Comparison of Access to Novel Drugs for Lymphoma and Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Between India and the United States.

INTRODUCTION

Blood cancers are a significant public health problem worldwide and a leading cause of death in the United States and India. According to GLOBOCAN 2018, the annual incidence of lymphoma is 82,548 in the United States and 37,225 in India. 1 The annual incidence of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was 50,149 in the United States and 42,055 in India. 2 Over the past 5 years, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved 24 new indications in lymphoma and 11 in CLL ( Table 1 ). 3 Most clinical trials for these novel drugs are conducted in the United States, and the drugs are available for use soon after, but only in the United States. The approval process for new drugs in India is managed by the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation and generally lags behind approval in the United States by at least 2 years. 4 In addition, a decade can elapse before generics and biosimilars reach clinical practice. Our study aims to increase understanding of the similarities and differences regarding cancer care delivery, accessibility, cost, and the potential impact on survival for patients in the United States and India with the advent of these novel drugs for lymphoma and CLL.

CONTEXT

Key Objective Blood cancers are a leading health problem in the United States and India. We compare the cost of and access to novel drugs for treating chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and lymphoma between the United States and India during the last 5 years. Knowledge Generated Delivery of cancer care in the United States is different from that in India. In the United States, around 90% of the population has health insurance. In India, a majority of the population pays for medical expenses out of pocket. The cost of drug development is high, and most novel drugs are initially developed and marketed in the United States, but it takes several years before the drugs become available in India. The development of biosimilars has increased access to and affordability of biologics for the treatment of CLL and lymphoma in India. Relevance The development of biosimilars has increased access to and affordability of biologics for the treatment of CLL and lymphoma in India. The overall outcome and quality of life is rather similar in the two countries with the advent of biosimilars and generics. Future strategies to ensure universal access include expanding the availability of biosimilars, capping drug prices, expanding insurance coverage, and constructing a hub-and-spoke rural outreach model to make novel drugs accessible to all patients.

DELIVERY OF CANCER CARE

The cancer care delivery systems in the United States and India illustrate the differences between health care in a developed and in a developing nation. The United States spends 17.8% of its gross domestic product on health care and often is the first country to adopt new therapies. 5 Most novel drugs recently approved for treating cancer are priced at more than $100,000 per year and are thus affordable only with health insurance. 6 - 9 Approximately 90% of the US population is covered by health insurance. 10 In addition, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (2010) has expanded insurance coverage to include cancer care. 11 Individuals with lymphoma who live in rural areas and those who are uninsured have inferior outcomes probably because they have less access to cancer care. 12 - 16

Cancer care delivery in India is the opposite. India spends around 3.89% of its gross domestic product on health care. 17 The low patient:oncologist ratio in India (1:2,000) adds to the increasing demands of cancer care. 18 Most people pay out of pocket for medical expenses, and only a minority have health insurance. 19 , 20 A substantial portion of the population lives in rural areas with little or no awareness of what health care options are available, and they have limited resources to pay for specialized health care. We have not captured comparisons between countries in terms of rural accessibility. The regional cancer centers in India provide health care at a subsidized rate only to a limited population. 21 The National Cancer Grid is a recent initiative by the Government of India under the Ayushman Bharat-Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana, which extends annual financial support up to $7,000 for patients with cancer. 22

DRUG PRICING IN THE UNITED STATES

The average cost of new drug development is approximately $100 million, and the projected cost for a successful approval is approximately $1 billion, so the prices for marketed drugs are higher. Generic medicines and the biosimilars that enter the system later can help to reduce the cost of the drugs for the consumer. 23 , 24 The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act (Hatch-Waxman Act, 1984) has led to accelerated methods for approving generic drugs. 25 However, in some cases, prices for cancer drugs are kept high by pharmaceutical company lobbying, which can also potentially delay the entry of generics into the market. 26 The benchmark for drug reimbursement is set by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Effective January 1, 2017, payment for infusion drugs is based on Section 1847A of the Social Security Act and implies that most of the payments will be based on the average sales price of these drugs. 27 - 29 Accordingly, Medicare pays 106% of the average sales price for most drugs covered under Part B.

BIOSIMILARS AND GENERICS

Once the patents for the innovative drug expire after a stipulated period, a window of opportunity opens for producing a similar product called a biosimilar at a much lower cost without compromising efficacy. 30 To date, the number of these agents that receive approval in the United States has been limited. Relevant agents include the pegfilgrastim biosimilars and the two biosimilars of rituximab. 31 , 32 Because of a thriving pharmaceutical industry, the generics and biosimilars are more affordable in India. The first biosimilar in India was approved in 2007, and it reached a market value of $2.2 billion in 2017. 33 Table 2 lists cost information for drugs in the United States and India for standard therapies for lymphomas and CLL. The costs appear to be different because of the method used to convert local currencies into US dollars. The World Bank classifies India as a low- and middle-income country. Although the current prices for drugs have been converted by using foreign exchange rates, the prices can be different if the conversion uses purchasing power parity. 34 To illustrate, there are 70.84 Indian rupees to 1 US dollar using foreign exchange rates, but only 18.128 rupees to 1 US dollar using purchasing power parity.

NOVEL DRUGS FOR LYMPHOMA AND CLL

Several novel drugs have shown promising results and have improved patient outcome in CLL and lymphoma. This section describes the FDA approvals and access to novel drugs in the United States and India during the last 5 years. Table 1 summarizes the new drug approvals and Table 2 provides an average cost of these agents in the United States and India.

Antibodies

Rituximab.

Rituximab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody approved in the United States for treating B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. It is also approved for use in untreated and relapsed CLL, as an induction and maintenance therapy in follicular lymphoma (FL), and in combination with ibrutinib for Waldenström macroglobulinemia. 35 , 36 Recent approvals include rituximab combined with lenalidomide for treating relapsed FL and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) and rituximab combined with venetoclax for treating relapsed CLL. 3 Truxima (rituximab-abbs) and Ruxience (rituximab-pvvr) are rituximab biosimilars recently approved by the FDA in the United States that cost less than rituximab. 31 , 32

The use of anti-CD20 antibody in India is quite similar to the way it is used in the United States. The innovative drug rituximab has been available since the early 2000s at a higher price; when the biosimilar Reditux became available in 2007, the price dropped and the drug was made available across the country. 37 , 38 In a retrospective study of 173 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), overall response rate (ORR), toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were similar between Reditux and rituximab. 39 The pharmacokinetic and toxicity profiles in 21 patients who received Reditux (biosimilar) were found to be comparable to those of patients receiving rituximab. 40 With an effective patient assistance program, the access to rituximab biosimilars has improved in India. The subcutaneous formulation of rituximab, which was approved for treating FL, is not available in India. 41 , 42

Obinutuzumab.

The fully humanized anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab was initially approved for treating relapsed CLL in 2013 and was subsequently approved as part of induction followed by maintenance in untreated advanced FL on the basis of results from the Gallium trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT013322968 ). Patients were randomly assigned to obinutuzumab plus chlorambucil chemotherapy or rituximab plus chlorambucil followed by obinutuzumab or rituximab maintenance in responders. The estimated 3-year PFS rate was 80.0% versus 73.3% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; P = .001) favoring the obinutuzumab arm. Adverse events (AEs) of grade 3 or higher were seen more often in the obinutuzumab group (74.6% v 67.8%). 43 Other additional indications included ibrutinib-obinutuzumab and venetoclax-obinutuzmab for untreated CLL. 44 , 45 Obinutuzumab is currently manufactured and marketed by Genentech in the United States. In India, it is used sparingly used because of its high cost.

Ofatumumab.

This second-generation CD20 antibody 46 was initially available in India but was withdrawn from commercial use in 2018. 47

Mogamulizumab-kpkc.

Mogamulizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against the chemokine receptor CCR-4 and was approved for adult patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) mycosis fungoides or Sezary syndrome. In the phase III MAVORIC trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01728805 ), patients on the mogamulizumab arm had a median PFS of 7.7 months versus 3.1 months for those on the vorinostat arm (HR, 0.53; P < .001); 41% had grade 3 or 4 AEs. 48 This drug is currently not available in India.

Nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

Nivolumab is currently FDA approved for adult patients with R/R classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) with previous autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). In 95 patients with relapsed cHL after ASCT and brentuximab vedotin, nivolumab produced a 65% ORR, and the median duration of response was 8.7 months. Serious AEs were reported in 21% of patients. 49 Pembrolizumab is approved for treating refractory cHL and was recently granted accelerated approval for treating refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma. The KEYNOTE-170 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02576990 ) was a multicentre, single-arm trial in 53 patients with R/R primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma and had an ORR of 45%. Although 61% had AEs, they were mostly grade 1 to 2 and were manageable. 50 , 51 Nivolumab and pembrolizumab are available in India and are accessible to patients at an average cost of approximately $1,420 (100 mg) and $6,010 (200 mg), respectively. 52 - 54

Antibody-Drug Conjugates

Polatuzumab vedotin.

The FDA recently approved the novel CD79b-directed antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin in combination with bendamustine and rituximab for adult patients with refractory DLBCL who had disease progression after 2 lines of chemotherapy. In a multicenter clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02257567 ) of 80 patients with relapsed DLBCL, the complete response (CR) rates and the ORR was higher with the polatuzumab vedotin plus benadmustine and rituximab as compared to the control arm of bendmustine plus rituximab (40% vs 18%; 63% vs 25% respectively). The combination had higher grade 3 to 4 cytopenias. 55 Currently, polatuzumab is unavailable in India. 56

Brentuximab vedotin.

Brentuximab vedotin was initially approved in 2011 for patients with relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma whose disease had progressed after ASCT or after 2 previous chemotherapy treatments and who were ineligible for a transplantation; an additional indication was added for patients with relapsed anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. 57 In March 2018, brentuximab vedotin was approved by the FDA for treatment-naive advanced cHL on the basis of the ECHELON-1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01712490 ). In all, 1,334 patients were randomly assigned to receive either brentuximab vedotin plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD) or bleomycin plus AVD. There was a 23% reduction in the risk of a PFS event in the brentuximab vedotin arm. Occurrence of neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy were higher in the brentuximab vedotin arm (58% v 45% and 67% v 43%, respectively) as compared with AVD plus bleomycin. 58

In 2018, the FDA also approved brentuximab vedotin for the treatment of untreated systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) or other CD30 + T-cell lymphomas (TCLs) with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP). The phase III ECHELON-2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01777152 ) was a randomized study of brentuximab vedotin plus CHP versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in 452 patients with newly diagnosed CD30 + TCL. The median PFS was 48.2 months with brentuximab vedotin plus CHP and 20.8 months with CHOP, with an HR of 0.71; there was improvement in OS (HR, 0.66). AEs were similar in both arms. 59 Brentuximab vedotin is currently not available in India; TCL is treated with CHOP with or without etoposide followed by ASCT. 60 R/R cHL is treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors or salvage chemotherapy in India, and occasionally brentuximab vedotin is imported and incorporated into some treatment regimens. 61

BTK Inhibitors and PI3 Kinase Inhibitors

Ibrutinib.

The Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib is FDA approved for relapsed and untreated CLL, relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), relapsed MZL, and Waldenström macroglobulinemia. 62 - 67 In the phase III trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01886872 ) of ibrutinib versus ibrutinib with rituximab or bendamustine and rituximab in 547 elderly patients with untreated CLL, the median PFS was higher with patients receiving ibrutinib alone or with rituximab. The grade 3 to 4 hematologic AEs were greater with bendamustine and rituximab (61%) than with ibrutinib (41%) or with ibrutinib plus rituximab (39%). 68 In the extended follow up of the RESONATE 2 trial (Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT01722487 ), the overall response rate was 92% with ibrutinib. At a median follow-up of 60 months, the PFS and OS for ibrutinib versus chlorambucil was-PFS estimates at 5 years: 70% vs 12%; HR: 0.146; 95% CI, 0.098 to 0.218; OS estimates at 5 years: 83% vs 68%; HR: 0.450; 95% CI, 0.266 to 0.761). There was a 88% reduction in risk of progression or death in the ibrutinib arm (P <0.001). Grade 3/4 AEs decreased over time except for atrial fibrillation. 63 , 69 In 197 patients treated with ibrutinib, similar ORR, PFS, and OS were noted in 37 patients (19%) receiving a reduced median dose of 4.3 mg/kg per day compared with standard doses. 70 A smaller Indian study also reported a similar efficacy with low-dose ibrutinib. 71

Ibrutinib has also been approved for treating R/R MZL on the basis of a phase II trial in 63 patients who had an ORR of 46%. The median time to initial response was 4.5 months and PFS was 14 months. 65 Ibrutinib is available for patients in India, but the cost remains high at this time ($4,700 for 90 capsules [140 mg]). Recently, a generic formulation has become available in India at $410 for 90 capsules (140 mg). 72

Acalabrutinib.

Acalabrutinib is a second-generation BTK inhibitor approved by the FDA for treating patients with refractory MCL on the basis of the ACE LY-004 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02213926 ). The ORR was 81%, and the median duration of response was not reached, with a median follow-up of 15.2 months. Grade 3 or worse AEs were neutropenia in 10%, anemia in 9%, and pneumonia in 5%; there was 1 instance of hemorrhage. 73 The impressive PFS results in patients with relapsed CLL, including those with high-risk cytogenetics in the phase III ASCEND trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02970318 ), led to approval for this indication. 3 , 74 In combination with obinutuzumab (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02475681 ), there was an improvement in PFS compared with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil in more than 500 patients with previously untreated CLL. 3 , 75 Acalabrutinib is not available in India. Patients with R/R MCL are being treated with ibrutinib or lenalidomide with rituximab; patients eligible for ASCT undergo induction with salvage chemotherapies followed by ASCT. Although the outcomes may be similar, a single-agent therapy would be more convenient and less toxic for patients compared with chemotherapy with ASCT or lenalidomide with rituximab. In addition, the recent availability of the generic ibrutinib in India at an affordable price may delay entry of acalabrutinib to India.

The approved PI3 kinase inhibitors, such as idelalisib, 76 - 78 duvelisib, 79 , 80 and copanlisib, 81 are not available in India. Because of the increased number of AEs compared with those with BTK inhibitors in CLL and lenalidomide in indolent lymphomas, this lack of access has no real impact.

BCL-2 Inhibitor

Venetoclax is an oral BCL-2 inhibitor that received FDA approval for treating patients with relapsed CLL who had a 17p deletion. 82 Subsequently, on the basis of the MURANO study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02005471 ), venetoclax with rituximab was approved for treating patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma who had received at least 1 previous therapy. The comparison arm was bendamustine plus rituximab. Tumor lysis syndrome and neutropenia were higher with venetoclax. 83 The combination of venetoclax-obinutuzumab in a trial of 432 elderly patients with untreated CLL also has been approved, and it showed a benefit in the high-risk group (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02242942 ). The 2-year PFS was higher in the venetoclax-obinutuzumab arm (88.2% v 64.1%, with 28 months of follow-up) as compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab. The combination was well tolerated and it had similar rates of neutropenia and infections as the control arm of chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab. 45 Patients in India currently do not have access to venetoclax.

Proteosome Inhibitor

Bortezomib is a protease inhibitor approved for patients with relapsed MCL and subsequently for treating patients with untreated MCL who are ineligible for ASCT. 84 , 85 The generic version is affordable and is mainly used for managing multiple myeloma. It has not had an impact on care for patients with lymphoma in India because lenalidomide, rituximab, and ibrutinib are used to treat patients with relapsed MCL.

Immunomodulators

Lenalidomide.

Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory agent approved for patients with relapsed MCL. 86 It has been approved in the United States for R/R FL or MZL, based on the AUGMENT randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01472562 ). The lenalidomide-rituximab arm had a median PFS of 39 months versus 14 months for rituximab alone. A higher percentage of infections (63% v 49%), neutropenia (58% v 23%), and rash (32% v 12%) was seen in the combination arm, but overall the AEs were tolerable in both arms. 87 The data from several studies show an improvement in PFS in patients with relapsed lymphomas and CLL and also in elderly patients with DLBCL who received lenalidomide as maintenance therapy after rituximab plus CHOP (R-CHOP). 88 - 91 Because this drug is available as an affordable generic, access to this novel drug has expanded significantly in India.

CAR T-cell therapy.

In October 2017, the FDA approved axicabtagene ciloleucel for patients with R/R DLBCL on the basis of a single-arm multicenter trial of 111 adult patients (ZUMA-1; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02348216 ). The ORR was 72% and the CR rate was 51%. The responses were sustained, and the median OS was not reached at 2 years, but an estimated 50.5% of patients were still alive at 24 months. 92 , 93 In May 2018, the FDA approved tisagenlecleucel for adults with relapsed DLBCL after 2 lines of chemotherapy on the basis of a phase II single-arm study of 92 patients. The ORR was 50%, and the CR was 32%. 94 Neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell–specific AEs such as cytokine release syndrome and neurologic toxicities were seen in both trials. Therapy using CAR T cells involves substantial cost, expertise, and infrastructure. CAR T-cell therapy may be the best treatment currently available for patients with relapsed lymphomas who otherwise have a dismal prognosis, but it is not available in India. 29 , 95 , 96

Possible Strategies for Improving the Accessibility of Drugs in the United States and India

Effective management of lymphoid cancers can often provide patients with long-term survival if they are treated appropriately with novel drugs. Thus, the role of compulsory licensing is worth considering. The Doha Declaration on mandatory licensing allowed member countries to circumvent patent rights so that patients would have access to essential medications. There are several hurdles in this path that need to be addressed. A step in the right direction would be to expand the market for biosimilars and generics in the United States and India. Furthermore, global trials for these drugs might enhance accessibility. 97 , 98 In India, the Prime Minister’s health insurance scheme caps the drug costs to reduce the financial burden. 22 Another step toward improving accessibility would be to provide universal insurance coverage. A systematic effort from the government agencies and use of a hub-and-spoke model for rural outreach may be required to improve access in remote areas of India. In the United States, by allowing Medicare and the FDA to have a say in drug prices, laws that enable importing drugs and negotiating drug prices can help reduce drug costs. 99 Here, we have outlined the differences in availability and affordability of cancer drugs between India and the United States.

In conclusion, the advent of biosimilars has reduced the cost of and made treatment of CLL and lymphoma similar in the United States and India in terms of survival and patient quality of life. Innovative strategies would help expand access to other novel agents to patients in India as well. In addition, implementing the Doha Declaration, having compulsory licensing, capping drug prices, expanding insurance coverage, and making cancer care available to all people irrespective of their economic, social, racial, and geographical backgrounds would make treatment for cancer globally accessible.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conception and design: All authors

Financial support: Christopher R. Flowers

Administrative support: Christopher R. Flowers

Collection and assembly of data: Christopher R. Flowers, Swaminathan P. Iyer

Data analysis and interpretation: All authors

Manuscript writing: All authors

Final approval of manuscript: All authors

Accountable for all aspects of the work: All authors

AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/go/site/misc/authors.html .

Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians ( Open Payments ).

Vishwanath Sathyanarayanan

Honoraria: Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Alkem Laboratories, Lupin

Christopher R. Flowers

Consulting or Advisory Role: Abbvie, Bayer, Celgene (unpaid), Denovo Biopharma, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, OptumRx, Karyopharm, Pharmacyclics/ Janssen, Spectrum

Research Funding: Abbvie, Acerta, Celgene, Gilead, Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Millennium/Takeda, Pharmacyclics, TG Therapeutics, Burroughs Wellcome Fund, V Foundation

Swaminathan P. Iyer

Honoraria: Seattle Genetics

Consulting or Advisory Role: Daiichi Sankyo, Seattle Genetics, Legend Biotech

Research Funding: Bristol-Myers Squibb (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Rhizen Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), CRISPR Therapeutics (Inst), Spectrum Pharmaceuticals (Inst),

Trillium Therapeutics (Inst), Affimed Therapeutics (Inst)

Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Gilead Sciences

No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

REFERENCES

1. Bray F Ferlay J Soerjomataram I et al Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA Cancer J Clin 68 394 424 2018 30207593 10.3322/caac.21492

2. Saxena R Kumar R Sazawal S et al CLL in India may have a different biology from that in the West Blood 128 2016 abstract 5574

3. US Food and Drug Administration Hematology/Oncology (Cancer) Approvals & Safety Notifications https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/hematologyoncology-cancer-approvals-safety-notifications

4. Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation Homepage https://www.cdscoonline.gov.in/CDSCO/homepage

5. Papanicolas I Woskie LR Jha AK Health care spending in the United States and other high-income countries JAMA 319 1024 1039 2018 29536101 10.1001/jama.2018.1150

6. Collins SR Gunja MZ Doty MM How Well Does Insurance Coverage Protect Consumers From Health Care Costs? Findings from the Commonwealth Fund Biennial Health Insurance Survey, 2016 commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2017/oct/how-well-does-insurance-coverage-protect-consumers-health-care

7. Kantarjian H Steensma D Rius Sanjuan J et al High cancer drug prices in the United States: Reasons and proposed solutions J Oncol Pract 10 e208 e211 2014 24803662 10.1200/JOP.2013.001351

8. Light DW Kantarjian H Market spiral pricing of cancer drugs Cancer 119 3900 3902 2013 24002792 10.1002/cncr.28321

9. Dusetzina SB Winn AN Abel GA et al Cost sharing and adherence to tyrosine kinase inhibitors for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia J Clin Oncol 32 306 311 2014 24366936 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.9123

10. Barnett JC Berchick ER Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2016 Current Population Reports https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2017/demo/p60-260.pdf

11. Obama B United States health care reform: Progress to date and next steps JAMA 316 525 532 2016 27400401 10.1001/jama.2016.9797 PMC5069435

12. Halpern MT Brawley OW Insurance status, health equity, and the cancer care continuum Cancer 122 3106 3109 2016 27500469 10.1002/cncr.30158

13. Shah NN Xi Y Liu Y et al Racial and socioeconomic disparities in mantle cell lymphoma Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 19 e312 e320 2019 31029647 10.1016/j.clml.2019.03.006

14. Goldstein JS Nastoupil LJ Han X et al Disparities in survival by insurance status in follicular lymphoma Blood 132 1159 1166 2018 30042094 10.1182/blood-2018-03-839035 PMC6137560

15. Keegan TH DeRouen MC Parsons HM et al Impact of treatment and insurance on socioeconomic disparities in survival after adolescent and young adult Hodgkin lymphoma: A population-based study Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 25 264 273 2016 26826029 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0756 PMC4767568

16. Han X Jemal A Flowers CR et al Insurance status is related to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma survival Cancer 120 1220 1227 2014 24474436 10.1002/cncr.28549

17. National Health Mission National Health Accounts Estimates for India http://nhsrcindia.org/sites/default/files/NHA%20Estimates%20Report%20-%20Final%20Web%20Optimized%20PDF%20Version%20-%2022.11.17_0.pdf

18. Noronha V Tsomo U Jamshed A et al A fresh look at oncology facts on south central Asia and SAARC countries South Asian J Cancer 1 1 4 2012 24455500 10.4103/2278-330X.96489 PMC3876600

19. Joe W Distressed financing of household out-of-pocket health care payments in India: Incidence and correlates Health Policy Plan 30 728 741 2015 24966294 10.1093/heapol/czu050

20. Rajpal S Kumar A Joe W Economic burden of cancer in India: Evidence from cross-sectional nationally representative household survey, 2014 PLoS One 13 e0193320 2018 29481563 10.1371/journal.pone.0193320 PMC5826535

21. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Addresses of regional cancer centers. https://main.mohfw.gov.in/sites/default/files/Addresses%20Of%20Regional%20Cancer%20Centres.pdf

22. Angell BJ Prinja S Gupt A et al The Ayushman Bharat Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana and the path to universal health coverage in India: Overcoming the challenges of stewardship and governance PLoS Med 16 e1002759 2019 30845199 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002759 PMC6405049

23. Light D Warburton R Demythologizing the high costs of pharmaceutical research BioSocieties 6 34 50 2011

24. Vincent Rajkumar S The high cost of prescription drugs: causes and solutions Blood Cancer J 10 71 2020 10.1038/s41408-020-0338-x PMC7311400 32576816

25. Mossinghoff GJ Overview of the Hatch-Waxman Act and its impact on the drug development process Food Drug Law J 54 187 194 1999 11758572

26. Scherer FM The F.T.C., Oligopoly, and Shared Monopoly Faculty Research Working Paper Series. Harvard Kennedy School. September 2013 https://research.hks.harvard.edu/publications/getFile.aspx?Id978

27. CMS.gov, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 2019 ASP Drug Pricing Files Homepage https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Part-B-Drugs/McrPartBDrugAvgSalesPrice/2019ASPFiles.html

28. Drugs.com Find Drugs & Conditions Homepage www.drugs.com

29. Jacobson C Emmert A Rosenthal MB CAR T-cell therapy: A microcosm for the challenges ahead in Medicare JAMA 10.1001/jama.2019.10194 [epub ahead of print on July 29, 2019] 31355862

30. US Food and Drug Administration Biosimilar and interchangeable products https://www.fda.gov/drugs/biosimilars/biosimilar-and-interchangeable-products

31. US Food and Drug Administration FDA approves Truxima as biosimilar to Rituxan for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-approves-truxima-biosimilar-rituxan-non-hodgkins-lymphoma

32. Business Wire FDA approves Pfizer’s biosimilar, RUXIENCE™ (rituximab-pvvr), for certain cancers and autoimmune conditions https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190723005823/en/FDA-Approves-Pfizer%E2%80%99s-Biosimilar-RUXIENCE%E2%84%A2-rituximab-pvvr-Cancersrituximab-pvvr

33. Pharmaceutical Technology Expanding from generics to biosimilars in India https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/features/expanding-generics-biosimilars-in-india/

34. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Purchasing power parities (PPP) https://data.oecd.org/conversion/purchasing-power-parities-ppp.htm

35. Drugs.com Rituxan approval history https://www.drugs.com/history/rituxan.html

36. US Food and Drug Administration Rituximab (marketed as Rituxan) Information https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/rituximab-marketed-rituxan-information

37. Biswas G Parikh PM Nair R et al Rituximab (anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody) in lymphoproliferative malignancies: Tata Memorial experience J Assoc Physicians India 54 29 33 2006 16649735

38. Kamoda S Ishikawa R Kakehi K Capillary electrophoresis with laser-induced fluorescence detection for detailed studies on N-linked oligosaccharide profile of therapeutic recombinant monoclonal antibodies J Chromatogr A 1133 332 339 2006 16945378 10.1016/j.chroma.2006.08.028

39. Roy PS John S Karankal S et al Comparison of the efficacy and safety of Rituximab (Mabthera™) and its biosimilar (Reditux™) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated with chemo-immunotherapy: A retrospective analysis Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol 34 292 298 2013 24604960 10.4103/0971-5851.125248 PMC3932598

40. Gota V Karanam A Rath S et al Population pharmacokinetics of Reditux™, a biosimilar Rituximab, in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 78 353 359 2016 27329361 10.1007/s00280-016-3083-x

41. Davies A Merli F Mihaljevic B et al Pharmacokinetics and safety of subcutaneous rituximab in follicular lymphoma (SABRINA): Stage 1 analysis of a randomised phase 3 study Lancet Oncol 15 343 352 2014 24521993 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70005-1

42. Davies A Berge C Boehnke A et al Subcutaneous rituximab for the treatment of B-cell hematologic malignancies: A review of the scientific rationale and clinical development Adv Ther 34 2210 2231 2017 28983819 10.1007/s12325-017-0610-z PMC5656720

43. Marcus R Davies A Ando K et al Obinutuzumab for the first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma N Engl J Med 377 1331 1344 2017 28976863 10.1056/NEJMoa1614598

44. Moreno C Greil R Demirkan F et al Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (iLLUMINATE): A multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 20 43 56 2019 30522969 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30788-5

45. Fischer K Al-Sawaf O Bahlo J et al Venetoclax and obinutuzumab in patients with CLL and coexisting conditions N Engl J Med 380 2225 2236 2019 31166681 10.1056/NEJMoa1815281

46. Robak T Warzocha K Govind Babu K et al Ofatumumab plus fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Results from the COMPLEMENT 2 trial Leuk Lymphoma 58 1084 1093 2017 27731748 10.1080/10428194.2016.1233536

47. WCG FDA News Novartis withdraws chronic leukemia drug Arzerra from non-U.S. markets https://www.fdanews.com/articles/185419-novartis-withdraws-chronic-leukemia-drug-arzerra-from-non-us-markets

48. Kim YH Bagot M Pinter-Brown L et al Mogamulizumab versus vorinostat in previously treated cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (MAVORIC): An international, open-label, randomised, controlled phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 19 1192 1204 2018 30100375 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30379-6

49. Kasamon YL de Claro RA Wang Y et al FDA approval summary: Nivolumab for the treatment of relapsed or progressive classical Hodgkin lymphoma Oncologist 22 585 591 2017 28438889 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0004 PMC5423515

50. Chen R Zinzani PL Fanale MA et al Phase II study of the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab for relapsed/refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma J Clin Oncol 35 2125 2132 2017 28441111 10.1200/JCO.2016.72.1316 PMC5791843

51. Zinzani PL Ribrag V Moskowitz CH et al Safety and tolerability of pembrolizumab in patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma Blood 130 267 270 2017 28490569 10.1182/blood-2016-12-758383 PMC5766837

52. The Economic Times MSD launches blockbuster cancer drug Keytruda in India https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/pharmaceuticals/msd-launches-blockbuster-cancer-drug-keytruda-in-india/articleshow/60487138.cms

53. 1mg Opdyta 100mg Injection https://www.1mg.com/drugs/opdyta-100mg-injection-369756

54. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company Transparency https://www.bms.com/in/transparency.html

55. Sehn LH Herrera AF Matasar MJ et al Polatuzumab vedotin (Pola) plus bendamustine (B) with rituximab (R) or obinutuzumab (G) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): Updated results of a phase (Ph) Ib/II study Blood 132 2018 abstr 1683

56. Gisselbrecht C Glass B Mounier N et al Salvage regimens with autologous transplantation for relapsed large B-cell lymphoma in the rituximab era J Clin Oncol 28 4184 4190 2010 20660832 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.1618 PMC3664033

57. Drugs.com Adcetris approval history https://www.drugs.com/history/adcetris.html

58. Connors JM Jurczak W Straus DJ et al Brentuximab vedotin with chemotherapy for stage III or IV Hodgkin’s lymphoma N Engl J Med 378 331 344 2018 29224502 10.1056/NEJMoa1708984 PMC5819601

59. Horwitz S O’Connor OA Pro B et al Brentuximab vedotin with chemotherapy for CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphoma (ECHELON-2): A global, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial Lancet 393 229 240 2019 30522922 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32984-2 PMC6436818

60. Ellin F Landström J Jerkeman M et al Real-world data on prognostic factors and treatment in peripheral T-cell lymphomas: A study from the Swedish Lymphoma Registry Blood 124 1570 1577 2014 25006130 10.1182/blood-2014-04-573089

61. Moskowitz CH Walewski J Nademanee A et al Five-year PFS from the AETHERA trial of brentuximab vedotin for Hodgkin lymphoma at high risk of progression or relapse Blood 132 2639 2642 2018 30266774 10.1182/blood-2018-07-861641

62. Barr PM Robak T Owen C et al Sustained efficacy and detailed clinical follow-up of first-line ibrutinib treatment in older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: Extended phase 3 results from RESONATE-2 Haematologica 103 1502 1510 2018 29880603 10.3324/haematol.2018.192328 PMC6119145

63. Burger JA Tedeschi A Barr PM et al Ibrutinib as initial therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia N Engl J Med 373 2425 2437 2015 26639149 10.1056/NEJMoa1509388 PMC4722809

64. Wang ML Rule S Martin P et al Targeting BTK with ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma N Engl J Med 369 507 516 2013 23782157 10.1056/NEJMoa1306220 PMC4513941

65. Noy A de Vos S Thieblemont C et al Targeting Bruton tyrosine kinase with ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory marginal zone lymphoma Blood 129 2224 2232 2017 28167659 10.1182/blood-2016-10-747345 PMC5399483

66. Dimopoulos MA Salman Z Buske C Ibrutinib and rituximab in Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia N Engl J Med 379 1975 1976 2018 30428288 10.1056/NEJMc1809505

67. Shanafelt TD Wang XV Kay NE et al Ibrutinib-rituximab or chemoimmunotherapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia N Engl J Med 381 432 443 2019 31365801 10.1056/NEJMoa1817073 PMC6908306

68. Woyach JA Ruppert AS Heerema NA et al Ibrutinib regimens versus chemoimmunotherapy in older patients with untreated CLL N Engl J Med 379 2517 2528 2018 30501481 10.1056/NEJMoa1812836 PMC6325637

69. Burger JA Barr PM Robak T et al Long-term efficacy and safety of first-line ibrutinib treatment for patients with CLL/SLL: 5 years of follow-up from the phase 3 RESONATE-2 study Leukemia 34 787 798 2020 31628428 10.1038/s41375-019-0602-x PMC7214263

70. Mato AR Timlin C Ujjani C et al Comparable outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) patients treated with reduced-dose ibrutinib: Results from a multi-centre study Br J Haematol 181 259 261 2018 28220935 10.1111/bjh.14540

71. Lad DP Malhotra P Khadwal A et al Reduced dose ibrutinib due to financial toxicity in CLL Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus 35 260 264 2019 30988561 10.1007/s12288-018-1011-4 PMC6439022

72. The Economic Times Natco launches cut price versions of cancer drug ibrutinib in India https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/pharmaceuticals/natco-launches-cut-price-versions-of-cancer-drug-ibrutinib-in-india/articleshow/72894811.cms?from=mdr

73. Wang M Rule S Zinzani PL et al Acalabrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (ACE-LY-004): A single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial Lancet 391 659 667 2018 29241979 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)33108-2 PMC7864374

74. Ghia P Pluta A Wach M et al ASCEND: Phase III randomized trial of acalabrutinib versus idelalisib plus rituximab or bendamustine plus rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia J Clin Oncol 10.1200/JCO.19.03355 [epub ahead of print on May 27, 2020] 32459600

75. AstraZeneca Calquence Phase III ELEVATE-TN trial met primary endpoint at interim analysis in previously-untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia June 6, 2019 https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2019/calquence-phase-iii-elevate-tn-trial-met-primary-endpoint-at-interim-analysis-in-previously-untreated-chronic-lymphocytic-leukaemia06062019.html

76. Drugs.com Zydelig approval history https://www.drugs.com/history/zydelig.html

77. Furman RR Sharman JP Coutre SE et al Idelalisib and rituximab in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia N Engl J Med 370 997 1007 2014 24450857 10.1056/NEJMoa1315226 PMC4161365

78. Gopal AK Kahl BS de Vos S et al PI3Kδ inhibition by idelalisib in patients with relapsed indolent lymphoma N Engl J Med 370 1008 1018 2014 24450858 10.1056/NEJMoa1314583 PMC4039496

79. Flinn IW Hillmen P Montillo M et al The phase 3 DUO trial: Duvelisib vs ofatumumab in relapsed and refractory CLL/SLL Blood 132 2446 2455 2018 30287523 10.1182/blood-2018-05-850461 PMC6284216

80. Flinn IW Miller CB Ardeshna KM et al DYNAMO: A phase II study of duvelisib (IPI-145) in patients with refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma J Clin Oncol 37 912 922 2019 30742566 10.1200/JCO.18.00915

81. Dreyling M Santoro A Mollica L et al Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibition by copanlisib in relapsed or refractory indolent lymphoma J Clin Oncol 35 3898 3905 2017 28976790 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.4648

82. Stilgenbauer S Eichhorst B Schetelig J et al Venetoclax in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia with 17p deletion: A multicentre, open-label, phase 2 study Lancet Oncol 17 768 778 2016 27178240 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30019-5

83. Seymour JF Kipps TJ Eichhorst B et al Venetoclax-rituximab in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia N Engl J Med 378 1107 1120 2018 29562156 10.1056/NEJMoa1713976

84. Goy A Bernstein SH Kahl BS et al Bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma: Updated time-to-event analyses of the multicenter phase 2 PINNACLE study Ann Oncol 20 520 525 2009 19074748 10.1093/annonc/mdn656 PMC4592328

85. Robak T Huang H Jin J et al Bortezomib-based therapy for newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma N Engl J Med 372 944 953 2015 25738670 10.1056/NEJMoa1412096

86. Wang M Fayad L Wagner-Bartak N et al Lenalidomide in combination with rituximab for patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma: A phase 1/2 clinical trial Lancet Oncol 13 716 723 2012 22677155 10.1016/S1470-2045(12)70200-0

87. Leonard JP Trneny M Izutsu K et al AUGMENT: A phase III study of lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab in relapsed or refractory indolent lymphoma J Clin Oncol 37 1188 1199 2019 30897038 10.1200/JCO.19.00010 PMC7035866

88. Leonard JP Jung SH Johnson J et al Randomized trial of lenalidomide alone versus lenalidomide plus rituximab in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma: CALGB 50401 (Alliance) J Clin Oncol 33 3635 3640 2015 26304886 10.1200/JCO.2014.59.9258 PMC4622102

89. Ferrajoli A Lee BN Schlette EJ et al Lenalidomide induces complete and partial remissions in patients with relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia Blood 111 5291 5297 2008 18334676 10.1182/blood-2007-12-130120 PMC4082321

90. Zinzani PL Pellegrini C Argnani L et al Prolonged disease-free survival in elderly relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated with lenalidomide plus rituximab Haematologica 101 e385 e386 2016 27247321 10.3324/haematol.2016.147256 PMC5060037

91. Thieblemont C Tilly H Gomes da Silva M et al Lenalidomide maintenance compared with placebo in responding elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone J Clin Oncol 35 2473 2481 2017 28426350 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.6984

92. Neelapu SS Locke FL Bartlett NL et al Axicabtagene ciloleucel CAR T-cell therapy in refractory large B-cell lymphoma N Engl J Med 377 2531 2544 2017 29226797 10.1056/NEJMoa1707447 PMC5882485

93. Neelapu SS Ghobadi A Jacobson CA et al 2-Year follow-up and high-risk subset analysis of Zuma-1, the pivotal study of axicabtagene ciloleucel (Axi-Cel) in patients with refractory large B cell lymphoma Blood 132 2018 abstr 2967

94. Schuster SJ Bishop MR Tam C et al Sustained disease control for adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: An updated analysis of Juliet, a global pivotal phase 2 trial of tisagenlecleucel Blood 132 2018 abstr 1684

95. Johnson NA Slack GW Savage KJ et al Concurrent expression of MYC and BCL2 in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone J Clin Oncol 30 3452 3459 2012 22851565 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.0985 PMC3454768

96. Oki Y Noorani M Lin P et al Double hit lymphoma: The MD Anderson Cancer Center clinical experience Br J Haematol 166 891 901 2014 24943107 10.1111/bjh.12982

97. Bognar CLFB Bychkovsky BL Lopes GL Jr Compulsory licenses for cancer drugs: Does circumventing patent rights improve access to oncology medications? J Glob Oncol 2 292 301 2016 28717715 10.1200/JGO.2016.005363 PMC5493268

98. Nicol D Owoeye O Using TRIPS flexibilities to facilitate access to medicines Bull World Health Organ 91 533 539 2013 23825881 10.2471/BLT.12.115865 PMC3699798

99. Jones GH Carrier MA Silver RT et al Strategies that delay or prevent the timely availability of affordable generic drugs in the United States Blood 127 1398 1402 2016 26817958 10.1182/blood-2015-11-680058 PMC4915805