Francis C Dehle, Kevin Phan, Jerome Higgins, Kate Applegarth, Manoj Gambhir, Colman B Taylor
{"title":"澳大利亚报销当局评估派姆单抗的长期总生存期与外推总生存期的比较","authors":"Francis C Dehle, Kevin Phan, Jerome Higgins, Kate Applegarth, Manoj Gambhir, Colman B Taylor","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2478234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decisions about government funding for new medicines often rely on statistical models to predict how long patients will live (overall survival, OS) based on early trial data. This study compared the accuracy of these predictions for the cancer drug pembrolizumab, using models preferred by pharmaceutical companies (Sponsors) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), compared to real-world long-term follow-up (LTFU) data.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We reviewed publicly available PBAC summary documents (PSDs) for all funding decisions on pembrolizumab up to November 2022. We included cases with at least three years of follow-up data and where at least 350 patients per year would be treated. We then compared survival predictions from PBAC and Sponsor models to actual survival data at two time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total over 38 PSDs covering 15 indications, five met our criteria. Sponsor-preferred models underestimated real survival by 0.54% to 16.45%, while PBAC-preferred models underestimated survival by 1.20% to 24.21%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results demonstrate that OS extrapolation methods used by both the Sponsor and PBAC tend to underestimate long-term survival outcomes for pembrolizumab indications, with PBAC-preferred methods being more conservative.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the accuracy of extrapolated overall survival for pembrolizumab: a comparison with long-term observed data in the Australian reimbursement context.\",\"authors\":\"Francis C Dehle, Kevin Phan, Jerome Higgins, Kate Applegarth, Manoj Gambhir, Colman B Taylor\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2025.2478234\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Decisions about government funding for new medicines often rely on statistical models to predict how long patients will live (overall survival, OS) based on early trial data. This study compared the accuracy of these predictions for the cancer drug pembrolizumab, using models preferred by pharmaceutical companies (Sponsors) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), compared to real-world long-term follow-up (LTFU) data.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>We reviewed publicly available PBAC summary documents (PSDs) for all funding decisions on pembrolizumab up to November 2022. We included cases with at least three years of follow-up data and where at least 350 patients per year would be treated. We then compared survival predictions from PBAC and Sponsor models to actual survival data at two time points.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total over 38 PSDs covering 15 indications, five met our criteria. Sponsor-preferred models underestimated real survival by 0.54% to 16.45%, while PBAC-preferred models underestimated survival by 1.20% to 24.21%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results demonstrate that OS extrapolation methods used by both the Sponsor and PBAC tend to underestimate long-term survival outcomes for pembrolizumab indications, with PBAC-preferred methods being more conservative.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2478234\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2478234","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluating the accuracy of extrapolated overall survival for pembrolizumab: a comparison with long-term observed data in the Australian reimbursement context.
Background: Decisions about government funding for new medicines often rely on statistical models to predict how long patients will live (overall survival, OS) based on early trial data. This study compared the accuracy of these predictions for the cancer drug pembrolizumab, using models preferred by pharmaceutical companies (Sponsors) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC), compared to real-world long-term follow-up (LTFU) data.
Research design and methods: We reviewed publicly available PBAC summary documents (PSDs) for all funding decisions on pembrolizumab up to November 2022. We included cases with at least three years of follow-up data and where at least 350 patients per year would be treated. We then compared survival predictions from PBAC and Sponsor models to actual survival data at two time points.
Results: A total over 38 PSDs covering 15 indications, five met our criteria. Sponsor-preferred models underestimated real survival by 0.54% to 16.45%, while PBAC-preferred models underestimated survival by 1.20% to 24.21%.
Conclusion: Results demonstrate that OS extrapolation methods used by both the Sponsor and PBAC tend to underestimate long-term survival outcomes for pembrolizumab indications, with PBAC-preferred methods being more conservative.
期刊介绍:
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review.
The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections:
Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results
Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.