Clinical benefit, reimbursement outcomes, and prices of FDA-approved cancer drugs reviewed through Project Orbis in the USA, Canada, England, and Scotland: a retrospective, comparative analysis
- PMID: 39004098
- DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00286-9
Clinical benefit, reimbursement outcomes, and prices of FDA-approved cancer drugs reviewed through Project Orbis in the USA, Canada, England, and Scotland: a retrospective, comparative analysis
Abstract
Background: Project Orbis is a global initiative that aims to streamline regulatory review processes across international regulators in the USA, Canada, Australia, UK, Israel, Brazil, Singapore, and Switzerland to bring promising cancer drugs to patients earlier. We explored the clinical benefit, time to regulatory approval and health technology assessment recommendations, reimbursement outcomes, and monthly treatment prices of cancer drugs reviewed through this initiative.
Methods: For this retrospective, comparative analysis, we identified cancer drug approvals reviewed through Project Orbis in the USA, Canada, and the UK between May 1, 2019, and Nov 1, 2023. Approvals of cancer drugs reviewed Project Orbis were extracted from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Oncology Centre of Excellence and all other FDA approvals from the Drugs@FDA database. The co-primary outcomes were time of regulatory review, time from regulatory approval to health technology assessment recommendation (England, Scotland, and Canada), reimbursement outcomes, clinical benefit (defined as median gains in progression-free survival and overall survival) between cancer drug approvals reviewed by Project Orbis and other FDA approval processes, and monthly treatment prices. The Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's Exact tests were used to examine statistical significance between approvals reviewed through Project Orbis and other FDA approvals during the same period.
Findings: Between May 1, 2019 and Nov 1, 2023, 81 (33%) of 244 cancer drugs approved by the FDA were reviewed through Project Orbis. The median overall survival gains were 4·1 months (IQR 3·3-5·1) compared with 2·7 months (2·1-3·9) for other FDA approvals. Similarly, progression-free survival gains were 2·6 months (IQR 1·7-4·9) for Project Orbis compared with 2·6 months (0·6-5·1) for other FDA approvals. Neither overall survival (p=0·11) nor progression-free survival (p=0·44) gains were significantly different between the two cohorts of approvals. Of the 14 UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) approvals reviewed by the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), the agency gave positive recommendations for all 14 (100%). Of the 15 MHRA approvals reviewed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the agency gave positive recommendations for six (40%). Of the 49 approvals reviewed by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH), the agency conditionally recommended 44 (90%). The time between regulatory approval to NICE recommendation increased from a median of 137 days (IQR 102-172) in 2021 to 302 days (184-483) in 2023, SMC recommendation increased from 185 days (in 2021 for one drug only) to 368 days (IQR 313-476) in 2023, and CADTH decision increased from 97 days (in 2020 for one drug only) to 202 days (IQR 153-304) in 2023. The median monthly price of approvals reviewed through Project Orbis was US$20 000 per month (IQR 13 000-37 000).
Interpretation: Clinical outcomes of Project Orbis were no different than other FDA approvals during the same time, and access, after a successful health technology assessment, was considerably delayed or absent, raising questions about whether Project Orbis participation translates into faster patient access to medicines with high clinical benefit and sustainable costs. Although future challenges might benefit from regulatory harmonisation, the advantages are currently unclear.
Funding: None.
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of interests VP receives research funding from Arnold Ventures through a grant made to the University of California San Francisco, royalties for books and writing from Johns Hopkins Press, MedPage, and the Free Press; declares consultancy roles with UnitedHealthcare and OptumRX; hosts the podcasts Plenary Session, VPZD, and Sensible Medicine; writes the newsletters for Sensible Medicine, the Drug Development Letter, and V's Observations and Thoughts; and runs the YouTube channel Vinay Prasad MD MPH, which collectively earns revenue on the platforms: Patreon, YouTube, and Substack. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Similar articles
-
Association Between the Use of Surrogate Measures in Pivotal Trials and Health Technology Assessment Decisions: A Retrospective Analysis of NICE and CADTH Reviews of Cancer Drugs.Value Health. 2020 Mar;23(3):319-327. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.10.010. Epub 2020 Jan 13. Value Health. 2020. PMID: 32197727
-
Effect of Project Orbis participation by the Swiss regulator on submission gaps, review times, and drug approval decisions between 2020 and 2022: a comparative analysis.Lancet Oncol. 2024 Jun;25(6):770-778. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00158-X. Epub 2024 May 13. Lancet Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38754450
-
New Cancer Drug Approvals From the Perspective of a Universal Healthcare System: Analyses of the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review Recommendations.J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018 Dec;16(12):1460-1466. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2018.7084. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018. PMID: 30545993
-
Comparative Expedited Regulatory Programs of U.S Food & Drug Administration and Project Orbis Partners.Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2023 Jul;57(4):875-885. doi: 10.1007/s43441-023-00522-4. Epub 2023 Apr 18. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2023. PMID: 37072651 Review.
-
Impact of Regulatory Approval Status on CADTH Reimbursement of Oncology Drugs and Role of Real-World Evidence on Conditional Approvals from 2019 to 2021.Curr Oncol. 2022 Oct 26;29(11):8031-8042. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29110635. Curr Oncol. 2022. PMID: 36354695 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Access in all areas? A round up of developments in market access and HTA: part 5.J Comp Eff Res. 2024 Nov;13(11):e240179. doi: 10.57264/cer-2024-0179. Epub 2024 Oct 1. J Comp Eff Res. 2024. PMID: 39351904 Free PMC article.
-
Current landscape of innovative drug development and regulatory support in China.Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2025 Jul 22;10(1):220. doi: 10.1038/s41392-025-02267-y. Signal Transduct Target Ther. 2025. PMID: 40691459 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Molecular Tumor Board-Guided Targeted Treatments for Biliary Tract Cancers in a Publicly Funded Healthcare System.Curr Oncol. 2025 Jan 31;32(2):80. doi: 10.3390/curroncol32020080. Curr Oncol. 2025. PMID: 39996880 Free PMC article.