not good news!

Leave a comment

This has been cut and pasted from the NICE website:

“In final draft guidance, NICE has recommended nilotinib (Tasigna) and imatinib (Glivec), both made by Novartis, for the first line treatment of CML (chronic myeloid leukaemia). Dasatinib (Sprycel), made by Bristol-Myers Squibb is not recommended.

This appraisal incorporates a partial review of previous guidance published in October 2003 where standard dose (400mg) imatinib was recommended for treating first-line CML (technology appraisal guidance 70).

In response to the draft guidance NICE Chief Executive, Sir Andrew Dillon said: “The draft recommendations reaffirm the use of imatinib as an effective treatment for the majority of patients and a cost-effective use of NHS resources and we are also very pleased to be able to add a further treatment option for these patients, by recommending nilotinib.

“Although no trials directly comparing dasatinib and nilotinib were available, the committee concluded from indirect comparisons that dasatinib and nilotinib could be considered equally as effective in treating CML. However, the Department of Health and the manufacturer of nilotinib have already agreed to provide the drug to the NHS at a discounted price. This reduction in cost enabled the independent Committee to approve nilotinib for use on the NHS.”

The size of the discount remains confidential.

The draft guidance is now with consultees, who have the opportunity to appeal against it. Until NICE issues final guidance, NHS bodies should make decisions locally on the funding of specific treatments. This draft guidance does not mean that people currently taking dasatinib will stop receiving it. They have the option to continue treatment until they and their clinicians consider it appropriate to stop.”

This decision will not affect anybody currently taking dasatinib, they will be able to get their prescription filled for as long as the will need it, but it will no longer be available to newly diagnosed patients.

As expected, because BMS did not offer the DoH a patient access scheme, dasatinib has been refused positive guidance.  It was found by NICE to be not cost-effective, and therefore will not be reimbursed by the NHS, effectively making it unavailable for use in UK hospitals, unless you can get it funded via the Cancer Drug Fund (CDF).  However, even if this is the case, the CDF is due to be terminated in 2014, when a Value Based Pricing policy will come into force.  Whether this will also act retrospectively remains to be seen.