Introduction: The cancer incidence continues to rise worldwide. Medical innovation has a major impact on patient survival, but within drug development, it can take more than 10 years to obtain marketing authorisation (MA). The time required for access to therapeutic innovation remains critical, so France has developed a specific expanded access program named ATU, which allows the administration of drugs before the European Medicines Agency (EMA) approval. The purpose of this study is to put in perspective the average time to access antineoplastic drugs worldwide, taking into account ATU, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and EMA approvals. Methods: The ATU system allows the use of a medicine before its MA, under exceptional conditions. All antineoplastic drugs in oncology that have benefited from the ATU system are analysed in terms of tumour site, biomarkers and number of patients who have access to the drug. Results: Between 1st January 2007 and 31st December 2019, 36 of 64 drugs (56.2%) that received MA in oncology were assigned an ATU, to the benefit of 16,927 patients. Thanks

Decisions on market authorization (MA) and reimbursement have different durations across countries because of health technology assessment (HTA) procedures and negotiations between manufacturers and national authorities. To overcome this delay, France has implemented a Temporary Authorization for Use (ATU) program that allows early access to drugs before MA, in order to treat patients with unmet medical needs. The objectives of our study were to establish the added therapeutic benefit (ATB) of ATUs for solid tumors and to investigate the correlations between three tools evaluating ATB and survival outcomes and drug costs. Data on ATUs granted from January 2009 to December 2019 to treat solid tumors were analyzed. An assessment of their ATB was conducted using the American Society of Clinical Oncology‐Value Framework (ASCO‐VF), the European Society for Medical Oncology‐Magnitude Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO‐MCBS) and the French HTA criterion, clinical added value (CAV). The latter score determines reimbursement and national market access. Thirty‐five drugs in 39 indications were granted ATUs. All of them obtained MA and derived a clinical benefit to be reimbursed by the Social Security. Twenty‐eight (71.8%) had CAV compared to preexisting therapies. 24/38 (63.2%) had a 4‐5 ESMO‐MCBS score and 19/33 (57.6%) had an ASCO‐VF score over 45. No correlations were found between cost, PFS, OS, CAV and ASCO‐VF score, while high ESMO‐MCBS scores were correlated to OS. In conclusion, many patients were treated with innovations before MA thanks to ATU, although there are discrepancies between ATB scales, hence the importance of international collaboration in the evaluation of innovative therapies.

No abstract

No abstract