From the Journals

New cancer drugs may have saved more than 1.2 million Americans


 

FROM JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS

Other factors at play

Multiple factors have led to the declines in mortality, said William G. Cance, MD, chief medical and scientific officer for the ACS, who was not involved in this study. “We are slowly sorting out the explanations in greater granularity.”

Dr. MacEwan said improved cancer screening may partially explain the decline in mortality in some tumor types.

“If screening in a particular tumor type improved during the study period and tumors were diagnosed earlier, then mortality for that tumor type may decline,” she said. “However, we did not find strong evidence to suggest that there were significant changes in screening during our study period. Breast cancer screening rates, for example, were stable over our study period.”

Cancer screening is not as strong an influence as it should be, Dr. Cance said.

“The lung cancer screening rate is low. In breast and colorectal cancers, we need to double down on earlier screening,” he said, noting that less than one-quarter of adults between ages 45 and 50 years are currently screened for colorectal cancer. The ACS recommends that people at average risk of colorectal cancer start regular screening at age 45.

More research is necessary to evaluate the relationship between drug approvals and cancer mortality, Dr. MacEwan said.

“Research directly linking utilization of new therapies to improved survival or reduced mortality in the real-world setting would more definitively demonstrate the impact of new treatments,” she said. “New therapies have improved outcomes for many patients and should continue to be considered as key elements of cancer treatment.”

“We need to continue to reduce tobacco smoking and improve on modifiable behaviors at the same time as we work on getting new drugs to cancer patients,” Dr. Cance said. “We are coming into an era of multiple new therapeutics, including targeted therapies, immunotherapies, and cellular therapies. Clinicians need to look closely at the trial data of new drugs and pay close attention to those that have the most mortality impact.”

“We also need equitable distribution of newer drugs,” Dr. Cance added. “They should be distributed to everybody who deserves them. Mortality is often impacted by social determinants of health.”

Funding for this research was provided by Pfizer. Study authors disclosed relationships, including employment, with Pfizer. Dr. Cance had no disclosures.

SOURCE: MacEwan JP et al. J Med Econ. 2020 Nov 9;1-12.

Pages

Recommended Reading

OK to treat many cancer patients despite pandemic, says ESMO
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
ASCO says ‘no’ to home infusions of cancer treatment, with exceptions
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Study: Immune checkpoint inhibitors don’t increase risk of death in cancer patients with COVID-19
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Artificial intelligence matches cancer genotypes to patient phenotypes
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Immunotherapy should not be withheld because of sex, age, or PS
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
The march of immunotherapy continues at ESMO 2020
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
Cancer disparities: One of the most pressing public health issues
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
The scope of under- and overtreatment in older adults with cancer
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
New estimates for breast cancer risk with HRT
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management
‘Test all patients with cancer’: One in eight have inherited mutations
Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management