Second-line outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer-raising the bar for the high jump rather than the doing the limbo

Anne Mary Noonan, Tanios Bekaii-Saab

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Metastatic colorectal cancer is a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. While outcomes have improved in the past 20 years, gains in survival in the second-line setting have been achieved at a significant monetary cost. The American Society of Clinical Oncology recently published guidelines on the definition of a clinically meaningful outcome as the measure of success of a therapy. We reviewed the FDA labels for drugs used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and found that outcomes fell short of American Society of Clinical Oncology's definition of clinically meaningful. There was also variation in the methods used to determine cost-effectiveness and value of outcomes. We discuss these observations and the challenges associated with justifying payment for expensive drugs that often only achieve marginal benefits.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)133-143
Number of pages11
JournalExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Volume15
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Colorectal Neoplasms
Medical Oncology
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Guidelines
Delivery of Health Care
Costs and Cost Analysis
Survival
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • colorectal cancer
  • cost-effectiveness
  • meaningful outcomes
  • second-line
  • value

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

@article{66eff00ee0ec4548971b55b9336f453a,
title = "Second-line outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer-raising the bar for the high jump rather than the doing the limbo",
abstract = "Metastatic colorectal cancer is a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. While outcomes have improved in the past 20 years, gains in survival in the second-line setting have been achieved at a significant monetary cost. The American Society of Clinical Oncology recently published guidelines on the definition of a clinically meaningful outcome as the measure of success of a therapy. We reviewed the FDA labels for drugs used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and found that outcomes fell short of American Society of Clinical Oncology's definition of clinically meaningful. There was also variation in the methods used to determine cost-effectiveness and value of outcomes. We discuss these observations and the challenges associated with justifying payment for expensive drugs that often only achieve marginal benefits.",
keywords = "colorectal cancer, cost-effectiveness, meaningful outcomes, second-line, value",
author = "Noonan, {Anne Mary} and Tanios Bekaii-Saab",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1586/14737167.2015.972376",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "15",
pages = "133--143",
journal = "Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research",
issn = "1473-7167",
publisher = "Expert Reviews Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Second-line outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer-raising the bar for the high jump rather than the doing the limbo

AU - Noonan, Anne Mary

AU - Bekaii-Saab, Tanios

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Metastatic colorectal cancer is a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. While outcomes have improved in the past 20 years, gains in survival in the second-line setting have been achieved at a significant monetary cost. The American Society of Clinical Oncology recently published guidelines on the definition of a clinically meaningful outcome as the measure of success of a therapy. We reviewed the FDA labels for drugs used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and found that outcomes fell short of American Society of Clinical Oncology's definition of clinically meaningful. There was also variation in the methods used to determine cost-effectiveness and value of outcomes. We discuss these observations and the challenges associated with justifying payment for expensive drugs that often only achieve marginal benefits.

AB - Metastatic colorectal cancer is a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. While outcomes have improved in the past 20 years, gains in survival in the second-line setting have been achieved at a significant monetary cost. The American Society of Clinical Oncology recently published guidelines on the definition of a clinically meaningful outcome as the measure of success of a therapy. We reviewed the FDA labels for drugs used in the second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and found that outcomes fell short of American Society of Clinical Oncology's definition of clinically meaningful. There was also variation in the methods used to determine cost-effectiveness and value of outcomes. We discuss these observations and the challenges associated with justifying payment for expensive drugs that often only achieve marginal benefits.

KW - colorectal cancer

KW - cost-effectiveness

KW - meaningful outcomes

KW - second-line

KW - value

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937002582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937002582&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1586/14737167.2015.972376

DO - 10.1586/14737167.2015.972376

M3 - Review article

VL - 15

SP - 133

EP - 143

JO - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

JF - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

SN - 1473-7167

IS - 1

ER -