Search

Background: This study, using real-world data, assesses the impact of RS testing on treatment pathways and the associated economic consequences of such testing. This paper pertains to lobular breast cancer. Methods: A retrospective, observational study was undertaken between 2011 and 2019 on a cross-section of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative, lymph node-negative, early-stage breast cancer patients. All patients had ILC and had RS testing in Ireland. The patient population is representative of the national population. Patients were classified as low (RS ≤ 25) or high (RS > 25) risk. Patients aged ≤50 were stratified as low (RS 0–15), intermediate (RS 16–25), or high risk (RS > 25). Results: A total of 168 patients were included, most of whom had grade 2 (G2) tumors (n = 154, 92%). Overall, 155 patients (92.3%) had low RS (≤25), 12 (7.1%) had high RS (>25), and 1 (0.6%) had unknown RS status. In 29 (17.5%) patients aged ≤50 at diagnosis, RS was ≤15 in 16 (55%), 16–20 in 6 (21%), 21–25 in 5 (17%), >25 in 1 (3.5%), and unknown in 1 (3.5%). Post RS testing, 126 patients (78%) had a change in chemotherapy recommendation; all to hormone therapy. In total, only 35 patients (22%) received chemotherapy. RS testing achieved a 75% reduction in chemotherapy use, resulting in savings of €921,543.84 in treatment costs, and net savings of €387,283.84. Conclusions: The use of this test resulted in a 75% reduction in chemotherapy and a significant cost savings in our publicly funded health system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This review aims to highlight the usage of circulating tumour DNA and circulating tumour cells in various manners for the care of cancer patients. The different technologies that are currently employed using these biomarkers are mentioned and contrasted with another whilst also discussing their limitations such as affordability and scalability. The review also aims to bring light to newer emerging technologies in the space of liquid biopsy that have yet to be approved by a regulatory board but have been developed with the notion of affordability and scalability in mind. These factors of technology are found to be important in order to provide cutting edge diagnostic and monitoring regimes as they can lead to personalised treatments and patient stratification for all. Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, despite many advances in diagnosis and treatment. Precision medicine has been a key area of focus, with research providing insights and progress in helping to lower cancer mortality through better patient stratification for therapies and more precise diagnostic techniques. However, unequal access to cancer care is still a global concern, with many patients having limited access to diagnostic tests and treatment regimens. Noninvasive liquid biopsy (LB) technology can determine tumour-specific molecular alterations in peripheral samples. This allows clinicians to infer knowledge at a DNA or cellular level, which can be used to screen individuals with high cancer risk, personalize treatments, monitor treatment response, and detect metastasis early. As scientific understanding of cancer pathology increases, LB technologies that utilize circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) and circulating tumour cells (CTCs) have evolved over the course of research. These technologies incorporate tumour-specific markers into molecular testing platforms. For clinical translation and maximum patient benefit at a wider scale, the accuracy, accessibility, and affordability of LB tests need to be prioritized and compared with gold standard methodologies in current use. In this review, we highlight the range of technologies in LB diagnostics and discuss the future prospects of LB through the anticipated evolution of current technologies and the integration of emerging and novel ones. This could potentially allow a more cost-effective model of cancer care to be widely adopted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In this study, we examined the prescription patterns and pharmaceutical costs for treatments of multiple myeloma (MM) in Catalonia's public healthcare system over the past decade. MM is a complex and costly disease for which substantial pharmacological innovation has recently been introduced, and we aimed to understand how treatment choices and expenses have evolved. We analyzed data from 4556 MM patients and found that the number of treated patients increased annually. Drugs like lenalidomide and daratumumab showed significant utilization rises, impacting overall costs. Our findings shed light on the economic burden of MM treatment, emphasizing the importance of monitoring and optimizing healthcare resources allocation for better healthcare decision making. (1) Background: Our understanding of and treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) has advanced significantly, and new pharmacological treatments have promising benefits but high price tags. This study analyzes prescription patterns and pharmaceutical expenditure for MM treatments in Catalonia's public healthcare system over eight years. (2) Methods: A retrospective observational study examined MM treatment data from 2015 to 2022 in Catalonia, using healthcare registries from the Catalan Health Service to collect information on patients, medicines used, and treatment costs. (3) Results: A total of 4556 MM patients received treatment, with a rising trend in the number of treated patients each year from 902 in 2015 to 1899 in 2022. The mean age was 68.9 years, and patients were almost evenly distributed by gender (51.5% male). Most patients were treated with bortezomib (3338 patients), lenalidomide (2952), and/or daratumumab (1093). Most drugs showed increased utilization annually, most significantly for lenalidomide and daratumumab. The total pharmacological treatment cost throughout the entire study period was EUR 321,811,249, with lenalidomide leading with the highest total cost (EUR 157,236,784), and daratumumab exhibiting the highest increase in annual expenditure. (5) Conclusions: The study reveals a progressive increase in the number of MM patients treated and rising pharmaceutical costs. Lenalidomide and daratumumab incurred the highest costs. The findings highlight MM treatment's economic impact and the need to monitor prescription patterns and expenditures to optimize healthcare resources and decision making. Understanding these trends can guide resource allocation effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This research study aims to understand whether the Medicare Advantage program, which provides healthcare to a significant portion of Medicare beneficiaries, including cancer survivors, is effectively improving access to care, healthcare outcomes, and affordability. The study highlights the need for the ongoing evaluation and re-evaluation of the role of Medicare Advantage in promoting equity among beneficiaries with cancer. It provides valuable insights for policymakers and healthcare professionals involved in decision-making processes related to Medicare Advantage and its impact on healthcare access, affordability, and financial well-being for cancer survivors. This research informs discussions on potential improvements in the Medicare program to ensure that the needs of cancer survivors are adequately addressed. Background: The Medicare Advantage program provides care to nearly half of Medicare beneficiaries, including a rapidly growing population of cancer survivors. Despite its increased adoption, it is still unknown whether or not the program improves healthcare access, outcomes, and affordability for cancer survivors. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥ 65 years with a self-reported history of cancer from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between Medicare program type (Medicare Advantage vs. traditional Medicare) and measures of healthcare access, acute care utilization, and affordability. Results: We identified 4451 beneficiaries with a history of cancer, corresponding to 26.6 million weighted cancer survivors in 2019. Of the beneficiaries, 35.8% were enrolled in Medicare Advantage, whereas 64.2% were enrolled in traditional Medicare. The age, sex, racial and ethnic composition, household income, primary site of cancer, and comorbidity burden of Medicare Advantage and traditional Medicare beneficiaries were similar. In the adjusted analysis, there were no differences in healthcare access or acute care utilization between traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries. However, cancer survivors enrolled in Medicare Advantage were more likely to worry about (34.3% vs. 29.4%; aOR, 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1–1.5)) or have problems paying (13.6% vs. 11.1%; aOR, 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1–1.8)) medical bills. Conclusions: We found no evidence that Medicare Advantage beneficiaries with cancer had better healthcare access, affordability, or acute care utilization than traditional Medicare beneficiaries did. Furthermore, Medicare Advantage beneficiaries were more likely to report financial strain and have difficulty paying for their medical bills than were those with traditional Medicare. Despite the generous benefits and attractive incentives, Medicare Advantage plans may not be more cost-effective than traditional Medicare is for cancer survivors. Our study informs ongoing congressional deliberations to re-evaluate the role of Medicare Advantage in promoting equity among beneficiaries with cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Despite being in use for almost 50 years, monoclonal antibodies face limitations in their implementation in clinical practice, particularly in pediatrics and pediatric cancer. Although technological advancements and research into new therapeutic targets have led to the development of sophisticated and effective molecules, translational barriers still exist. Integrating monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) into current treatment protocols and ensuring accessibility for all children with cancer globally remains a challenge. This review examines the biological, clinical, economic, and social limitations hindering the global implementation of mAbs in pediatric cancer, with a particular focus on anti-GD2 mAbs. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), as the name implies, are clonal antibodies that bind to the same antigen. mAbs are broadly used as diagnostic or therapeutic tools for neoplasms, autoimmune diseases, allergic conditions, and infections. Although most mAbs are approved for treating adult cancers, few are applicable to childhood malignancies, limited mostly to hematological cancers. As for solid tumors, only anti-disialoganglioside (GD2) mAbs are approved specifically for neuroblastoma. Inequities of drug access have continued, affecting most therapeutic mAbs globally. To understand these challenges, a deeper dive into the complex transition from basic research to the clinic, or between marketing and regulatory agencies, is timely. This review focuses on current mAbs approved or under investigation in pediatric cancer, with special attention on solid tumors and anti-GD2 mAbs, and the hurdles that limit their broad global access. Beyond understanding the mechanisms of drug resistance, the continual discovery of next generation drugs safer for children and easier to administer, the discovery of predictive biomarkers to avoid futility should ease the acceptance by patient, health care professionals and regulatory agencies, in order to expand clinical utility. With a better integration into the multimodal treatment for each disease, protocols that align with the regional clinical practice should also improve acceptance and cost-effectiveness. Communication and collaboration between academic institutions, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory agencies should help to ensure accessible, affordable, and sustainable health care for all. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to compare the outcomes and cost differences between primary lung cancer (PLC) and second primary lung cancer (SPLC) patients who underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). This was a retrospective analysis of 124 patients with lung cancer stages I, II, and III who underwent VATS between January 2018 and January 2023. The patients were divided into two groups based on their cancer status that was matched by age and gender: the PLC group (n = 62) and the SPLC group (n = 62). The results showed that there was no significant difference in the clinical characteristics between the 2 groups, except for the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), with a score above 3 in 62.9% of PLC patients and 80.6% among SPLC patients (p = 0.028). Regarding the surgical outcomes, the operative time for the VATS intervention was significantly higher in the SPLC group, with a median of 300 min, compared with 260 min in the PLC group (p = 0.001), varying by the cancer staging as well. The average duration of hospitalization was significantly longer before and after surgery among patients with SPLC (6.1 days after surgery), compared with 4.2 days after surgery in the PLC group (0.006). Regarding the cost analysis, the total hospitalization cost was significantly higher in the SPLC group (15,400 RON vs. 12,800 RON; p = 0.007). Lastly, there was a significant difference in the survival probability between the two patient groups (log-rank p-value = 0.038). The 2-year survival was 41.9% among PLC patients and only 24.2% among those with SPLC. At the 5-year follow-up, there were only 1.6% survivors in the SPLC group, compared with 11.3% in the PLC group (p-value = 0.028). In conclusion, this study found that VATS is a safe and effective surgical approach for both PLC and SPLC patients. However, SPLC patients have a higher VATS operating time and require more healthcare resources than PLC patients, resulting in higher hospitalization costs. These findings suggest that careful pre-operative evaluation and individualized surgical planning are necessary to optimize the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of VATS for lung cancer patients. Nevertheless, the 5-year survival remains very low and concerning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: In stage IV melanoma, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab improves outcomes compared to single agents. However, it bears an important financial impact on the healthcare system. In this manuscript, we analyze the costs related to the ipilimumab–nivolumab combination, focusing on the immune-related adverse events (irAE) in a real-world setting. Surprisingly, we found that the toxicity cost of ipilimumab and nivolumab are insignificant compared to the total cost of the treatment. Additionally, patients with a Grade 3–4 toxicity have lower costs and better outcomes than patients with Grade 1–2 irAEs. Finally, medication and disease-related hospitalization costs are the major costs of the treatment. These findings are important information for clinicians and healthcare organizations for treatment decisions in immunotherapy. Combined ipilimumab and nivolumab significantly improve outcomes in metastatic melanoma patients but bear an important financial impact on the healthcare system. Here, we analyze the treatment costs, focusing on irAE. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 62 melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab–nivolumab at the Lausanne University Hospital between 1 June 2016 and 31 August 2019. The frequency of irAEs and outcomes were evaluated. All melanoma-specific costs were analyzed from the first ipilimumab–nivolumab dose until the therapy given subsequently or death. A total of 54/62 (87%) patients presented at least one irAE, and 31/62 (50%) presented a grade 3–4 irAE. The majority of patients who had a complete response 12/14 (86%) and 21/28 (75%) of overall responders presented a grade 3–4 toxicity, and there were no responses in patients without toxicity. Toxicity costs represented only 3% of the total expenses per patient. The most significant contributions were medication costs (44%) and disease costs (39%), mainly disease-related hospitalization costs, not toxicity-related. Patients with a complete response had the lowest global median cost per week of follow up (EUR 2425) and patients who had progressive disease (PD), the highest one (EUR 8325). Except for one patient who had a Grade 5 toxicity (EUR 6043/week), we observe that less severe toxicity grades (EUR 9383/week for Grade 1), or even the absence of toxicity (EUR 9922/week), are associated with higher median costs per week (vs. EUR 3266/week for Grade 4 and EUR 2850/week for Grade 3). The cost of toxicities was unexpectedly low compared to the total costs, especially medication costs. Patients with higher toxicity grades had better outcomes and lower total costs due to treatment discontinuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The economic impact of adverse events (AEs) for poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) in ovarian or breast cancer has not been widely evaluated. Compare PARPi-related AE management costs from a US payer perspective. The frequency of treatment-related grade 3–4 AEs was obtained from published clinical trials of PARPis for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC), platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC), and metastatic breast cancer (MBC). AE management costs per patient (2020 USD) per treatment course were calculated by multiplying the AE unit costs by the frequency of AEs for each arm of each trial. Sensitivity analyses were conducted according to the lower and upper limits of the 95% confidence interval for AE rates and unit costs, respectively. Scenarios were also performed to explore the uncertainty of outcomes. Total AE management costs in AOC were: $3,904, olaparib; $5,595, olaparib plus bevacizumab; and $12,215, niraparib. In PSROC, total costs were: $3,894, olaparib; $6,001, rucaparib; and $11,492, niraparib, and in MBC: $3,574, olaparib; and $9,489, talazoparib. Hematological toxicities were the key drivers of AE management costs for PARPis. The main AEs among PARPis were hematological. Olaparib was associated with lower AE costs compared to other PARPis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) colorectal guideline has been implemented widely across Alberta. Our study examined the clinical and cost impacts of eras on colon cancer patients across the province. Methods We first used both summary statistics and multivariate regression methods to compare, before and after guideline implementation, clinical outcomes (length of stay, complications, readmissions) in consecutive elective colorectal patients 18 or more years of age and in colon cancer and non-cancer patients treated at the Peter Lougheed Centre and the Grey Nuns Hospital between February 2013 and December 2014. We then used the differences in clinical outcomes for colon cancer patients, together with the average cost per hospital day, to estimate cost impacts. Results The analysis considered 790 patients (398 cancer and 392 non-cancer patients). Mean guideline compliance increased to 60% in cancer patients and 57% in non-cancer patients after eras implementation from 37% overall before eras implementation. From pre- to post-eras, mean length of stay declined to 8.4 ± 5 days from 9.5 ± 7 days in cancer patients, and to 6.4 ± 4 days from 8.8 ± 5.5 days in non-cancer patients (p = 0.0012 and p = 0.0041 respectively). Complications declined significantly in the renal, hepatic, pancreatic, and gastrointestinal groups (difference in proportions: 13% in cancer patients; p < 0.05). No significant change in the risk of readmission was observed. The net cost savings attributable to eras implementation ranged from $1,096 to $2,771 per cancer patient and from $3,388 to $7,103 per non-cancer patient. Conclusions Implementation of eras not only resulted in clinical outcome improvements, but also had a significant beneficial impact on scarce health system resources. The effect for cancer patients was different from that for noncancer patients, representing an opportunity for further refinement and study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in muscle invasive, urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC). However, large-scaled, contemporary data investigating the usage and effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to radical cystectomy on perioperative outcomes are scarce. We identified 4347 bladder cancer patients treated with RC between 2016 and 2019, relying on the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Of those, 805 (19%) received NAC. No differences for overall complication were recorded between RC patients treated with NAC vs. without. Specifically, NAC patients depicted lower rates of wound, cardiac, pulmonary and genitourinary complications. In line with this, in-hospital mortality rates as well as the length of stay were in favor for NAC patients. By contrast, NAC was associated with moderately higher total hospital costs. The current study recorded no detriment from NAC in the context of RC; however, the current study recorded persistently low rates of NAC contrary to current guidelines. Background: To test for differences in complication rates, in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS) and total hospital costs (THCs) in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) prior to radical cystectomy (RC). Methods: Within the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2016–2019), we identified RC-treated, non-metastatic, lymph-node negative bladder cancer patients, stratified by NAC status. Trend analyses, multivariable logistic, multivariable Poisson and multivariable linear regression models were used. Results: We identified 4347 RC-treated bladder cancer patients. Of those, 805 (19%) received NAC prior to RC. Overall, complications rates did not differ (65 vs. 66%; p = 0.7). However, NAC patients harbored lower rates of surgical site (6 vs. 9%), cardiac (13 vs. 19%) and genitourinary (5.5 vs. 9.7%) complications. In-hospital mortality (<1.7 vs. 1.8%) and LOS (6 vs. 7 days) was lower in NAC patients (all p < 0.05). Moreover, NAC was an independent predictor of shorter LOS in multivariable Poisson regression models (Risk ratio: 0.86; p < 0.001) and an independent predictor for higher THCs in multivariable linear regression models (Odds ratio: 1474$; p = 0.02). Conclusion: NAC was not associated with higher complication rates and in-hospital mortality. Contrary, NAC was associated with shorter LOS, yet moderately higher THCs. The current analysis suggests no detriment from NAC in the context of RC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The additional value of patient-reported symptom monitoring in routine cancer is still under discussion. With this in mind, we have reviewed recent evidence on the benefits of this strategy. The evidence examined illustrates that bringing systematic patient feedback into the oncology consultation provides objective advantages over usual care, such as better symptom control, early detection of tumor recurrence, and extended chemotherapy use. Such care improvements ultimately entail an outstanding survival benefit for advanced cancer patients, an increase in their global quality of life, and eventually, medical cost savings. Monitoring patient-reported symptoms might also have other implications in clinical practice, such as promoting patient disease awareness or enhancing patient–physician communication and relationships. Notwithstanding these advantages, there are still logistical barriers that prevent its widespread implementation—especially in the electronic modality. In addition, the real-world effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of this strategy are yet to be proven in different settings. Background: To describe the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on clinical, other patient-reported, and economic outcomes. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review using Medline/PubMed, limited to original articles published between 2011 and 2021 in English and Spanish, and focused on the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on cancer patients. Results: We identified 16 reports that deal with the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring (collected mostly electronically) on different outcomes. Five studies showed that patient-reported symptom surveillance led to significantly improved survival compared with usual care—mainly through better symptom control, early detection of tumor recurrence, and extended chemotherapy use. Additionally, three evaluations demonstrated an improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) associated with this monitoring strategy, specifically by reducing symptom severity. Additionally, six studies observed that this monitoring approach prevented unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions, leading to a substantial decrease in healthcare usage. Conclusions: There is consistent evidence across the studies that patient-reported symptom monitoring might entail a substantial survival benefit for cancer patients, better HRQoL, and a considerable decrease in healthcare usage. Nonetheless, more studies should be conducted to demonstrate their effectiveness in addition to their cost-effectiveness in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]