Search

The advent of personalized therapy for non-small-cell lung carcinoma (nsclc) has improved patient outcomes. Selection of appropriate targeted therapy for patients with nsclc now involves testing for multiple biomarkers, including EGFR. EGFR mutation status is required to optimally treat patients with NSCLC, and thus timely and accurate biomarker testing is necessary. However, in Canada, there are currently no standardized processes or methods in place to ensure consistent testing implementation. That lack creates challenges in ensuring that all appropriate biomarkers are tested for each patient and that the medical oncologist receives the results for making informed treatment decisions in a timely way. An expert multidisciplinary working group was convened to create consensus recommendations about biomarker testing in advanced NSCLC in Canada, with a primary focus on EGFR testing. Recognizing that there are biomarkers beyond EGFR that require timely identification, the expert multidisciplinary working group considered EGFR testing in the broader context of integration into complex lung biomarker testing. Primarily, the panel of experts recommends that all patients with nonsquamous nsclc, regardless of stage, should undergo comprehensive reflex biomarker testing at diagnosis with targeted next-generation sequencing. The panel also considered the EGFR testing algorithm and the challenges associated with the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic elements of testing. Strategies for funding testing by reducing silos of single biomarker testing for EGFR and for optimally implementing the recommendations presented here and educating oncology professionals about them are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) have dramatically improved the survival of patients with ALK-rearranged (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). Clinical trial data can generally compare drugs in a pair-wise fashion. Real-world collection of health utility data, symptoms, and toxicities allows for the direct comparison between multiple tki therapies in the population with ALK+ nsclc. Methods: In a prospective cohort study, outpatients with ALK+ recruited between 2014 and 2018, treated with a variety of tkis, were assessed every 3 months for clinico-demographic, patient-reported symptom and toxicity data and EQ-5D-derived health utility scores (hus). Results: In 499 longitudinal encounters of 76 patients with ALK+ nsclc, each tki had stable longitudinal hus when disease was controlled, even after months to years: the mean overall hus for each tki ranged from 0.805 to 0.858, and longitudinally from 0.774 to 0.912, with higher values associated with second- or third-generation tkis of alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib. Disease progression was associated with a mean hus decrease of 0.065 (95% confidence interval: 0.02 to 0.11). Health utility scores were inversely correlated to multiple symptoms or toxicities: rho values ranged from -0.094 to -0.557. Fewer symptoms and toxicities were associated with the second- and third-generation tkis compared with crizotinib. In multivariable analysis, only stable disease state and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status were associated with improved hus. Conclusions: There was no significant decrease in hus when patients with ALK+ disease were treated longitudinally with each tki, as long as patients were clinically stable. Alectinib, brigatinib, and lorlatinib had the best toxicity profiles and exhibited high mean hus longitudinally in the real-world setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Accurate classification of lung cancer subtypes has become critical in tailoring lung cancer treatment. Our study aimed to evaluate changes in diagnostic testing and pathologic subtyping of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) over time at a major cancer centre. Methods In a review of patients diagnosed with advanced nsclc at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre between 2007-2009 and 2013-2015, diagnostic method, sample type and site, pathologic subtype, and use of immunohistochemistry (ihc) staining and molecular testing were abstracted. Results The review identified 238 patients in 2007-2009 and 283 patients in 2013-2015. Over time, the proportion of patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma increased to 73.1% from 60.9%, and diagnoses of nsclc not otherwise specified (nos) decreased to 6.4% from 18.9%, p < 0.0001. Use of diagnostic bronchoscopy decreased (26.9% vs. 18.4%), and mediastinal sampling procedures, including endobronchial ultrasonography, increased (9.2% vs. 20.5%, p = 0.0001). Use of ihc increased over time to 76.3% from 41.6% (p < 0.0001). Larger surgical or core biopsy samples and those for which ihc was performed were more likely to undergo biomarker testing (both p < 0.01). Conclusions Customizing treatment based on pathologic subtype and molecular genotype has become key in treating patients with advanced lung cancer. Greater accuracy of pathology diagnosis is being achieved, including through the routine use of ihc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Multiple clinical trials for the treatment of advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) have recently been reported. As a result, the treatment algorithm has changed, and many important clinical questions have been raised:■What is the optimal first-line treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated nsclc? ■What is preferred first-line treatment for patients with brain metastasis? ■What is the preferred second-line treatment for patients who received first-line first- or second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis)? ■What is the preferred treatment after osimertinib? &9632; What evidence do we have for treating patients whose tumours harbour uncommon EGFR mutations? Methods A Canadian expert panel was convened to define the key clinical questions, review recent evidence, and discuss and agree on practice recommendations for the treatment of advanced EGFR-mutated nsclc. Results The published overall survival results for osimertinib, combined with its central nervous system activity, have led to osimertinib becoming the preferred first-line treatment for patients with common EGFR mutations, including those with brain metastasis. Other agents could still have a role, especially when osimertinib is not available or not tolerated. Treatment in subsequent lines of therapy depends on the first-line therapy or on T790M mutation status. Treatment recommendations for patients whose tumours harbour uncommon EGFR mutations are guided mainly by retrospective and limited prospective evidence. Finally, the evidence for sequencing and combining tkis with chemotherapy, angiogenesis inhibitors, checkpoint inhibitors, and other new therapeutics is reviewed. Conclusions This Canadian expert consensus statement and algorithm were driven by significant advances in the treatment of EGFR-mutated nsclc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Improving health-related quality of life (hrqol) is a key goal of systemic therapy in advanced lung cancer, although routine assessment remains challenging. We analyzed the impact of a real-time electronic hrqol tool, the electronic Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (elcss-ql), on palliative care (pc) referral rates, patterns of chemotherapy treatment, and use of other supportive interventions in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) receiving first-line chemotherapy. Methods Patients with advanced nsclc starting first-line chemotherapy were randomized to their oncologist receiving or not receiving their elcss-ql data before each clinic visit. Patients completed the elcss-ql at baseline, before each chemotherapy cycle, and at subsequent follow-up visits until disease progression. Prospective data about the pc referral rate, hrqol, and use of other supportive interventions were collected. Results For the 95 patients with advanced nsclc who participated, oncologists received real-time elcss-ql data for 44 (elcss-ql arm) and standard clinical assessment alone for 51 (standard arm). The primary endpoint, the pc referral rate, was numerically higher, but statistically similar, for patients in the elcss-ql and standard arms. The hrqol scores over time were not significantly different between the two study arms. Conclusions The elcss-ql is feasible as a tool for use in routine clinical practice, although no statistically significant effect of its use was demonstrated in our study. Improving access to supportive care through the collection of patient-reported outcomes and hrqol should be an important component of care for patients with advanced lung cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cancer treatment and management have become increasingly economically burdensome. Consequently, to help with planning health service delivery, it is vital to understand the associated costs. Administrative databases can be used to help understand and generate real-world system-level costs. Using databases to generate costs can take one of two approaches: top-down or bottom-up. Top-down approaches disaggregate the total health care spending from a global health care budget by sector and provider. A bottom-up approach begins with individual-level health care use and its costs, which are then aggregated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ROS1 kinase is an oncogenic driver in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Fusion events involving the ROS1 gene are found in 1%–2% of NSCLC patients and lead to deregulation of a tyrosine kinase–mediated multi-use intracellular signalling pathway, which then promotes the growth, proliferation, and progression of tumour cells. ROS1 fusion is a distinct molecular subtype of NSCLC, found independently of other recognized driver mutations, and it is predominantly identified in younger patients (<50 years of age), women, never-smokers, and patients with adenocarcinoma histology. Targeted inhibition of the aberrant ROS1 kinase with crizotinib is associated with increased progression-free survival (PFS) and improved quality-of-life measures. As the sole approved treatment for ROS1-rearranged NSCLC, crizotinib has been demonstrated, through a variety of clinical trials and retrospective analyses, to be a safe, effective, well-tolerated, and appropriate treatment for patients having the ROS1 rearrangement. Canadian physicians endorse current guidelines which recommend that all patients with nonsquamous advanced NSCLC, regardless of clinical characteristics, be tested for ROS1 rearrangement. Future integration of multigene testing panels into the standard of care could allow for efficient and cost-effective comprehensive testing of all patients with advanced NSCLC. If a ROS1 rearrangement is found, treatment with crizotinib, preferably in the first-line setting, constitutes the standard of care, with other treatment options being investigated, as appropriate, should resistance to crizotinib develop. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Economic evaluations are an integral component of many clinical trials. Costs used in those analyses are based on the prices of branded drugs when they first enter the market. The effect of genericization on the costeffectiveness (ce) or cost-utility (cu) of an intervention is unknown because economic analyses are rarely updated using the costs of generic drugs. Methods We re-examined the ce or cu of regimens previously evaluated in Canadian Cancer Trials Group (cctg) studies that included prospective economic evaluations and where genericization has occurred or is anticipated in Canada. We incorporated the new costs of generic drugs to characterize changes in ce or cu. We also determined acceptable cost levels of generic drugs that would make regimens reimbursable in a publicly funded health care system. Results The four randomized controlled trials included (representing 1979 patients) were cctg br.10 (early lung cancer, adjuvant vinorelbine-cisplatin vs. observation, n = 172), cctg br.21 (metastatic lung cancer, erlotinib vs. placebo, n = 731), cctg co.17 (metastatic colon cancer, cetuximab vs. best supportive care, n = 557), and cctg ly.12 (relapsed or refractory lymphoma, gemcitabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin vs. cytarabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin, n = 619). Since the initial publication of those trials, the genericization of vinorelbine, erlotinib, cetuximab, and cisplatin has taken place or is expected in Canada. Costs of generics improved the ces and cus of treatment significantly. For example, genericization of erlotinib ($1460.25 per 30 days) resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) of $45,746 per life-year gained compared with $94,638 for branded erlotinib. Likewise, genericization of cetuximab ($275.80 per 100 mg) produced an icer of $261,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (qaly) gained compared with $299,613 for branded cetuximab. Decreases in the cost of generic cetuximab to $129.39 and $63.51 would further improve the icer to $150,000 and $100,000 per QALY respectively. Conclusions Genericization of a costly oncology drug can modify the ce and cu of a regimen significantly. Failure to revisit economic analyses with the costs of generics could be a missed opportunity for funding bodies to optimize value-based allocation of health care resources. At current levels, the costs of generics might not be sufficiently low to sustain publicly funded health care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Little evidence has been generated for how best to manage patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) presenting with rarer clinical scenarios, including oligometastases, oligoprogression, and pseudoprogression. In each of those scenarios, oncologists have to consider how best to balance efficacy with quality of life, while maximizing the duration of each line of therapy and ensuring that patients are still eligible for later options, including clinical trial enrolment. Methods An expert panel was convened to define the clinical questions. Using case-based presentations, consensus practice recommendations for each clinical scenario were generated through focused, evidence-based discussions. Results Treatment strategies and best-practice or consensus recommendations are presented, with areas of consensus and areas of uncertainty identified. Conclusions In each situation, treatment has to be tailored to suit the individual patient, but with the intent of extending and maximizing the use of each line of treatment, while keeping treatment options in reserve for later lines of therapy. Patient participation in clinical trials examining these issues should be encouraged. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Afatinib, an irreversible epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR TKI), is approved for first-line therapy in advanced EGFR mutation--positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and has previously demonstrated activity after failure of chemotherapy and reversible EGFR TKIS, with improved response and progression-free survival, compared with placebo. Outcomes in pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC receiving afatinib through a Canadian special access program (SAP) are reported here. Methods Patients with NSCLC progressing after at least 1 line of chemotherapy and an EGFR TKI were eligible to enrol in the SAP. Characteristics of patients from the two largest accruing Canadian centres were retrospectively reviewed, including demographics, disease and treatment data, and patient outcomes. Results The 53 patients who received afatinib (57% women, 51% never-smokers, 26% of East Asian ethnicity, and 66% with adenocarcinoma) had a median age of 59 years. EGFR mutations were documented in 25%, and EGFR wildtype in 8%. All patients had received prior EGFR TKI treatment, with 42% achieving a response. Patients took afatinib for a median of 2 months (range: 0-26 months); 17% required 1 or more dose reductions. Of 47 evaluable patients receiving afatinib, 10 experienced tumour shrinkage, and 11, stable disease. Median survival from afatinib initiation was 5 months (95% confidence interval: 2 months to 8 months). Grade 3 or greater diarrhea, rash, paronychia, and stomatitis were seen in 9%, 11%, 6%, and 4% of patients respectively. Conclusions In an unselected population of pretreated patients with advanced NSCLC after TKI failure, median survival with afatinib therapy was 5 months. Through a SAP, afatinib demonstrated activity in clinical practice, with manageable toxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tumours with sensitizing mutations in the EGFR gene constitute a distinct molecular subgroup of non-small-cell lung cancers (nsclcs) that benefit from precision medicine. First- and second-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) are recommended as upfront therapy for EGFR-mutated advanced nsclc and, compared with chemotherapy, have resulted in superior progression-free survival, improved tumour response rates, and improved quality of life. However, resistance inevitably develops, and the third-generation tki osimertinib has been approved to target the gatekeeper EGFR mutation T790M, which is responsible for resistance in 60% of cases. Multiple drivers of tki resistance have now been identified, and many new drugs are in development. With respect to this rapidly evolving field, our review highlights the current status of treatment options for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced nsclc, focusing especially on identified causes of resistance, challenges, and clinical trials aiming to improve outcomes in this patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Advances in personalized medicine have produced novel tests and treatment options for women with breast cancer. Relatively little is known about the process by which such tests are adopted into oncology practice. The objectives of the present study were to understand the experiences of medical oncologists with multigene expression profile (GEP) tests, including their adoption into practice in early-stage breast cancer, and the perceptions of the oncologists about the influence of test results on treatment decision-making. Methods We conducted a qualitative descriptive study involving interviews with medical oncologists from academic and community cancer centres or hospitals in 8 communities in Ontario. A 21-gene breast cancer assay was used as the example of GEP testing. Qualitative analytic techniques were used to identify the main themes. Results Of 28 oncologists who were approached, 21 (75%) participated in the study [median age: 43 years; 12 women (57%)]. Awareness and knowledge of GEP testing were derived from several sources: international scientific meetings, participation in clinical studies, discussions with respected colleagues, and manufacturer-sponsored meetings. Oncologists observed that incorporating GEP testing into their clinical practice resulted in several changes, including longer consultation times, second visits, and taking steps to minimize treatment delays. Oncologists expressed divergent opinions about the strength of evidence and added value of GEP testing in guiding treatment decisions. Conclusions Incorporation of GEP testing into clinical practice in early-stage breast cancer required oncologists to make changes to their usual routines. The opinions of oncologists about the quality of evidence underpinning the test affected how much weight they gave to test results in treatment decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Although molecular testing has become standard in managing advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), most patients undergo minimally invasive procedures, and the diagnostic tumour specimens available for testing are usually limited. A knowledge translation initiative to educate diagnostic specialists about sampling techniques and laboratory processes was undertaken to improve the uptake and application of molecular testing in advanced lung cancer. Methods A multidisciplinary panel of physician experts including pathologists, respirologists, interventional thoracic radiologists, thoracic surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists developed a specialty-specific education program, adapting international clinical guidelines to the local Ontario context. Expert recommendations from the program are reported here. Results Panel experts agreed that specialists procuring samples for lung cancer diagnosis should choose biopsy techniques that maximize tumour cellularity, and that conservation strategies to maximize tissue for molecular testing should be used in tissue processing. The timeliness of molecular reporting can be improved by pathologist-initiated reflex testing upon confirmation of nonsquamous NSCLC and by prompt transportation of specimens to designated molecular diagnostic centres. To coordinate timely molecular testing and optimal treatment, collaboration and communication between all clinicians involved in diagnosing patients with advanced lung cancer are mandatory. Conclusions Knowledge transfer to diagnostic lung cancer specialists could potentially improve molecular testing and treatment for advanced lung cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Despite its importance for patient outcomes, biomarker testing for lung cancer is not uniformly integrated into the Canadian health care system. To better understand current practice patterns for lung cancer biomarker testing, we assessed physician perspectives by specialty and region. Methods A national survey of Canadian lung cancer specialists was conducted to understand their perspectives on biomarker testing in lung cancer. The 11-item survey assessed the current practice and challenges of testing. The survey was sent to 375 specialists. Results The overall response rate for the survey was 36%. Nearly all specialists reported that knowing tumour genotyping results affects patient outcome and influences the treatment decision. Medical oncologists most commonly initiated molecular testing; however, most respondents suggested a shared model involving medical oncologists and pathologists. More than half of all responding specialists had the perception that fewer than 25% of test results are available for first-line treatment decisions. Identified barriers to routine testing for all lung cancer patients included cost, lack of funding, tissue availability, and sample quality. Conclusions There was clear agreement that biomarker testing is important in determining appropriate treatment for patients. There is a need for general consensus on who should initiate molecular testing. Clear clinical guidance for pathologists has to be established for molecular testing, including defining the population to be tested, the timing of testing, and the tests to be performed. Testing could be facilitated by including more information on diagnostic sample requisitions, such as clinical suspicion of primary lung cancer, cancer history, and other samples already collected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cost avoidance occurs when, because of provision of a drug therapy [drug cost avoidance (DCA)] or a pathology test [pathology cost avoidance (PCA)] during trial participation, health care payers need not pay for standard treatments or testing. The aim of our study was to estimate the total DCA and PCA for Canadian patients enrolled in relevant phase iii trials conducted by the NCIC Clinical Trials Group. Methods Phase iii trials that had completed accrual and resulted in DCA or PCA were identified. The PCA was calculated based on the number of patients screened and the test cost. The DCA was estimated based on patients randomized, the protocol dosing regimen, drug cost, median dose intensity, and median duration of therapy. Costs are presented in Canadian dollars. No adjustment was made for inflation. Results From 1999 to 2011, 4 trials (1479 patients) resulted in PCA and 17 trials (3195 patients) resulted in DCA. The total PCA was estimated at $4,194,849, which included testing for KRAS ($141,058), microsatellite instability ($18,600), and 21-gene recurrence score ($4,035,191). The total DCA was estimated at $27,952,512, of which targeted therapy constituted 43% (five trials). The combined PCA and DCA was $32,147,361. Conclusions Over the study period, trials conducted by the NCIC Clinical Trials Group resulted in total cost avoidance (PCA and DCA) of approximately $7,518 per patient. Although not all trials lead to cost avoidance, such savings should be taken account when the financial impact of conducting clinical research is being considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Administrative data are used to describe the pancreatic cancer (PCC) population. The analysis examines demographic details, incidence, site, survival, and factors influencing mortality in a cohort of individuals diagnosed with PCC. Methods Incident cases of PCC diagnosed in Ontario between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2011 were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry. They were linked by encrypted health card number to several administrative databases to obtain demographic and mortality information. Descriptive, bivariate, and survival analyses were conducted. Results During the period of interest, 9221 new cases of PCC (4548 in men, 4673 in women) were diagnosed, for an age-adjusted standardized annual incidence in the range of 8.6-9.5 per 100,000 population. Mean age at diagnosis was 70.3 ± 12.5 years (standard deviation). Five-year survival was 7.2% (12.8% for those <60 years of age and 3.6% for those >80 years of age). Survival varied by sex, older age, rural residence, lower income, site of involvement in the pancreas, and presence of comorbidity. Conclusions The mortality rate in PCC is exceptionally high. With an increasing incidence and a mortality positively associated with age, additional support will be needed for this highly fatal disease as demographics in Ontario continue to trend toward a higher proportion of older individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Patient function is a key part of the clinical decision to offer chemotherapy and has, in earlier studies, been associated with chemotherapy toxicity. Objective testing might be more accurate than patient-reported or physician-assessed physical function, and thus might be a stronger predictor of chemotherapy toxicity in older adults. Methods Patients, 70 years of age and older, with thoracic or colorectal cancer were recruited. Three physical tests were performed before commencement of a new line of chemotherapy: grip strength, 4-m walk test, and the Timed Up and Go (TUG). Our pilot study explored the association between those tests and chemotherapy toxicity. Results The 24 patients recruited had a median age of 74.5 years (range: 70-84 years), and 54.2% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Median score on the Charlson comorbidity index was 1 (range: 0-4). Almost two thirds had metastatic disease, 70% were chemonaïve, and 83.3% were about to receive polychemotherapy. Patients had a mean tug of 13.2 ± 5.7 s and a mean gait speed of 0.74 ± 0.24 m/s; 50% had a grip strength test in the lowest 20th percentile. Grades 3-5 chemotherapy toxicities occurred in 34.7% of the patients; two thirds required a dose reduction or delay; and one third discontinued chemotherapy because of toxicity. Hospitalization attributable to chemotherapy was uncommon (12.5%). A trend toward increased severe chemotherapy toxicity with slower gait speed was observed (p = 0.049). Conclusions Abnormalities in objective markers of physical function are common in older adults with cancer, even in those deemed it for chemotherapy. However, those abnormalities were not associated with an increased likelihood of chemotherapy toxicity in the population included in this small pilot study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the diagnosis of lung cancer in 2015. Some of the challenges facing clinicians given the recent advances in the field of lung cancer had been highlighted. The optimization of current lung cancer diagnostic efforts has been aimed so that patients can be provided with the most appropriate, timely, and efficient diagnostic testing that allows them to benefit from a growing number of novel therapies and that improves patient outcomes.

Targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) pathway has become standard practice for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Compared with chemotherapy, egfr tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIS) have been associated with improved efficacy in patients with an EGFR mutation. Together with the increase in efficacy comes an adverse event (AE) profile different from that of chemotherapy. That profile includes three of the most commonly occurring dermatologic aes: acneiform rash, stomatitis, and paronychia. Currently, no randomized clinical trials have evaluated the treatments for the dermatologic aes that patients experience when taking egfr tkis. Based on the expert opinion of the authors, some basic strategies have been developed to manage those key dermatologic aes. Those strategies have the potential to improve patient quality of life and compliance and to prevent inappropriate dose reductions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The objective of the present analysis was to determine the publicly funded health care costs associated with the care of breast cancer (BCA) patients by disease stage. Methods Incident cases of female invasive BCA (2005-2009) were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to administrative datasets from the publicly funded system. The type and use of health care services were stratified by disease stage over the first 2 years after diagnosis. Mean costs and costs by type of clinical resource used in the care of BCA patients were compared with costs for a matched control group. The attributable cost for the 2-year time horizon was determined in 2008 Canadian dollars. Results This cohort study involved 39,655 patients with BCA and 190,520 control subjects. The average age in those groups was 61.1 and 60.9 years respectively. Most BCA patients were classified as either stage I (34.4%) or stage II (31.8%). Of the BCA cohort, 8% died within the first 2 years after diagnosis. The overall mean cost per BCA case from a public payer perspective in the first 2 years after diagnosis was $41,686. Over the 2-year time horizon, the mean cost increased by stage: I, $29,938; II, $46,893; III, $65,369; and IV, $66,627. The attributable cost of BCA was $31,732. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations. Conclusions Costs of care increased by stage of BCA. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations. These data will assist planning and decision-making for the use of limited health care resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine utilization and costs of home care services (HCS) for individuals with a diagnosis of breast cancer (BC). Methods Incident cases of invasive BC in women were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry (2005-2009) and linked with other Ontario health care administrative databases. Control patients were selected from the population of women never diagnosed with any type of cancer. The types and proportions of HCS used were determined and stratified by disease stage. Attributable home care utilization and costs for BC patients were determined. Factors associated with HCS costs were assessed using regression analysis. Results Among the 39,656 BC and 198,280 control patients identified (median age: 61.6 years for both), 75.4% of BC patients used HCS (62.1% stage I; 85.7% stage II; 94.6% stage III; 79.1% stage IV) compared with 14.6% of control patients. The number of HCS used per patient-year were significantly higher for the BC patients than for the control patients (14.97 vs. 6.13, p < 0.01), resulting in higher costs per patient-year ($1,210 vs. $325; $885 attributable cost to BC, p < 0.01). The number of HCS utilized and the associated costs increased as the BC stage increased. In contrast, HCS costs decreased as income increased and as previous health care exposure decreased. Interpretation Patients with BC used twice as many HCS, resulting in costs that were almost 4 times those observed in a matched control group. Less than an additional $1000 per BC patient per year were spent on HCS utilization in the study population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Canada. Although treatment outcomes in advanced disease remain modest, with paradigm shifts in the approach to treatment, they are steadily improving. Customizing treatment based on histology and molecular typing has become the standard of care. EGFR genotyping and pathology subtyping should be considered routine in new diagnoses of metastatic NSCLC. Treatment options for those with somatic EGFR activating mutations include gefitinib until progression, followed by standard chemotherapy. For patients with wild-type EGFR, or in patients whose EGFR genotype is unknown, platinum-based chemotherapy remains the firstline standard, with single-agent chemotherapy as an option for older patients and those who are unfit for platinum-doublet therapy. Patients with nonsquamous histology may receive treatment regimens incorporating pemetrexed or bevacizumab. In patients with squamous cell carcinoma, the latter agents should be avoided because of concerns about enhanced toxicity or decreased efficacy. Secondline chemotherapy is offered to a selected subgroup of patients upon progression and may include pemetrexed in non-squamous histology and docetaxel or erlotinib (or both) in all histologies. Currently, only erlotinib is offered as a third-line option in unselected nsclc patients after failure of first- and second-line chemotherapy. Maintenance therapy is emerging as a new option for patients, as are targeted therapies for particular molecular subtypes of nsclc, such as crizotinib in tumours harbouring the EML4-ALK gene rearrangement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

New drugs such as pemetrexed, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFRC) tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and the Alk inhibitor crizotinib have recently enabled progress in the management of advanced non-smallcell lung cancer (NSCLC). More drugs, especially Met inhibitors, will follow. However, the benefits of these agents are not uniform across the spectrum of NSCLC, and optimizing their utility requires some degree of subgrouping of nsclc by the presence or absence of certain biomarkers. The biomarkers of current or imminent value are EGFR and KRAS mutational status, ALK rearrangements, and MET immunohistochemistry. As a predictor of benefit for anti-egfr monoclonal antibodies, EGFR immunohistochemistry is also of potential interest. Some of the foregoing biomarkers (EGFR, ALK, MET) are direct drivers of the malignant phenotype. As such, they are, quite rationally, the direct targets of inhibitory drugs. However, KRAS, while definitely a driver, has resisted attempts at direct pharmacologic manipulation, and its main value might lie in its role as part of an efficient testing algorithm, because KRAS mutations appear to exclude EGFR and ALK mutations. The indirect value of KRAS in determining sensitivity to other targeted agents or to pemetrexed remains controversial. The other biomarkers (EGFR, ALK, MET) may also have indirect value as predictors of sensitivity to chemotherapy in general, to pemetrexed specifically, and to radiotherapy and molecularly targeted agents. These biomarkers have all enabled the co-development of new drugs with companion diagnostics, and they illustrate the paradigm that will govern progress in oncology in the immediate future. However, in nsclc, the acquisition of sufficient biopsy material remains a stubborn obstacle to the evolution of novel targeted therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in Canada, with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for the majority of cases. Timely access to comprehensive molecular profiling is critical for selecting biomarker-matched targeted therapies, which lead to improved outcomes in advanced NSCLC. Tissue biopsy samples are the gold standard for molecular profiling; however, several challenges can prevent timely and complete molecular profiling from being performed, causing delays in treatment or suboptimal therapy selection. Liquid biopsy offers a minimally invasive method for molecular profiling by analyzing circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) and RNA (cfRNA) in plasma, potentially overcoming these barriers. This paper discusses the outcomes of a multidisciplinary working group in Ontario, which proposed three eligibility criteria for liquid biopsy reimbursement: (1) insufficient tissue for complete testing or failed tissue biomarker testing; (2) suspected advanced NSCLC where tissue biopsy is not feasible; and (3) high-risk patients who may deteriorate before tissue results are available. The group also addressed considerations for assay selection, implementation, and economic impact. These discussions aim to inform reimbursement and implementation strategies for liquid biopsy in Ontario's public healthcare system, recognizing the need for ongoing evaluation as technology and evidence evolve.

Lung cancer remains the leading cancer-related death across North America. Imaging is fundamental. Recently, healthcare disparities came into research focus. Our aim was to explore disparity from an imaging, genetic, and outcome perspective. We utilized the AACR Project GENIE Biopharma Consortium (BPC) dataset v 1.1 to build a collated NSCLC dataset. Descriptive and analytical statistics were applied according to data characteristics. From 1849 patients, mean age was 64.4 y (±10.5), 58% ( n = 1065) were female, 23% ( n = 419) never smoked, 84% ( n = 1545) were of white race, and 57% ( n = 1052) were < stage III. No difference ( p > 0.05) was found for baseline imaging by race. White race showed higher 3-month surveillance imaging ( p = 0.048) and a baseline stage < IV (OR 0.61). KRAS (33.3 vs. 17.9%), STK11 (14.8 vs. 7.3%), and KEAP1 (13.3 vs. 5.3%) mutations were predominant among white patients while EGFR mutation (19.2 vs. 44.1%) was less predominant. Mutations in TP53 or KEAP1 had worse PFS and OS. The latter was also reduced in STK11, KRAS + STK11, and KRAS + KEAP1 mutations. Meanwhile, EGFR mutation had increased OS. Multivariate analysis showed that progression on imaging at 3 or 6 months (HR 1.69 and 1.43, respectively), TP53 (HR 1.37) and KRAS (HR 1.26) had lower OS while EGFR and LRP1B (HR 0.69 and 0.39, respectively) had higher OS. No racial disparity at baseline imaging was observed. Higher initial stages among non-white patients might reflect inequalities in accessing healthcare. However, race wasn't associated to OS. Finally, progression in imaging at 3 or 6 months showed the higher hazard ratios for death.

We examined trends in radiation therapy (rt) utilization by a population-based breast cancer cohort in Ontario. The provincial cancer registry provided a breast cancer cohort based on diagnosis dates from April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2010. Staging information was also available. The cohort was then linked, by encrypted health card number, to linkable administrative datasets, including rt utilization. The average age in the identified female breast cancer cohort (n = 39,656) was 61.6 ± 14.0 years. Almost two thirds of the patients (n = 25,225) received rt, and staging information was available for 22,988 patients (9541 stage i, 8516 stage ii, 4050 stage iii, and 881 stage iv). The average number of rt courses received by the patients was 1.4 ± 0.7 for stage i, 1.8 ± 1.1 for stage ii, 2.5 ± 1.3 for stage iii, and 2.8 ± 2.4 for stage iv. The ratio of conventional rt to intensity-modulated rt was 70.9%:16.6% for stage i, 71.6%:11.3% for stage ii, 74.6%:4.6% for stage iii, and 89.6%:2.2% for stage iv. From 2005 to 2010, almost two thirds of a Canadian female breast cancer cohort received rt, and the average number of courses increased with disease severity. A similar trend was observed with the type of rt (use of conventional rt increased with disease severity). The next step is to apply unit costs to the number of fractions and to obtain rt planning and radiation therapist times.

Unlabelled: Genomic information is increasingly being used to personalize health care. One example is gene expression profiling (gep) tests, which estimate recurrence risk to inform chemotherapy decisions in breast cancer. Recently, gep tests were publicly funded in Ontario. We explored the perceived utility of gep tests, focusing on the factors influencing their use and value in treatment decision-making by patients and oncologists., Methods: We conducted interviews with oncologists (n = 14) and interviews and a focus group with early-stage breast cancer patients (n = 28) who underwent gep testing. Both groups were recruited through oncology clinics in Ontario. Data were analyzed using the content analysis and constant comparison techniques., Results: Narratives from patients and oncologists provided insights into various factors facilitating and restricting access to gep. First, oncologists are positioned as gatekeepers of gep, providing access in medically appropriate cases. However, varying perceptions of appropriateness led to perceived inequities in access and negative impacts on the doctor-patient relationship. Second, media attention facilitated patient awareness of gep, but also complicated gatekeeping. Third, the dedicated administration attached to gep was burdensome and led to long waits for results and also to increased patient anxiety and delayed treatment. Collectively, because of barriers to access, those factors inadvertently heightened the perceived value of gep for patients relative to other prognostic indicators., Conclusions: Our study delineates the factors facilitating and restricting access to gep, and highlights the roles of media and organization of services in the perceived value and utilization of gep. The results identify a need for administrative changes and practice guidelines to support streamlined and standardized use of gep tests.

Introduction: Determining the likely benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer patients depends on estimating baseline recurrence risk. Gene expression profile (gep) testing of tumours informs risk prediction, but evidence of its clinical utility is limited. We explored patient perceptions of gep testing and the impact of those perceptions on chemotherapy decisions., Methods: We conducted one focus group (n = 4) and individual interviews (n = 24) with patients who used gep testing, recruited through clinics at two hospitals in Ontario. Data were analyzed using content analysis and constant comparison techniques., Results: Patients' understanding of gep testing was variable, and misapprehensions were common. Patients valued the test because it provided them with certainty amidst confusion, with options and a sense of empowerment, and with personalized, authoritative information. They commonly believed that the test was better and fundamentally different from other clinical tests, attributing to it unique power and truth-value. This kind of "magical thinking" was derived from an amplified perception of the test's validity and patients' need for reassurance about their treatment choices. Despite misperceptions or magical thinking, gep was widely considered to be the deciding factor in treatment decisions., Conclusions: Patients tend to overestimate the truth-value of gep testing based on misperceptions of its validity. Our results identify a need to better support patient understanding of the test and its limitations. Findings illustrate the deep emotional investment patients make in gep test results and the impact of that investment on their treatment decisions.

Background: In patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancer, the phase iii Randomized ECF for Advanced and Locally Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer 2 (real-2) trial demonstrated equivalent clinical efficacy when capecitabine (x) was substituted for 5-fluorouracil (5fu) in the epirubicin-cisplatin-5fu (ecf) regimen. The present analysis compares the direct medical costs associated with both regimens., Methods: This cost-consequence analysis of direct medical costs took resource utilization data from the real-2 trial where available. Direct medical costs were derived from the perspective of the Canadian public health care system in 2008 Canadian dollars. Mean cost per patient on each treatment arm was calculated., Results: Drug costs from start of treatment until first progression, including pre- and post-chemotherapy medications and administration costs, totalled $5,344 for ecx as compared with $3,187 for ecf. Costs for treatment of adverse events were estimated at $2,621 for ecx as compared with $3,397 for ecf. An additional cost of $873 was associated with insertion of an implanted venous access. Total incremental cost of ecx over ecf was $508., Conclusions: In advanced gastroesophageal cancer, capecitabine is an attractive alternative to 5fu. Although the drug cost per se is greater, use of capecitabine is associated with decreased consumption of hospital resources. Not only does capecitabine fit with patient preference for oral therapy, it also avoids the inconvenience and complications of central venous access.