Dataset Information

The early economic evaluation of novel biomarkers to accelerate their translation into clinical applications.

ABSTRACT: Translating prognostic and diagnostic biomarker candidates into clinical applications takes time, is very costly, and many candidates fail. It is therefore crucial to be able to select those biomarker candidates that have the highest chance of successfully being adopted in the clinic. This requires an early estimate of the potential clinical impact and commercial value. In this paper, we aim to demonstratively evaluate a set of novel biomarkers in terms of clinical impact and commercial value, using occurrence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type-2 diabetes (DM2) patients as a case study.We defined a clinical application for the novel biomarkers, and subsequently used data from a large cohort study in The Netherlands in a modeling exercise to assess the potential clinical impact and headroom for the biomarkers.The most likely application of the biomarkers would be to identify DM2 patients with a low CVD risk and subsequently withhold statin treatment. As a result, one additional CVD event in every 75 patients may be expected. The expected downstream savings resulted in a headroom for a point-of-care device ranging from €119.09 at a willingness to accept of €0 for one additional CVD event, to €0 at a willingness to accept of €15,614 or more.It is feasible to evaluate novel biomarkers on outcomes directly relevant to technological development and clinical adoption. Importantly, this may be attained at the same point in time and using the same data as used for the evaluation of association with disease and predictive power.

SUBMITTER: de Graaf G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6006586 | biostudies-other | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The early economic evaluation of novel biomarkers to accelerate their translation into clinical applications.

de Graaf Gimon G Postmus Douwe D Westerink Jan J Buskens Erik E

Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E 20180618

<h4>Background</h4>Translating prognostic and diagnostic biomarker candidates into clinical applications takes time, is very costly, and many candidates fail. It is therefore crucial to be able to select those biomarker candidates that have the highest chance of successfully being adopted in the clinic. This requires an early estimate of the potential clinical impact and commercial value. In this paper, we aim to demonstratively evaluate a set of novel biomarkers in terms of clinical impact and ...[more]

PMID: 29946228

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeWe describe the clinical pharmacology characterization of giredestrant in a first-in-human study.Experimental designThis phase Ia/Ib dose-escalation/-expansion study (NCT03332797) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary antitumor activity of giredestrant in estrogen receptor-positive HER2-negative locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer. The single-agent dose-escalation stage evaluated giredestrant 10, 30, 90, or 250 mg once daily. The dose-expansion stage evaluated single-agent giredestrant at 30, 100, and 250 mg once daily. Dose-escalation and -expansion phases also evaluated giredestrant 100 mg combined with palbociclib 125 mg.ResultsFollowing single-dose oral administration, giredestrant was rapidly absorbed and generally showed a dose-proportional increase in exposure at doses ranging from 10 to 250 mg. At the 30 mg clinical dose, maximum plasma concentration was 266 ng/mL (50.1%) and area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours at steady state was 4,320 ng·hour/mL (59.4%). Minimal giredestrant concentrations were detected in urine, indicating that renal excretion is unlikely to be a major elimination route for giredestrant. Mean concentration of 4beta-hydroxycholesterol showed no apparent increase over time at both the clinical dose (30 mg) and a supratherapeutic dose (90 mg), suggesting that giredestrant may have low CYP3A induction potential in humans. No clinically relevant drug-drug interaction was observed between giredestrant and palbociclib. Giredestrant exposure was not affected by food and was generally consistent between White and Asian patients.ConclusionsThis study illustrates how the integration of clinical pharmacology considerations into early-phase clinical trials can inform the design of pivotal studies and accelerate oncology drug development.SignificanceThis work illustrates how comprehensive clinical pharmacology characterization can be integrated into first-in-human studies in oncology. It also demonstrates the value of understanding clinical pharmacology attributes to inform eligibility, concomitant medications, and combination dosing and to directly influence late-stage trial design and accelerate development.

Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this study was to construct an early economic evaluation for acalabrutinib for relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) to assist early reimbursement decision making. Scenarios were assessed to find the relative impact of critical parameters on incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).MethodsA partitioned survival model was constructed comparing acalabrutinib and ibrutinib from a UK national health service perspective. This model included states for progression-free survival (PFS), post-progression survival (PPS) and death. PFS and overall survival (OS) were parametrically extrapolated from ibrutinib publications and a preliminary hazard ratio based on phase I/II data was applied for acalabrutinib. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, and 1296 scenarios were assessed.ResultsThe base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £61,941/QALY, with 3.44 incremental QALYs and incremental costs of £213,339. Deterministic sensitivity analysis indicated that survival estimates, utilities and treatment costs of ibrutinib and acalabrutinib and resource use during PFS have the greatest influence on the ICER. Probabilistic results under different development scenarios indicated that greater efficacy of acalabrutinib would decrease the likelihood of cost effectiveness (from 63% at no effect to 2% at maximum efficacy). Scenario analyses showed that a reduction in PFS did not lead to great QALY differences (- 8 to - 14% incremental QALYs) although it did greatly affect costs (- 47 to - 122% incremental pounds). For OS, the opposite was true (- 89 to - 93% QALYs and - 7 to - 39% pounds).ConclusionsAcalabrutinib is not likely to be cost effective compared with ibrutinib under current development scenarios. The conflicting effects of OS, PFS, drug costs and utility during PFS show that determining the cost effectiveness of acalabrutinib without insight into all parameters complicates health technology assessment decision making. Early assessment of the cost effectiveness of new products can support development choices and reimbursement processes through effective early dialogues between stakeholders.

Dataset Information

The early economic evaluation of novel biomarkers to accelerate their translation into clinical applications.

Publications

The early economic evaluation of novel biomarkers to accelerate their translation into clinical applications.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets