Cost-effective analysis of genotyping using oral cells in the geriatric population.

We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of using buccal swab brushes in comparison with blood samples for obtaining DNA for large epidemiological studies of the elderly population. The data reported here are from the third phase of the Integral Study of Depression among the Elderly in Mexico City's Mexican Institute of Social Security, conducted in 2007. The total cost of the two procedures was determined. The measurement of effectiveness was the quality and quantity of DNA measured in ng/µL and the use of this DNA for the determination of apolipoprotein E (APO E) polymorphism by PCR. Similar rates of amplification were obtained with the two techniques. The cost of the buccal swab brushes, including sample collection and DNA extraction, was US$16.63, compared to the cost per blood sample of US$23.35. Using the buccal swab, the savings was US$6.72 per patient (P < 0.05). The effectiveness was similar. Quantity and quality of DNA obtained were similar for the oral and blood procedures, demonstrating that the swab brush technique offers a feasible alternative for large-scale epidemiological studies.

Metastatic malignant melanoma.

Metastatic malignant melanoma is an incurable malignancy with extremely poor prognosis. Patients bearing this diagnosis face a median survival time of approximately 9 months with a probability of surviving 5 years after initial presentation at less than 5%. This is contrasted by the curative nature of surgical resection of early melanoma detected in the skin. To date, no systemic therapy has consistently and predictably impacted the overall survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. However, in recent years, a resurgence of innovative diagnostic and therapeutic developments have broadened our understanding of the natural history of melanoma and identified rational therapeutic targets/strategies that seem poised to significantly change the clinical outcomes in these patients. Herein we review the state-of-the-art in metastatic melanoma diagnostics and therapeutics with particular emphasis on multi-disciplinary clinical management.

A pharmaco-economic analysis of second-line treatment with imatinib or sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours.

Second-line treatments recommended by the National Cancer Center Network to manage advanced-stage gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) were evaluated to determine the cost and cost-effectiveness of each intervention in the Mexican insurance system, the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social (IMSS). Treatments examined over a 5-year temporal horizon to estimate long-term costs included 800 mg day(-1) of imatinib mesylate, 50 mg day(-1) of sunitinib malate (administered in a 4 week on/2 week rest schedule), and palliative care. The mean cost (MC), cost-effectiveness, and benefit of each intervention were compared to determine the best GIST treatment from the institutional perspective of the IMSS. As sunitinib was not reimbursed at the time of the study, a Markov model and sensitivity analysis were conducted to predict the MC and likelihood of reimbursement. Patients taking 800 mg day(-1) of imatinib had the highest MC (+/-s.d.) of treatment at $35,225.61 USD (+/-1253.65 USD); while sunitinib incurred a median MC of $17,805.87 USD (+/-694.83 USD); and palliative care had the least MC over treatment duration as the cost was $2071.86 USD (+/-472.88 USD). In comparison to palliative care, sunitinib is cost-effective for 38.9% of patients; however, sunitinib delivered the greatest survival benefit as 5.64 progression-free months (PFM) and 1.4 life-years gained (LYG) were obtained in the economic model. Conversely, patients on imatinib and palliative care saw a lower PFM of 5.28 months and 2.58 months and also fewer LYG (only 1.31 and 1.08 years, respectively). Therefore, economic modeling predicts that reimbursing sunitinib over high dose imatinib in the second-line GIST indication would deliver cost savings to the IMSS and greater survival benefits to patients.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasonography and physician specialty on the management of patients with esophagus cancer.

While endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are the most accurate techniques for locoregional staging of esophageal cancer, little evidence exists that these innovations impact on clinical care. The objective on this study was to determine the frequency with which EUS and EUS-FNA alter the management of patients with localized esophageal cancer, and assess practice variation among specialists at a tertiary care center. Three gastroenterologists, three medical oncologists, three radiation oncologists and four thoracic surgeons were asked to independently report their management recommendations as the anonymized staging information of 50 prospectively enrolled patients from another study were sequentially disclosed on-line. Compared to initial management recommendations, that were based upon history, physical examination, upper endoscopy and CT scan results, EUS prompted a change in management 24% (95% CI: 12-36%) of the time; usually to a more resource-intensive approach (71%), for example from recommending palliation to recommending neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. EUS-FNA plus cytology results altered management an additional 8% (95% CI: 6-15%) of the time. Agreement between specialists ranged from fair (intraclass correlation [ICC=0.32) to substantial (ICC=0.65); improving with additional information. Among specialists, agreement was greatest for patients with stage I disease. EUS and EUS-FNA changed patient management the most for patients with stages IIA, IIB or III disease. EUS, with or without FNA, significantly impacts the management of patients with localized esophageal cancer. With respect to the optimal treatment for each patient, agreement among physicians incrementally increases with endoscopic ultrasound results. Specialty training appears to influence therapeutic decision-making behavior.

Thromboembolism in patients with high-grade glioma.

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors related to increased or decreased risk of thromboembolism (TE) in patients with high-grade glioma. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis of 64 patients enrolled in two prospective clinical trials of chemotherapy and radiation therapy for newly diagnosed high-grade glioma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The 64 patients were 18 years of age or older and had histologically confirmed grade 3 or 4 astrocytoma, mixed astrocytoma-oligodendroglioma, or gliosarcoma. The diagnosis of TE was confirmed by impedance plethysmography, venography, duplex ultrasonography, ventilation-perfusion lung scanning, or pulmonary angiography. For statistical analysis, the study group was divided into those with and those without TE. RESULTS: TE developed in 18 of the 64 patients (28%). Of the 18 patients, 11 had deep venous thrombosis of a lower extremity, 5 had pulmonary emboli, and 2 had superficial thrombophlebitis. A paretic arm (P = 0.017), a paretic leg (P = 0.026), or a history of TE before the diagnosis of glioma (P = 0.076) was more common in patients with TE than in those without TE. Ten patients in the group without TE were using aspirin preoperatively in comparison with no patient in the TE group (P = 0.05). No significant differences were noted in duration of survival (median, 39.4 weeks and 46 weeks for the TE and non-TE groups, respectively). One patient with apparently excessive anticoagulation had a fatal intracerebral hemorrhage. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that TE in patients with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma might be associated with a history of TE or with a paretic extremity; however, no evidence of worse survival was noted in the TE group. Treatment with heparin followed by warfarin sodium was associated with infrequent bleeding complications. An intriguing finding was that the use of aspirin before operation was associated with a decreased risk of TE. Thus, a prospective study with use of aspirin in patients with high-grade glioma at risk for TE would be reasonable.

Investigating four 'myths' surrounding dysphagia in patients with metastatic esophageal cancer. A multi-institutional study from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group.

Eighty-five to 95% of esophageal cancer patients suffer dysphagia. Yet, few studies have focused on this symptom, and four 'myths' persist: (i) dysphagia cannot be measured; (ii) chemotherapy cannot palliate it; (iii) dysphagia predicts a poor prognosis; (iv) dysphagia is associated with a frustratingly insatiable appetite. Forty-four patients with metastatic esophageal cancer participated in this quality of life/translational component of a previously reported clinical trial. All were monitored for chemotherapy efficacy and toxicity and completed questionnaires on dysphagia and appetite at baseline and every 6 weeks. The appetite hormones, leptin and neuropeptide y, were also assessed. Forty-five per cent of patients could easily swallow solid foods; all others had varying dysphagia, thus enabling exploration of these four 'myths.' First, a single-item visual analog scale (Swallowing Scale), demonstrated excellent agreement with a previously validated questionnaire (81% at baseline), thus reminding us that dysphagia is measurable. Second, chemotherapy was associated with a trend towards improved dysphagia (P = 0.059). Third, dysphagia did not predict tumor response or survival. Fourth, dysphagia was not associated with appetite, leptin or neuropeptide y. This study helps to dispel these four 'myths' and underscores the need for further quality of life research on dysphagia.