BACKGROUND: The off-label use of a drug refers to a use outside the terms of its approval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). It is also possible to prescribe unlicensed drugs under the TGA's special access scheme. A high rate of off-label prescribing has previously been reported in cancer. Our study aimed to document the disparity between evidence-based clinical guidelines for anticancer therapy, product approval and funding status of these agents within an academic tertiary/quaternary cancer centre. METHODS: All chemotherapy protocols approved for use in our specialist oncology centre were assessed to determine if the drugs were off-label or unlicensed for that indication based on review of their current product information. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) funding status for each protocol was subsequently assessed. RESULTS: A total of 448 protocols containing 82 different drugs across 15 tumour groups was identified. Overall, 189 (42.2%) of protocols were off-label, and three (0.7%) were unlicensed. This resulted in all 192 protocols being unfunded by the PBS. Of the 189 off-label protocols, 132 (69.9%) were based on established evidence-based treatment guidelines, and a further 39 (20.6%) was based on phase II or III clinical trial data. CONCLUSION: Over 90% of off-label protocols are supported by established treatment guidelines or published peer-reviewed research even though the medications are not approved for that particular use by the TGA. However, these off-label protocols are unfunded by the PBS; this results in a marked inequality of access to appropriate medications for cancer patients across Australia.
BACKGROUND: The off-label use of a drug refers to a use outside the terms of its approval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). It is also possible to prescribe unlicensed drugs under the TGA's special access scheme. A high rate of off-label prescribing has previously been reported in cancer. Our study aimed to document the disparity between evidence-based clinical guidelines for anticancer therapy, product approval and funding status of these agents within an academic tertiary/quaternary cancer centre. METHODS: All chemotherapy protocols approved for use in our specialist oncology centre were assessed to determine if the drugs were off-label or unlicensed for that indication based on review of their current product information. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) funding status for each protocol was subsequently assessed. RESULTS: A total of 448 protocols containing 82 different drugs across 15 tumour groups was identified. Overall, 189 (42.2%) of protocols were off-label, and three (0.7%) were unlicensed. This resulted in all 192 protocols being unfunded by the PBS. Of the 189 off-label protocols, 132 (69.9%) were based on established evidence-based treatment guidelines, and a further 39 (20.6%) was based on phase II or III clinical trial data. CONCLUSION: Over 90% of off-label protocols are supported by established treatment guidelines or published peer-reviewed research even though the medications are not approved for that particular use by the TGA. However, these off-label protocols are unfunded by the PBS; this results in a marked inequality of access to appropriate medications for cancerpatients across Australia.
Authors: I Danés; A Agustí; A Vallano; C Alerany; J Martínez; J A Bosch; A Ferrer; L Gratacós; A Pérez; M Olmo; S M Cano Marron; A Valderrama; X Bonafont Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 2.953