Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of olaparib as a maintenance treatment versus routine surveillance (RS) in patients with BRCA mutated (BRCAm) advanced ovarian cancer (OC) following response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy in Singapore. Methods: A 4-health state partitioned survival model was developed to simulate the lifetime (50 years) incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of olaparib versus RS from a healthcare payer perspective. Progression-free survival, time to second disease progression, and overall survival were estimated using SOLO-1 data and extrapolated beyond the trial period using parametric survival models. Any patient who remained progression-free at year 7 was assumed to be no longer at risk of progression. Mortality rates were based on all-cause mortality, adjusted based on BRCA1/2 mutation. Health state utilities and adverse event frequencies were from SOLO-1. Drug costs were from local public healthcare institutions. Healthcare resource usage and costs were from local clinician input and publications. A 3% discount rate was applied to costs and outcomes. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed to assess the robustness of results. Results: The base-case analysis of olaparib maintenance therapy versus RS resulted in an ICER of Singapore dollar (SGD) 19,822 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The ICER was most sensitive to variations in the discount rate. PSA demonstrated that olaparib had an 87% probability of being cost-effective versus RS at a willingness-to-pay of SGD 60,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion Olaparib has a high potential of being a cost-effective maintenance treatment versus RS for patients with BRCA1/2m advanced OC after response to first-line chemotherapy in Singapore.

Purpose: Breast cancer (BC) treatment has shifted from chemotherapy to targeted therapy.Several targeted agents have demonstrated an improvement in survival. Given that national healthcare resources were correlated with the cancer mortality-to-incidence ratio, we compared access to BC drugs in Thailand with that in other Asian countries. Methods: BC experts involved in the Breast International Group (BIG)-Asia in six representative groups for countries or special administrative region (SAR) in Asia (Hong Kong SAR, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and Singapore) were invited to participate in the survey. The questionnaire addressed national health reimbursement schemes, molecular testing for early BC (EBC), availability and accessibility of BC drugs. Accessibility and reimbursement of the drugs were reported based on their listing as essential medicines in the World Health Organization Model List of Essential Medicines (WHO-EML) and their nomination as effective drugs in the European Society for Medical Oncology-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). The study was approved by all participating BIG-Asia organizations in November 2021. Results: Genomic tests for EBC were non-reimbursable in all surveyed territories.Reimbursement and co-payment of BC drugs vary between and within these regions (particularly Thailand). Most drugs in the WHO-EML and ESMO-MCBS (A/B for EBC and 4/5 for advanced BC) were accessible in all surveyed territories. However, the accessibility of effective but costly WHO-EML and ESMO-MCBS drugs was not uniform in Thailand. There was an evident disparity for individuals covered by the Thai Social Security/Universal Health Coverage schemes. Conclusion Essential BC drugs are generally accessible in selected BIG-Asia countries or SAR. There is a disparity in accessing high-cost drugs in Thailand compared with other Asian territories.