Huey, Ryan

Although innovation in cancer treatment has improved cure rates and survival, the costs have escalated beyond societies' ability to pay. Cancer care costs in the United States are expected to rise to 245 billion by 2030. In this health policy session, we focused on three cost-containment strategies, and their potential impact on cancer care delivery. Site Neutrality: Curbing the Cost of Cancer Care, but at What Risk? , explores legislation that would introduce payment parity across differing sites of care: elimination of facility fees in hospital owned practices and shift of billing for oncology infusions away from hospital owned practices. Unintended consequences could reduce access to care for vulnerable populations, shift costs to patients, and reduce safety. Post-Pandemic Digital Health Reimbursement: Impact on Access to Care , explores how the emergency waivers, licensure flexibilities, and parity reimbursement necessitated by COVID-19 shepherded innovation that outpaced the regulatory framework needed for long-term sustainability. Today, telehealth services, hospital at home, remote patient monitoring, and decentralized clinical trial enrollment face reintroduction of regulatory and payment barriers. Will we live to see efficacy-based pricing for cancer drugs? Learning from international models , explores how lack of drug price negotiation has led to higher prices in the United States compared with Canada and Europe. Comparative clinical effectiveness pricing systems compare the value of each drug to standard treatments. Comparative cost-effectiveness programs look at the incremental cost per additional unit of health gained above the standard of care. The United States could learn from these approaches used in comparable countries.

e16479 Background: Recent genomic data has demonstrated SBA to be a molecularly unique entity when compared to colon or gastric cancers. The ongoing SWOG 1922 randomized clinical trial is comparing FOLFIRI to ramucirumab/paclitaxel as the second-line treatment for metastatic SBA. We sought to further define the activity of taxane-based therapy in the largest collection of SBA patients treated with this therapy. Methods: A retrospective review of SBA patients treated with taxane-based chemotherapy from 1994 to 2024 at MD Anderson Cancer Center was performed. All patients had pathologic confirmation, received > 1 cycle of therapy, and had documented tumor response evaluation. Response was assessed by the treating physician based on the imaging studies and categorized as response, stable disease or progression. Patient demographics, clinical parameters, molecular data, and taxane treatment was reviewed. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to calculate time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS). Results: 70 SBA patients treated with taxane-based therapy were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range 33-80 years), majority being male (59%) with primary tumor located at duodenum (44%), Jejunum (34%), Ileum (16%). The most common presenting metastatic site was peritoneum (39%), followed by liver (31%). The genomic status revealed mutations in the following genes: 62% TP53, 47% KRAS, 24% SMAD4, and 15% APC. Taxane treatment was single agent (nab-paclitaxel, paclitaxel, or docetaxel) in 29%, gemcitabine and taxane combination in 61% and other taxane-based combinations in 10%. Therapy was given in the metastatic setting as 2nd-line in 40%, 3rd-line in 33% and 4th-line or greater in 20%. Response status was response in 24%, stable disease in 26%, and progression in 50%. Median TTP was 3.1 months (95%CI: 2.0-4.2 months), and median OS was 8.7 months (95%CI: 7.4-10.1 months). Median TTP was similar between single agent (2.6 months) and gemcitabine-based combination (2.5 months) (p =0.75). Efficacy did not differ by line of therapy nor primary tumor site. Efficacy differed by TP53 mutation status: TP53 mutated vs wildtype (response 21% vs 43%, p = 0.02; median TTP 2.4m vs 4.9m, p = 0.013; median OS 7.3m vs 10.6m, p = 0.004). Conclusions: This retrospective study of 70 SBA patients confirms the activity of taxane-based therapy demonstrating a response rate of 24% and median TTP of 3.1 months. Though limited by sample size, TP53 mutations may represent a negative predictive marker for taxane-based therapy in SBA patients. These findings support the ongoing SWOG 1922 trial investigating taxane-based therapy as a second line for metastatic SBA.