Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Approvals in 2016: questioning the clinical benefit of anticancer therapies

Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology volume 14, pages 135–136 (2017)Cite this article

Subjects

Patients with cancer expect to derive a meaningful clinical benefit from anticancer treatments, especially considering that such therapies are associated with adverse events and, often, substantial financial costs. We have evaluated new anticancer agents approved by the FDA in 2015 and 2016 using the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale and ASCO Value Framework, and conclude that many agents only offer marginal value.

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Saltz, L. B. Progress in cancer care: the hope, the hype, and the gap between reality and perception. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 5020–5021 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Booth, C. M. & Eisenhauer, E. A. Progression-free survival: meaningful or simply measurable? J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 1030–1033 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Booth, C. M. & Tannock, I. Reflections on medical oncology: 25 years of clinical trials — where have we come and where are we going? J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 6–8 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Booth, C. M. et al. Evolution of the randomized controlled trial in oncology over three decades. J. Clin. Oncol. 26, 5458–5464 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Seruga, B. et al. Absolute benefits of medical therapies in phase III clinical trials for breast and colorectal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 21, 1411–1418 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Cherny, N. I. et al. A standardised, generic, validated approach to stratify the magnitude of clinical benefit that can be anticipated from anti-cancer therapies: the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Ann. Oncol. 26, 1547–1573 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schnipper, L. E. et al. Updating the American Society of Clinical Oncology value framework: revisions and reflections in response to comments received. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 2925–2934 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Del Paggio, J. C. et al. Do contemporary randomized controlled trials meet ESMO thresholds for meaningful clinical benefit? Ann. Oncol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdw538 (2016).

  9. Tap, W. D. et al. Olaratumab and doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone for treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma: an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial. Lancet 388, 488–497 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Schlumberger, M. et al. Lenvatinib versus placebo in radioiodine-refractory thyroid cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 621–630 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Truven Health Analytics. RED BOOK: a comprehensive, consistent drug pricing resource. Micromedex http://micromedex.com/products/product-suites/clinical-knowledge/redbook (2017).

Download references

Acknowledgements

C.M.B. is supported as the Canada Research Chair in Population Cancer Care.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Oncology and Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, University Avenue, Kingston, K7L 3N6, Ontario, Canada

    Christopher M. Booth

  2. Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of Toronto, King's College Circus, Toronto, M5S, Ontario, Canada

    Joseph C. Del Paggio

Authors
  1. Christopher M. Booth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph C. Del Paggio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher M. Booth.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information S1 (table)

Clinical benefit of anticancer agents approved by the FDA in 2015–2016 (PDF 228 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Booth, C., Del Paggio, J. Approvals in 2016: questioning the clinical benefit of anticancer therapies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14, 135–136 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.18

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.18

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research