3.8 Article

Barriers to patient access of CAR T cell therapies in Austria

Journal

MEMO-MAGAZINE OF EUROPEAN MEDICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 1, Pages 79-90

Publisher

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s12254-022-00859-w

Keywords

Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy; Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; Aggressive lymphoma; Healthcare policy; Health financing

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies have the potential to be an effective treatment option for B cell malignancies, particularly relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, despite being available in wealthy Western countries, patient access to CAR-T therapy can be limited due to systemic barriers. In Austria, a significant percentage of eligible DLBCL patients did not receive CAR-T therapy in 2021, raising concerns about accessibility. This report identifies barriers to access and provides recommendations for systemic solutions to improve CAR-T access in Austria.
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapies offer a promising new therapeutic option for treating B cell malignancies, for instance relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, patient access to this type of cellular immunotherapy may be limited due to systemic barriers even in wealthy Western countries. In Austria, the CAR T eligible DLBCL population is estimated to encompass approximately 56 patients based on the criteria applied for CAR T registrational trials. However, less than 40% of these DLBCL patients eligible for commercial standard-of-care CAR T cell therapy were finally treated with CAR T cell therapy in 2021 based on our analysis. This report discusses potential barriers that may impede current patient access to CAR T cell therapy and provides recommendations for systemic solutions to address these barriers and improve the CAR T access situation in Austria.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available