anticancer medicines

抗癌药物
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:国家药品价格谈判(NDPN)政策已进入正常化阶段,旨在缓解,在某种程度上,癌症患者所经历的疾病相关和经济负担。这项研究分析了中国东北一线城市癌症患者中抗癌药物的使用和随后的负担。
    方法:我们使用实际药物部署情况的数据评估了64种协商的抗癌药物的使用情况,医疗保险索赔的频率和实际用药费用。使用灾难性健康支出(CHE)发生率和发生强度来衡量这些药物的可负担性。最后,我们使用定义的每日剂量(DDDs)和定义的每日剂量成本(DDDc)作为指标来评估这些药物在该地区的实际使用情况.
    结果:在研究期间,64种药物中有63种是现成的。从药物使用的角度来看,从2018年到2021年,协商的抗癌药物和药物费用的医疗保险索赔频率呈增长趋势。癌症患者通常在三级医院寻求治疗,并在社区药房购买药物。城镇职工基本医疗保险(UEBMI)所覆盖的患者的总体用药数量和费用是城乡居民医疗保险(URRMI)所覆盖的患者的五倍。肺癌和乳腺癌患者的医疗保险索赔和药物费用的频率最高。此外,从2018年到2021年,在城市患者支付能力水平下,CHE发病率呈下降趋势(2.85-1.60%),但在农村患者支付能力水平下呈上升趋势(11.94%-18.42)。城市(0.55-1.26倍)和农村(1.27-1.74倍)患者的平均发生强度呈上升趋势。从药物利用的角度来看,谈判的抗癌药物的整体DDD呈增长趋势,DDDc呈下降趋势。
    结论:这项研究表明,城市癌症患者获得药物的情况有所改善。然而,患者的医疗行为受到医院级别和医疗保险类型等因素的影响。在未来,中国健康保险管理部门应进一步改进工作,促进医疗资源分配的公平性,并加强对国家健康保险基金的监管。
    BACKGROUND: The National Drug Price Negotiation (NDPN) policy has entered a normalisation stage, aiming to alleviate, to some extent, the disease-related and economic burdens experienced by cancer patients. This study analysed the use and subsequent burden of anticancer medicines among cancer patients in a first-tier city in northeast China.
    METHODS: We assessed the usage of 64 negotiated anticancer medicines using the data on the actual drug deployment situation, the frequency of medical insurance claims and actual medication costs. The affordability of these medicines was measured using the catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) incidence and intensity of occurrence. Finally, we used the defined daily doses (DDDs) and defined daily doses cost (DDDc) as indicators to evaluate the actual use of these medicines in the region.
    RESULTS: During the study period, 63 of the 64 medicines were readily available. From the perspective of drug usage, the frequency of medical insurance claims for negotiated anticancer medicines and medication costs showed an increasing trend from 2018 to 2021. Cancer patients typically sought medical treatment at tertiary hospitals and purchased medicines at community pharmacies. The overall quantity and cost of medications for patients covered by the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI) were five times higher than those covered by the Urban and Rural Resident Medical Insurance (URRMI). The frequency of medical insurance claims and medication costs were highest for lung and breast cancer patients. Furthermore, from 2018 to 2021, CHE incidence showed a decreasing trend (2.85-1.60%) under urban patients\' payment capability level, but an increasing trend (11.94%-18.42) under rural patients\' payment capability level. The average occurrence intensities for urban (0.55-1.26 times) and rural (1.27-1.74 times) patients showed an increasing trend. From the perspective of drug utilisation, the overall DDD of negotiated anticancer medicines showed an increasing trend, while the DDDc exhibited a decreasing trend.
    CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that access to drugs for urban cancer patients has improved. However, patients\' medical behaviours are affected by some factors such as hospital level and type of medical insurance. In the future, the Chinese Department of Health Insurance Management should further improve its work in promoting the fairness of medical resource distribution and strengthen its supervision of the nation\'s health insurance funds.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:新抗癌药物的报销时间(TTR)在不同国家之间存在差异,并导致不平等的获得。我们旨在调查新的抗癌药物的TTR,并探讨影响七个高收入欧洲国家报销过程的因素。
    方法:我们从2016年到2021年对具有欧盟市场准入(EU-MA)和人用医药产品委员会的积极意见的抗癌药物进行了回顾性案例研究,并随后获得了国家报销批准(NRA)。德国国家卫生技术评估(HTA)和报销网站,法国,英国,荷兰,比利时,挪威和瑞士被用来识别TTR,定义为从EU-MA到NRA的时间。此外,我们调查了药物-,country-,潜在影响TTR的指标和药物相关因素。
    结果:确定了35种药物,其TTR范围为-81天至2320天(中位数为407天)。在数据截止时,16(46%)在所有七个国家得到了报销。总的来说,最短的TTR在德国(中位数为3天,所有药品报销<5天)。在满足EU-MA(欧盟透明度指令)后,欧洲共同体理事会规定的180天的时间限制,德国100%的包含药品,51%在法国29%在英国和荷兰,14%在瑞士,挪威为6%,比利时为3%。不同国家的TTR差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。在多变量分析中,与较短的TTR相关的因素是较高的国内生产总值(GDP),缺乏预评估程序和大型制药公司的提交。
    结论:七个高收入欧洲国家之间的抗癌药物的TTR差异很大,导致了获取不平等。在探索的药物中-,country-,与指标和制药相关的因素,我们发现高GDP,缺乏预评估程序和大型制药公司提交的报告与较短的TTR有关.
    Time to reimbursement (TTR) of new anticancer medicines differs between countries and contributes to unequal access. We aimed to investigate TTR of new anticancer medicines and explore factors influencing the reimbursement process in seven high-income European countries.
    We carried out a retrospective case study of anticancer medicines with European Union Market Access (EU-MA) and a positive Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use opinion from 2016 until 2021 with subsequent national reimbursement approval (NRA). The National Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and reimbursement websites of Germany, France, UK, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway and Switzerland were used to identify TTR, defined as time from EU-MA to NRA. Additionally, we investigated medication-, country-, indication- and pharma-related factors potentially influencing TTR.
    Thirty-five medicines were identified for which TTR ranged from -81 days to 2320 days (median 407 days). At data cut-off, 16 (46%) were reimbursed in all seven countries. Overall, the shortest TTR was in Germany (median 3 days, all medicines reimbursed <5 days). The time limit for reimbursement of 180 days stated by the Council of European Communities after the EU-MA (EU Transparency Directive) was met for 100% of included medicines in Germany, 51% in France, 29% in the UK and the Netherlands, 14% in Switzerland, 6% in Norway and 3% in Belgium. The TTR was significantly different between countries (P < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with shorter TTR were higher gross domestic product (GDP), absence of a pre-assessment procedure and submission by a big pharmaceutical company.
    TTR of anticancer medicines varies significantly between seven high-income European countries and leads to inequality in access. Among explored medication-, country-, indication- and pharma-related factors we found that a high GDP, the absence of a pre-assessment procedure and submission by big pharmaceutical companies were associated with shorter TTR.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    氟喹诺酮类药物的研究已有半个多世纪。自1960年代以来,这些合成抗生素已经创造了四代,并成功地引入临床实践。然而,由于化学修饰的可能性很大,它们仍然对药物化学感兴趣,随后对初始分子的药代动力学和药效学进行了有用的改变。这篇综述通过将不同的杂环部分引入核心系统的3位来总结氟喹诺酮类药物杂交的化学和药理学结果。它分析了从氟喹诺酮羧基形成杂环的合成程序和方法,并揭示了此类程序的最便捷方法。Further,提供了获得的杂合药效团系统的生物活性研究结果。后者揭示了许多有前途的分子,可以进一步研究以克服对抗生素的耐药性问题,寻找新的抗癌剂和更多。
    Fluoroquinolones have been studied for more than half a century. Since the 1960s, four generations of these synthetic antibiotics have been created and successfully introduced into clinical practice. However, they are still of interest for medicinal chemistry due to the wide possibilities for chemical modification, with subsequent useful changes in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the initial molecules. This review summarizes the chemical and pharmacological results of fluoroquinolones hybridization by introducing different heterocyclic moieties into position 3 of the core system. It analyses the synthetic procedures and approaches to the formation of heterocycles from the fluoroquinolone carboxyl group and reveals the most convenient ways for such procedures. Further, the results of biological activity investigations for the obtained hybrid pharmacophore systems are presented. The latter revealed numerous promising molecules that can be further studied to overcome the problem of resistance to antibiotics, to find novel anticancer agents and more.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:癌症是世界上仅次于心血管疾病的第二大死亡原因。本研究旨在调查患有三种常见乳腺癌之一的患者对化疗药物的负担能力和身体获取情况。胃,和马什哈德市的冒号,伊朗,2021年。
    方法:这是一项描述性横断面研究。对20家药店进行了评估,其中包括马什哈德的两家公共药店和18家私人药店。通过在药店或药房的持续逗留收集数据。对于每种肿瘤药物,售价,最低一般价格,和可用性进行了调查。在这项研究中,已经尝试了三种方法来计算抗癌药物的可负担性。
    结果:在来自公共和私人药店的28种研究药物中,15(53.5%)收到非常低,8(28.5%)相对较高,和2(7%)高访问分数。通用多西他赛品牌的超药物和曲妥珠单抗(AryoTrust)是最可用的药物,但是阿霉素(Ebewe),奥沙利铂(Mylan),曲妥珠单抗(赫赛汀)不适用于癌症患者。此外,第一种方法(基于收入十分位数)表明,来自所有收入十分位数的参保患者都能够支付DCF药物方案中价格最低的药物的费用,如果病人有保险,属于第九收入十分位数,他们有经济能力以FLO药物方案的最低价格购买药物.
    结论:癌症药物的负担不足会导致放弃治疗并增加获得医疗保健服务的不平等。因此,这需要政策制定者立即注意规划,以确保降低患者的药物成本并增加患者获得抗癌药物的机会。
    OBJECTIVE: Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the world after cardiovascular disease. The present study aimed to investigate the affordability and physical access to chemotherapy drugs among patients with one of the three common cancers of the breast, stomach, and colon in the city of Mashhad, Iran, in 2021.
    METHODS: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study. Twenty drug stores including two public and 18 privates in Mashhad were evaluated. Data was collected by consistent stay in the drug stores or pharmacies. For each oncology medicine, selling price, lowest general price, and availability were investigated. Three approaches have been experimented to calculate the affordability of anticancer medicines in this study.
    RESULTS: Out of 28 studied medicines from public and private drug stores, 15 (53.5%) received very low, 8 (28.5%) relatively high, and 2 (7%) high access scores. The generic docetaxel brand\'s ultra-drug and trastuzumab (AryoTrust) were the most available drugs, but the doxorubicin (Ebewe), oxaliplatin (Mylan), and trastuzumab (Herceptin) were not available to the individuals with cancer. Also, the first approach (based on income decile) indicated that insured patients from all income deciles were able to pay the costs of the lowest price drugs of the DCF drug regimen, and if the patients were insured and belonged to the ninth income decile, they had the financial ability to buy drugs at the lowest price of the FLO drug regimen.
    CONCLUSIONS: Unaffordability of cancer medicines can lead to treatment abandonment and increase inequality in access to healthcare services. Therefore, this requires immediate attention of policy makers to be planned in order to ensure to reducing the costs of medicines for patients and increasing patient access to anticancer medicines.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在欧洲,儿童可以使用抗癌药物的延迟令人震惊。在获得欧盟儿科营销授权后,国家卫生技术评估(HTA)机构评估有效性,和药物的安全性,以支持其成本和报销的决定。这项研究(SIOPE获得药物项目)旨在评估这些HTA评估如何对欧洲儿科使用的抗癌药物进行评估,并探讨市场准入延误的根源。
    我们从公共领域获得了9个欧洲国家blinatumomab的HTA报告,丁妥昔单抗β和tisagenlecleucel。我们评估了儿科适应症的上市许可与国家HTA决定之间经过的时间以及决定的性质。
    在23项HTA决定中(四个国家没有blinatumomab报告),18是积极的,两个有限制,三负。对于Blinatumomab来说,tisagenlecleucel和dinutuximabβ,在儿科使用获得监管部门批准后,HTA决定的中位时间为353天(范围193-751),141天(范围77-517)和515天(范围0-780),分别,国家之间的差异。Dinutuximabβ和tisagenlecleucel首先在儿童中引入,但并没有导致HTA决定的时间更短。对于Blinatumomab来说,在成人适应症后1008天,HTA申请提交的中位数为167天后,和145天后的建议。
    这项研究揭示了9个欧盟国家的HTA决策存在很大差异。需要协作和调整所需的证据,以促进强有力的科学HTA评估,还考虑了儿科肿瘤学的方法学挑战。
    There is an alarming delay in Europe for anticancer medicines becoming accessible for children. Following a paediatric European Union marketing authorisation, national Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies evaluate effectiveness, and safety of medicines to support decision on their cost and reimbursement. This study (a SIOPE Access to Medicines project) aimed to evaluate how these HTA evaluations take place for anticancer medicines indicated for paediatric use in Europe and to explore where the delays for market access originate.
    We obtained HTA reports from the public domain for nine European countries for blinatumomab, dinutuximab beta and tisagenlecleucel. We evaluated the time elapsed between marketing authorisation for a paediatric indication and a national HTA decision and the nature of the decision.
    Out of 23 HTA decisions (four countries without blinatumomab report), 18 were positive, two with restrictions, three negative. For blinatumomab, tisagenlecleucel and dinutuximab beta, the median time to an HTA decision after regulatory approval for paediatric use was 353 days (range 193-751), 141 days (range 77-517) and 515 days (range 0-780), respectively, with variability between countries. Dinutuximab beta and tisagenlecleucel were first introduced in children, but did not result in shorter time to HTA decision. For blinatumomab, marketing authorisation followed 1008 days after the indication in adults, with HTA applications submitted a median of 167 days later, and a recommendation after 145 days.
    This study reveals ample variability in HTA decision making in nine European Union countries. Collaboration and alignment of required evidence is needed to facilitate robust scientific HTA assessments, also considering methodological challenges in paediatric oncology.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    随着癌症发病率的增加,在中国,难以获得负担得起的抗癌药物一直是一个严重的公共卫生问题。为了帮助解决这个问题,我们评估了可用性,江苏省公立医院癌症药物治疗的价格和承受能力,中国。
    在2012年和2016年,收集了首都和其他五个城市的抗癌药物供应和价格信息。共有六家癌症护理医院,对26家三级综合医院和28家二级综合医院进行了抽样,使用世界卫生组织/国际卫生行动方法的改编。在调查时收集库存的抗癌药物的数据。价格以通胀调整后的单位价格中位数(MUP)表示。如果所有处方抗癌药的总费用低于家庭支付能力的20%,药物是可以负担得起的。我们使用广义估计方程来估计2012年至2016年可用性差异的显着性,并使用Wilcoxon秩检验来估计MUP差异的显着性。计算多变量逻辑回归来衡量可负担性的预测因子。
    从2012年到2016年,原创品牌(OBs)的平均可用性显着下降(从7.79%降至5.71%,p=0.012)和价格最低的仿制药(LPG)(36.29%至32.67%,p=0.009)。二级综合医院抗癌药物的平均可获得性明显低于癌症护理,以及三级综合医院。OBs的MUP(差异:-21.29%,p<0.01)及其LPG(-22.63%,p<0.01)从2012年到2016年显著下降。发现所有抗癌药物的OB(16.67%)比LPG便宜(城市居民为34.62%,农村居民为30.77%);不同收入地区的负担能力不同。从2012年到2016年,城市地区的低可用性和低承受能力的LPG比例从30.77%下降到19.23%,农村地区的34.62%下降到26.92%,分别。通用替代和基本医疗保险涵盖的药物是促进负担能力的因素。
    2016年抗癌药物的可获得性与2012年的低可获得性相比有所下降。高收入地区的患者比低收入地区的患者更负担得起抗癌药物。各国政府应考虑利用其议价能力降低采购价格并取消抗癌药税。政策应侧重于针对低收入癌症患者的特殊健康保险计划。药物政策的目标应确保一线仿制药可用于癌症患者并优先处方。
    With the increasing incidence of cancer, poor access to affordable anticancer medicines has been a serious public health problem in China. To help address this issue, we assessed the availability, price and affordability of pharmacotherapy for cancer in public hospitals in the Jiangsu Province, China.
    In 2012 and 2016, anticancer medicine availability and price information in the capital and five other cities was collected. A total of six cancer care hospitals, 26 tertiary general hospitals and 28 secondary general hospitals were sampled, using an adaptation of the World Health Organization/Health Action International methodology. Data was collected for the anticancer medicines in stock at the time of the surveys. Prices were expressed as inflation-adjusted median unit prices (MUPs). Medicine was affordable if the overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines was less than 20% of the household\'s capacity to pay. We used generalized estimating equations to estimate the significance of differences in availability from 2012 to 2016 and the Wilcoxon rank test to estimate the significance of differences in MUPs. Multivariate logistic regression was computed to measure predictors of affordability.
    From 2012 to 2016 there was a significant decrease in the mean availability of originator brands (OBs) (from 7.79% to 5.71%, p = 0.012) and lowest-priced generics (LPGs) (36.29% to 32.67%, p = 0.009). The mean availability of anticancer medicines in secondary general hospitals was significantly lower than the cancer care, as well as in tertiary general hospitals. The MUPs of OBs (difference: -21.29%, p < 0.01) and their LPGs (-22.63%, p < 0.01) decreased significantly from 2012 to 2016. The OBs (16.67%) of all the anticancer medicines were found to be less affordable than LPGs (34.62% for urban residents and 30.77% for rural residents); their affordability varied among the different income regions. From 2012 to 2016, the proportion of LPGs with low availability and low affordability dropped from 30.77% to 19.23% in urban areas and 34.62% to 26.92% in rural areas, respectively. Generic substitution and medicine covered by basic medical insurance are factors facilitating affordability.
    There were concerning decreases in the availability of anticancer medicines in 2016 from already low availability in 2012. Anticancer medicines were more affordable for the patients in high-income regions than the patients in low-income regions. Governments should consider using their bargaining power to reduce procurement prices and abolish taxes on anticancer medicines. Policy should focus on the special health insurance plan for low-income patients with cancer. The goal of drug policy should ensure that first-line generic drugs are available for cancer patients and preferentially prescribed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Prime focus of this study was to evaluate the availability and affordability of originator brands (OBs) and lowest price generics (LPGs) of prescribed biologic and non-biologic anticancer medicines.
    A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 22 cancer-care hospitals (18 public hospitals and 4 private hospitals) and 44 private pharmacies in Punjab, Pakistan. Sampling population consisted of 4483 patients with cancer aged ≥18 years. The availability was determined by classifying anticancer medicines in four categories: absent/unavailability (medicines not present in any surveyed facility), low availability (medicines present in <50% of surveyed facilities), fairly high availability (medicines present in 50%-74% of surveyed facilities) and high availability (medicines present in >75% of surveyed facilities). Medicines were affordable if overall cost of all the prescribed anticancer medicines were 20% of the household capacity to pay. Data were analysed by using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, V.21.0).
    A total of 5060 patients with cancer were approached out of which 4483 patients were included in the survey. Overall, 10 103 anticancer drugs were prescribed. Among them, 96.3% were non-biologics and 3.7% were biologics. Oncologists were reluctant to prescribe biologics due to high prices. 58.1% of non-biologics were affordable; whereas, the affordability of biologics was 3.3%. A total of 43.9% of both biologic and non-biologic OBs were available; whereas, their affordability was 44.2%. On the other hand, the availability of LPGs was 21.3%, and their affordability was 66.1%. For low-income patients, the affordability of non-biologics was 31.6% and the affordability of biologics was 1.1%.
    Most of the patients with cancer were prescribed non-biologics due to their low price and better affordability. In contrast to OBs, LPGs of both biologics and non-biologics had less availability but more affordability.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    抗癌药物的可获得性和可负担性是一个非常令人关注的问题,特别是对于低收入和中等收入国家,例如,巴基斯坦。这项研究的主要重点是评估公共和私营部门的抗癌药物的可用性,以及不同收入水平患者的承受能力。
    描述性的,在旁遮普省的22家癌症护理医院(18家公立医院和04家私立医院)和44家私立药房进行了横断面调查,巴基斯坦。所有(n=4400)参与者年龄≥18岁。数据以不同的间隔收集,并使用社会科学统计软件包(IBMSPSSStatisticsforWindows,版本21.0。Armonk,纽约:IBM公司)结果:共接触4913例患者,4400人对调查做出了回应(回应率=89.6%)。非霍奇金淋巴瘤(12.3%),乳腺癌(8.6%),白血病(7.6%)是最常见的癌症。常规药物如顺铂,环磷酰胺,依托泊苷是处方最多的药物。由于价格高昂,肿瘤学家不愿开出新的抗癌药物。发起人品牌(OB)更容易获得(52.5%),但价格较低(53.4%);然而,价格最低的仿制药(LPG)较少(28.1%),但价格更实惠(67.9%)。高收入阶层患者比低收入阶层患者更容易负担抗癌药物。
    与公立医院相比,私立医院和药店的OB和LPG的可用性更高。高收入阶层对OB和LPG的负担能力更高;然而,LPG对所有收入阶层都更实惠。
    Availability and affordability of anticancer medicines is a matter of great concern especially for low and middle income countries e.g., Pakistan. Prime focus of this study was to evaluate the availability of anticancer medicines in public and private sectors, and their affordability among patients with different income levels.
    A descriptive, cross-sectional survey was conducted in 22 cancer care hospitals (18 public hospitals and 04 private hospitals) and 44 private pharmacies in Punjab, Pakistan. All (n = 4400) participants were ≥18 years of age. Data were collected at different intervals and analyzed by using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.) RESULTS: A total of 4913 patients were approached, and 4400 responded to the survey (response rate = 89.6%). Non-hodgkin lymphoma (12.3%), breast cancer (8.6%), and leukemia (7.6%) were the most prevailing cancers. Conventional medicines like cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide were the most prescribed medicines. Oncologists were reluctant to prescribe newer anticancer medicines due to high prices. Originator brands (OBs) were more readily available (52.5%) but less affordable (53.4%); whereas, lowest price generics (LPGs) were less available (28.1%) but more affordable (67.9%). Anticancer medicines were more affordable by the high income class patients than the low income class patients.
    The availability of both OBs and LPGs was greater at private hospitals and pharmacies as compared to public hospitals. The high income class had more affordability of both OBs and LPGs; however, LPGs were more affordable for all income classes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    疗效缺失是临床阶段药物开发失败的主要原因,这可能会引发疑问,在其他方面,将非临床数据转化为人类。此处介绍的工作的目的是(i)概述(基于公共评估报告)在上市授权申请阶段向监管机构提交的非临床疗效相关研究的性质。一组已批准的抗癌人类药物(共15种),以及(ii)就任何已发现的不足以及与当前监管非临床指南的一致性对此类研究进行回顾性分析。每种药物都经过了多项体外试验和动物试验,which,一起,被判断为能够提供有关活性物质活性的信息并证明抗肿瘤作用,以及与现有的基本一致,虽然细节有限,指导。尽管如此,确定了一些方面,这些方面可能会对将非临床数据翻译成人类产生潜在影响,即,在动物模型/人类桥接数据/知识和体内药代动力学/药效学关系数据方面存在明显不足。
    The lack of efficacy is a major cause of medicine\'s development failure at the clinical phase, which may lead to question, among other aspects, the translation of the non-clinical data into humans. The objectives of the work here presented were (i) to get an overview (based on public assessment reports) of the nature of the non-clinical efficacy-related studies presented to the regulatory authorities at the marketing authorization application\'s stage for a group of approved anticancer human medicines (15 in total) and (ii) to conduct a retrospective analysis of such studies in terms of any identified insufficiencies and consistency with the current regulatory non-clinical guidelines. Each medicine has been tested in a number of in vitro assays and animal studies, which, all together, are judged to be capable of providing information on the activity of the active substance and demonstrating an anti-tumour effect, as well as to be generally consistent with the available, although limited detailed, guidance. In spite of this, some aspects were identified which could have a potential impact on the translation on non-clinical data into humans, namely, apparent insufficiencies in terms of animal model/human bridging data/knowledge and in vivo data on pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics relationships.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:安全的可用性和可负担性,有效,高品质,负担得起的抗癌疗法是有效的国家癌症控制计划的核心要求。
    方法:基于先前验证方法的在线调查。该研究的目的是评估(i)全球许可的抗肿瘤药物的国家处方集的可用性,(ii)患者自付药物费用,(iii)具有有效处方的患者的药物的实际可用性,(iv)与可能对抗肿瘤剂的供应产生不利影响的因素有关的信息,以及(v)国家经济发展水平对这些参数的影响。来自97个国家的304名实地记者应邀参加。初步数据集发布在ESMO网站上,供公开同行审查,修正案已纳入最终报告。
    结果:调查由来自63个国家的135名记者提交,其他同行评审数据由来自19个国家的54名记者提交。处方集可用性存在重大差异,许多抗癌药物的自付费用和实际可用性。最严重的问题是中低收入国家。即使在世卫组织基本药物标准清单(EML)上的药物中,差异也很大,这与高自付费用有关(在中低收入国家,32.0%的EML药物仅全额提供,而5.2%根本没有。对于低收入国家来说,相应的数字甚至更糟,分别为57.7%和8.3%,分别)。
    结论:处方集的可用性存在很大的全球差异,大多数获得许可的抗癌药物的自付费用和实际可用性。低收入和中低收入国家严重缺乏世卫组织EML癌症药物的可获得性和高自费支出,新的可用性要少得多,与高收入国家相比,目标代理商更昂贵。
    BACKGROUND: The availability and affordability of safe, effective, high-quality, affordable anticancer therapies are a core requirement for effective national cancer control plans.
    METHODS: Online survey based on a previously validated approach. The aims of the study were to evaluate (i) the availability on national formulary of licensed antineoplastic medicines across the globe, (ii) patient out-of-pocket costs for the medications, (iii) the actual availability of the medication for a patient with a valid prescription, (iv) information relating to possible factors adversely impacting the availability of antineoplastic agents and (v) the impact of the country\'s level of economic development on these parameters. A total of 304 field reporters from 97 countries were invited to participate. The preliminary set of data was posted on the ESMO website for open peer review and amendments have been incorporated into the final report.
    RESULTS: Surveys were submitted by 135 reporters from 63 countries and additional peer-review data were submitted by 54 reporters from 19 countries. There are substantial differences in the formulary availability, out-of-pocket costs and actual availability for many anticancer medicines. The most substantial issues are in lower-middle- and low-income countries. Even among medications on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines (EML) the discrepancies are profound and these relate to high out-of-pocket costs (in low-middle-income countries 32.0% of EML medicines are available only at full cost and 5.2% are not available at all, and for low-income countries, the corresponding figures are even worse at 57.7% and 8.3%, respectively).
    CONCLUSIONS: There is wide global variation in formulary availability, out-of-pocket expenditures and actual availability for most licensed anticancer medicines. Low- and low-middle-income countries have significant lack of availability and high out-of-pocket expenditures for cancer medicines on the WHO EML, with much less availability of new, more expensive targeted agents compared with high-income countries.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号