ICER Report Concludes Comparative Value of PARP Inhibitors is Lacking

ICER Report Concludes Comparative Value of PARP Inhibitors is Lacking
The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), an independent body that assesses the value of drugs newly approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, confirmed that evidence is lacking for comparisons of outcomes using poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors to treat women with ovarian cancer. At the same time, ICER recommended lowering prices to increase affordability and patient access. Part of ICER’s Final Evidence Report summarized a public meeting of the Midwest Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council (Midwest CEPAC). The independent council voted on the evidence presented in ICER’s report. Particular attention was paid to the effectiveness and value of PARP inhibitors in treating women receiving maintenance therapy for recurrent disease that had responded to a platinum-based chemotherapy, and women with a breast cancer (BRCA) gene mutation treated for recurrent disease. The council voted that Tesaro’s Zejula (niraparib) has shown evidence of greater net health benefit in both populations of patients, and AstraZeneca’s Lynparza (olaparib) in women taking it as a maintenance therapy. But no consensus existed on the net benefit of Lynparza or Clovis Oncology's Rubraca (rucaparib) in patients with recurrent disease. The council voted on important added benefits of PARP inhibitors. With input from patient re
Subscribe or to access all post and page content.