Search

Purpose: Treatment of Prostate Cancer (PCa) with Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) involves long-term consequences including bone loss and fractures. Our aim was to evaluate the calculated fracture risk and the prevalence of osteoporosis, vertebral fractures (VF) and sarcopenia in men with PCa at initiation of ADT, as ADT will increase fracture risk from that moment onward., Methods: In this cross-sectional real-world study in men at ADT initiation, fracture risk factors including comorbidities, medication, and 10-year fracture risk (FRAX®) were assessed. Laboratory tests, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and spinal X-rays were performed. Sarcopenia was defined according to EWGSOP2., Results: In 115 men at ADT initiation, aged 73.3 (±7.6) years, osteoporosis was diagnosed in 4.3 % and osteopenia in 35.7 %. The mean 10-year fracture risk of major osteoporotic fracture was 4.4 % and of hip fracture 1.7 %, respectively. At least one VF was present in 32.2 % and 33.9 % of men had osteoporosis and/or a VF assessed on spinal X-rays. In 10.4 % at least one new fracture-risk-associated metabolic bone disorder was diagnosed with laboratory testing. Sarcopenia was diagnosed in only one patient., Conclusions: Although the prevalence of osteoporosis, sarcopenia and 10-years fracture risk is low, there is a high prevalence of vertebral fractures in a third of the men with PCa at the time of ADT initiation. Besides a BMD measurement and fracture risk calculation using FRAX, a systematic vertebral fracture assessment should be considered in all men with PCa at initiation of ADT to provide a reliable baseline classification of VFs to improve identification of true incident VFs during ADT., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Marsha van Oostwaard, Dr. Yes van de Wouw, Professor dr. Maryska Janssen-Heijnen, Dr. Marc de Jong and Dr. Caroline Wyers have no conflicts of interest. Professor dr. Joop van den Bergh reports consulting fees and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Amgen institution and UCB institution outside the submitted work., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Introduction: Multiple screening methods for malnutrition are available, but a systematic review of evidence in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is lacking. The aim of this study is to systematically investigate which outcome variables of nutritional screening methods are associated with treatment tolerance in patients with CRC., Material and Methods: A systematic review was performed with respect to outcome variables of nutritional screening methods and their association with systemic treatment tolerance in patients with CRC. The Cochrane guidelines for systematic reviews and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias and quality of each included study., Results: A total of sixteen studies were included. The following screening methods for malnutrition were assessed in the included studies: serum albumin, body mass index, C-reactive protein/albumin ratio, modified version of the Glasgow prognostic score, mini nutritional assessment, nutritional risk index, patient-generated subjective global assessment, sarcopenia and weight loss., Discussion: Sarcopenia tended to be associated with treatment tolerance more often than other screening methods but the current review suggests that there are ample screening methods rendering meaningful outcomes regarding a patient's nutritional status and associated risk for treatment intolerance. This grants practitioners the flexibility to choose from a variety of different nutritional screening methods. Nutritional screening can thus be tailored to the individual patient. Importantly, nutritional screening may help identify those patients at risk for chemotoxicity thus allowing for the implementation of targeted prehabilitation programs in order to prevent (severe) chemotoxicity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Policy makers increasingly seek to complement data from clinical trials with information from routine care. This study aims to provide a detailed account of the hospital resource use and associated costs of patients with advanced breast cancer in The Netherlands., Methods: Data from 597 patients with advanced breast cancer, diagnosed between 2010 and 2014, were retrieved from the Southeast Netherlands Advanced Breast Cancer Registry. Database lock for this study was in October 2017. We report the observed hospital costs for different resource categories and the lifetime costs per patient, adjusted for censoring using Lin's method. The relationship between patients' characteristics and costs was studied using multivariable regression., Results: The average (SE) lifetime hospital costs of patients with advanced breast cancer were €52 709 (405). Costs differed considerably between patient subgroups, ranging from €29 803 for patients with a triple-negative subtype to €92 272 for patients with hormone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 positive cancer. Apart from the cancer subtype, several other factors, including age and survival time, were independently associated with patient lifetime costs. Overall, a large share of costs was attributed to systemic therapies (56%), predominantly to a few expensive agents, such as trastuzumab (15%), everolimus (10%), and bevacizumab (9%), as well as to inpatient hospital days (20%)., Conclusions: This real-world study shows the high degree of variability in hospital resource use and associated costs in advanced breast cancer care. The presented resource use and costs data provide researchers and policy makers with key figures for economic evaluations and budget impact analyses., (Copyright © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)