Circulating Tumor DNA Allele Fraction: A Candidate Biological Signal for Multicancer Early Detection Tests to Assess the Clinical Significance of Cancers.

Current imaging-based cancer screening approaches provide useful but limited prognostic information. Complementary to existing screening tests, cell-free DNA-based multicancer early detection (MCED) tests account for cancer biology [manifested through circulating tumor allele fraction (cTAF)], which could inform prognosis and help assess the cancer's clinical significance. This review discusses the factors affecting circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels and cTAF, and their correlation with the cancer's clinical significance. Furthermore, it discusses the influence of cTAF on MCED test performance, which could help inform prognosis. Clinically significant cancers show higher ctDNA levels quantified by cTAF than indolent phenotype cancers within each stage. This is because more frequent mitosis and cell death combined with increased trafficking of cell-free DNA into circulation leads to greater vascularization and depth of tumor invasion. cTAF has been correlated with biomarkers for cancer aggressiveness and overall survival; cancers with lower cTAF had better survival when compared with cancers as determined by the higher cTAF and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-based survival for that cancer type at each stage. MCED-detected cancers in case-control studies had comparable survival to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-based survival at each stage. Because many MCED tests use ctDNA as an analyte, cTAF could provide a common metric to compare performance. The prognostic value of cTAF may allow MCED tests to preferentially detect clinically significant cancers at early stages when outcomes are favorable and this may avoid overdiagnosis.

Estimating the population health impact of a multi-cancer early detection genomic blood test to complement existing screening in the US and UK.

BACKGROUND: Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) next-generation-sequencing blood tests represent a potential paradigm shift in screening. METHODS: We estimated the impact of screening in the US and UK. We used country-specific parameters for uptake, and test-specific sensitivity and false-positive rates for current screening: breast, colorectal, cervical and lung (US only) cancers. For the MCED test, we used cancer-specific sensitivities by stage. Outcomes included the true-positive:false-positive (TP:FP) ratio; and the cost of diagnostic investigations among screen positives, per cancer detected (Diagcost). Outcomes were estimated for recommended screening only, and then when giving the MCED test to anyone without cancer detected by current screening plus similarly aged adults ineligible for recommended screening. RESULTS: In the US, current screening detects an estimated 189,498 breast, cervical, colorectal and lung cancers. An MCED test with 25-100% uptake detects an additional 105,526-422,105 cancers (multiple types). The estimated TP:FP (Diagcost) was 1.43 ($89,042) with current screening but only 1:1.8 ($7060) using an MCED test. For the UK the corresponding estimates were 1:18 (£10,452) for current screening, and 1:1.6 (£2175) using an MCED test. CONCLUSIONS: Adding an MCED blood test to recommended screening can potentially be an efficient strategy. Ongoing randomised studies are required for full efficacy and cost-effectiveness evaluations.

Novel multicancer early detection technology-potential value to employers and the workforce.

Multicancer early detection technology could help reduce cancer mortality compared to the current strategy of single-cancer screening tests.

Epoetin alfa use in patients with ESRD: an analysis of recent US prescribing patterns and hemoglobin outcomes.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown to what degree physicians adjust erythropoietin doses to achieve hemoglobin levels (11.0 to 12.0 g/dL [110 to 120 g/L]) recommended by the National Kidney Foundation-Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (NKF-K/DOQI) for patients with end-stage renal disease receiving hemodialysis. Our objective is to examine epoetin alfa prescribing patterns for achieving the target hemoglobin level range in this population. METHODS: Monthly hemoglobin levels and epoetin alfa doses from 2 large databases were retrospectively analyzed. One data set comprised 31,267 patients from the Fresenius Medical Care-North America (FMC-NA) database, and the other comprised 128,761 patients based on claims for Medicare services. RESULTS: Longitudinal evaluation of the FMC-NA data set showed that hemoglobin levels in patients administered epoetin alfa cycled in and out of the NKF-K/DOQI hemoglobin target range, and doses were decreased in 98.8% of patients with persistent hemoglobin levels greater than 12.0 g/dL (> 120 g/L). Hemoglobin levels in patients from the Medicare data set that initially were outside the target range migrated into the range with epoetin alfa dose titration. FMC-NA patients with a 3-month average hemoglobin level less than 11.0 g/dL (< 110 g/L) were administered significantly greater epoetin alfa doses than those with average hemoglobin levels greater than 12.0 g/dL (> 120 g/L; 21,838 versus 13,503 U/wk; P < 0.0001). Less than 0.4% of patients administered epoetin alfa were persistently anemic (hemoglobin < 11.0 g/dL [< 110 g/L]) and were administered persistently high doses (> 30,000 U/wk), but failed to respond with a 0.5-g/dL or greater (> or = 5-g/L) increase in hemoglobin levels. CONCLUSION: In these analyses, few hemodialysis patients experienced persistent anemia while being administered high epoetin alfa doses. Physicians appeared to appropriately adjust doses to achieve hemoglobin levels recommended by the NKF-K/DOQI guidelines.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating protein therapy and the decline of renal function: a retrospective analysis of patients with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Previous studies have hinted at possible associations between anemia and progression of renal disease. The study objective was to determine whether treatment with erythropoiesis-stimulating proteins (ESPs) can curb the rate of decline in renal function in predialysis patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: Observational, before/after analysis using electronic medical records from the Veterans Administration (VA). Included patients had at least two measurements of serum creatinine levels before and after ESP treatment initiation. The Cockcroft-Gault formula was used to derive estimates of glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Rate of renal function decline prior to and following initiation of therapy were compared. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty two patients with renal impairment levels of Stage 3 (moderate) or Stage 4 (severe) at ESP treatment initiation were identified. Over 80% of patients initiated therapy with either Grade 1 or Grade 2 anemia. The rate of renal function decline was calculated as the slope of the least-squares linear regression line of the inverse serum creatinine over time during the pre-treatment initiation and post-treatment initiation time periods. Overall, patients experienced a slowing in the rate of renal function decline after treatment was initiated (mean pretreatment initiation rate of -0.094 dL/mg/yr versus mean post-treatment initiation rate of -0.057 dL/mg/yr). CONCLUSION: Renal function declined at a slower rate following ESP initiation. Results are consistent with prior studies indicating delayed dialysis initiation in patients treated with ESPs. Analyses were limited by the observational study design and lack of information regarding some potential confounders. Longer-term, prospective trials are needed to determine whether ESPs slow progression of renal disease and the potential magnitude of such an effect.

Impairment in work productivity and health-related quality of life in patients with IBS.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a long-term and episodic medical disorder shown to have an impact on work productivity and health-related quality of life (QOL). The objective of this study was to assess the impact of IBS on work productivity and on health-related QOL in an employed population in the United States and to quantify the cost of these factors to the employer. A 2-phase survey was sent to the workforce of a large US bank to assess the presence of IBS among employees and to measure their work productivity (absenteeism [time lost from work] and presenteeism [reduced productivity at work]) and health-related QOL. Forty-one percent of the 1776 employees responding to both phases of the survey met the Rome II criteria for IBS. Employees with IBS reported a 15% greater loss in work productivity because of gastrointestinal symptoms than employees without IBS and had significantly lower Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36) scores than those without IBS. IBS was associated with a 21% reduction in work productivity, equivalent to working less than 4 days in a 5-day workweek. Employees with IBS also had significantly lower scores on all domains of the SF-36, indicating poorer functional outcomes. Reduced work productivity and diminished QOL of these magnitudes may have substantial financial impact on employers.

Economic and utilization outcomes associated with choice of treatment for venous thromboembolism in hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital administrative data were analyzed to assess treatment patterns, in-hospital mortality, rates of hemorrhagic events and thrombus propagation, utilization of health care resources, and hospital costs associated with various treatments during inpatient care for venous thromboembolism (VTE). STUDY DESIGN: Data from inpatient records were collected for deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) encounters at 132 US hospitals between January 1999 and December 2000. Patients receiving the most frequently employed treatments were compared with respect to demographics, related procedures and diagnostics, length of stay, adverse events, in-hospital mortality, and hospital costs. RESULTS: A total of 953 primary DVT and 3933 primary PE admissions were identified. Most admissions involved treatment with unfractionated heparin and vitamin K antagonist (UFH/VKA, 64.2% of admissions), followed by UFH with VKA and low-molecular-weight heparin (UFH/LMWH/VKA, 14.4%), and LMWH/VKA (12.9%). Compared with those treated with UFH/VKA, patients treated with LMWH/VKA experienced higher anticoagulant costs (dollar 540 vs. dollar 106), but lower total hospital costs (dollar 5198 vs. dollar 5977) and shorter lengths of stay (4.4 vs. 5.7 days for those without PE and 5.7 vs. 6.7 days for those with PE). CONCLUSIONS: UFH/VKA was the most common regimen used to treat VTE. In spite of its higher medication cost, however, treatment with LMWH/VKA was associated with significantly shorter hospital stays and lower total hospitalization costs, compared with UFH/VKA.

Minimizing complications from nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs: cost-effectiveness of competing strategies in varying risk groups.

OBJECTIVE: To appraise the cost-effectiveness of competing therapeutic strategies in patient cohorts eligible for aspirin prophylaxis with varying degrees of gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed to evaluate 3 competing strategies for the management of chronic arthritis: 1) a generic nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID(NS)) alone; 2) NSAID(NS) plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI); and 3) a cyclooxygenase 2-selective inhibitor (coxib) alone. Cost estimates were from a third-party payer perspective. The outcomes were incremental cost per ulcer complication avoided and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of varying patient GI risks and aspirin use. RESULTS: In average-risk patients, the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy costs an incremental 45,350 US dollars per additional ulcer complication avoided and 309,666 US dollars per QALY gained compared with the NSAID(NS) strategy. The coxib strategy was less effective and more expensive than the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the NSAID(NS) + PPI strategy became the dominant approach in patients at high risk for an NSAID adverse event (i.e., patients taking aspirin with > or =1 risk factor for a GI complication). CONCLUSION: Generic nonselective NSAIDs are most cost-effective in patients at low risk for an adverse event. However, the addition of a PPI to a nonselective NSAID may be the preferred strategy in patients taking aspirin or otherwise at high risk for a GI or cardiovascular adverse event.

A systematic review of diabetes disease management programs.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate and synthesize published evidence regarding the effect of disease management programs for patients with diabetes mellitus on processes and outcomes of care. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Computerized databases were searched for English-language controlled studies assessing the effect of diabetes disease management programs published from 1987 to 2001. Two reviewers extracted study data using a structured abstraction form. Pooled estimates of program effects on glycated hemoglobin were calculated using an empirical Bayes model. RESULTS: The pooled estimate of program effects on glycated hemoglobin was a 0.5-percentage point reduction (95% confidence interval, 0.3 to 0.6 percentage points), a modest but significant improvement. Evidence also supports program benefits in improving screening for retinopathy and foot lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes disease management programs can improve glycemic control to a modest extent and can increase screening for retinopathy and foot complications. Further efforts will be required to create more effective disease management programs for patients with diabetes mellitus.

Does disease management improve clinical and economic outcomes in patients with chronic diseases? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical and economic effects of disease management in patients with chronic diseases. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for English-language articles from 1987 to 2001. Articles were included if they used a systematic approach to care and evaluated patients with chronic disease, reported objective measurements of the processes or outcomes of care, and employed acceptable experimental or quasi-experimental study designs as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group. RESULTS: Two reviewers evaluated 16,917 titles and identified 102 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Identified studies represented 11 chronic conditions: depression, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic pain, coronary artery disease, asthma, heart failure, back pain, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Disease management programs for patients with depression had the highest percentage of comparisons (48% [41/86]) showing substantial improvements in patient care, whereas programs for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (9% [2/22]) or chronic pain (8% [1/12]) appeared to be the least effective. Of the outcomes more frequently studied, disease management appeared to improve patient satisfaction (71% [12/17]), patient adherence (47% [17/36]), and disease control (45% [33/74]) most commonly and cost-related outcomes least frequently (11% to 16%). CONCLUSION: Disease management programs were associated with marked improvements in many different processes and outcomes of care. Few studies demonstrated a notable reduction in costs. Further research is needed to understand how disease management can most effectively improve the quality and cost of care for patients with chronic diseases.

Effectiveness of proton pump inhibitors in nonerosive reflux disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Little information is available about the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in patients with nonerosive reflux disease (NERD). We aimed to synthesize available data and determine the effectiveness of PPIs on symptom resolution in patients with NERD. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature identified studies reporting the effects of PPIs in patients with NERD. Heartburn resolution data were pooled across studies. The effectiveness of PPI therapy in inducing complete heartburn resolution was compared in patients with NERD vs. erosive esophagitis (EE). RESULTS: Seven trials evaluating heartburn resolution in NERD were identified. Higher proportions of patients reported achieving sufficient heartburn resolution compared with complete heartburn resolution. The effect of PPIs on sufficient heartburn resolution was observed sooner than was complete heartburn resolution. Therapeutic gain of PPI therapy over placebo ranged from 30% to 35% for sufficient heartburn control and from 25% to 30% for complete heartburn control. Pooled response rates at 4 weeks were significantly higher for patients with EE compared with NERD (56% vs. 37%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PPIs provide a more modest therapeutic gain in patients with NERD as compared with those with EE. A trend in increased therapeutic gain for NERD patients was shown throughout the 4 weeks, suggesting that 4 weeks of follow-up evaluation may be insufficient to show full therapeutic gain in this patient population.

Utilization of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antisecretory agents: a managed care claims analysis.

PURPOSE: To describe patients initiating nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) therapy with regard to gastrointestinal and cardiac risks and patterns of antisecretory agent use, and to explore the relation between therapy type and subsequent outcomes. METHODS: We studied patients aged 18 years or older who had continuous coverage from 1998 to 2001 and who had initiated treatment with cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) selective inhibitors or nonselective NSAIDs. Patients were categorized with respect to gastrointestinal and cardiac risk profiles. Proton pump inhibitor use within 15 days of initiating NSAID therapy was considered prophylactic. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate associations between treatment and hospitalization events, cardiac events, and health care costs. RESULTS: We identified 106,564 eligible NSAID initiators: 65.2% used COX-2 inhibitors and 34.8% used traditional NSAIDs. Users of COX-2 inhibitors were more likely to be at higher risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and cardiac events than were NSAID users. Proton pump inhibitor prophylaxis was most common among users of COX-2 inhibitors, but was only 11% in patients at high risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. There were no differences among treatment groups in terms of gastrointestinal or cardiac events. Initiation of COX-2 inhibitor therapy was associated with greater total health care costs. CONCLUSION: Although we found that COX-2 inhibitors were used more frequently than were traditional NSAIDs in certain groups of patients with varying cardiac or gastrointestinal risk, we did not find that their use resulted in reductions in clinical events, cotherapy with proton pump inhibitors, or costs, suggesting that a better understanding of the relation between NSAID treatment strategies and outcomes in patients with differing risk characteristics is needed.

Quality of life in managed care patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

The relationship between the severity of abdominal discomfort/pain and generic and disease-specific quality of life (QoL) was explored in patients with irritable bowel syndrome in an MCO. Subjects were stratified into four symptom-severity groups. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were used to examine the relationship of QoL to severity of abdominal discomfort/pain. Generic and disease-specific QoL scores declined as severity of abdominal discomfort/pain increased. The lowest 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores for respondents with the most severe abdominal discomfort/pain were for role physical (24.2 +/- 35.4) and vitality (33.7 +/- 19.2). In multivariate regression models controlling for age, sex, work status and education, severity of abdominal discomfort/pain was a significant independent predictor of QoL.

Effectiveness of disease management programs in depression: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The authors systematically evaluated the published evidence to assess the effectiveness of disease management programs in depression. METHOD: English-language articles on depression were identified through a MEDLINE search for the period from January 1987 to June 2001. Two reviewers evaluated 16,952 published titles, identified 24 depression disease management programs that met explicit inclusion criteria, and extracted data on study characteristics, interventions used, and outcome measures. Pooled effect sizes were calculated by using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Pooled results for disease management program effects on symptoms of depression showed statistically significant improvements (effect size=0.33, N=24). Programs also had statistically significant effects on patients' satisfaction with treatment (effect size=0.51, N=6), patients' compliance with the recommended treatment regimen (effect size=0.36, N=7), and adequacy of prescribed treatment (effect size=0.44, N=11). One program with an explicit screening component showed significant improvement in the rate of detection of depression by primary care physicians (effect size=0.66); two other programs lacking a screening component showed small nonsignificant improvements in the detection rate (effect size=0.18). Disease management programs increased health care utilization (effect size=-0.10, N=8), treatment costs (effect size=-1.03, N=3), and hospitalization (effect size=-0.20, N=2). CONCLUSIONS: Disease management appears to improve the detection and care of patients with depression. Further research is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of disease management in depression, and consideration should be given to more widespread implementation of these programs.

Examining the value and quality of health economic analyses: implications of utilizing the QHES.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the increasing use of health economic studies and practical implications of evaluating their quality utilizing the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. METHODS: We first reviewed secondary references to examine ways in which health economic analyses are used in different health care settings, the manner in which these data are appraised and evaluated, and their relevance and value in decision making. The QHES, a new instrument designed to support fast, accurate initial assessments of study quality, was then introduced and validated. A case study was performed using the QHES to score the quality of 30 cost-effectiveness studies in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) published since 1985. Areas where additional research could guide efforts to identify and enhance the use of higher-quality cost-effectiveness studies were suggested. RESULTS: Results from the published validation study of the QHES demonstrated the validity of this new instrument. The resulting QHES scores in the case study of GERD papers ranged from 43 to 91 with a mean of 63.6 (SD=14.7). Approximately 27% of the studies rated had scores less than 50, and 27% had scores above or equal to 75. All 30 studies made conclusions and recommendations and justified them based on their study results. Most studies used appropriate cost and health outcome measures. Very few studies stated the perspective of their analysis and reasons for its selection. The majority of the studies did not perform incremental analysis. CONCLUSION: An examination of the QHES validation study and the case study in GERD suggests that there is a rationale and potential utility to use a quality scoring system for cost-effectiveness studies. The QHES may play an important role in discriminating higher-quality cost-effectiveness information to enhance decision making. The QHES can also serve as a guideline for conducting and reporting future cost-effectiveness studies, as an aid in the editorial process, and for stratification in systematic reviews. Complex decisions regarding resource allocation rarely rely solely on economic considerations but do increasingly use health economic analyses. To the extent that such analyses are used, the QHES may help ensure that higher-quality analyses receive more analytic attention and greater weight in the decision-making process.

Reading and interpreting economic evaluations in rheumatoid arthritis: an assessment of selected instruments for critical appraisal.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare the relative attributes (reliability, ease of use, applicability, and relevance) of different assessment tools for economic analyses as they pertain to rheumatoid arthritis (RA) literature. METHODS: An expert panel, comprising rheumatology researchers and clinicians, operationalized 2 economic appraisal instruments and applied them to 11 articles used for analysis. Each expert reviewed 3 articles, with each article independently reviewed by a pair of experts. A summary score for each article per appraisal instrument was calculated by dividing the number of items that received a "positive" response by the total number of items in the appraisal instrument. RESULTS: Scores for each article were similar across reviewers and appraisal instruments. CONCLUSION: There is a need for a more comprehensive approach for evaluating this rapidly growing body of economic literature that is not only valid and reliable, but also easy to apply and understand. Although consistency between reviewers was good on both guidelines, inter-guideline discrepancies were noted and reviewers reported some difficulty in using the operationalized format.

Meta-analysis of dyspepsia and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.

OBJECTIVE: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) use is a known risk factor for gastrointestinal (GI) perforations, ulcers, and bleeds, but there are limited data on its association with the very common symptom of dyspepsia. Using published and unpublished data sources, we sought to determine estimates of the risks of dyspepsia associated with NSAIDs. METHODS: We searched computerized databases (1966-1998) for primary studies of NSAIDs reporting on GI complications. We also obtained Food and Drug Administration (FDA) new drug application reviews for the 5 most common NSAIDs. We included studies reporting defined upper GI outcomes among subjects (>17 years old) who used oral NSAIDs for more than 4 days. Two reviewers evaluated 4,881 published titles, identifying 55 NSAID versus placebo randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 37 unpublished (FDA data) placebo-controlled RCTs; 86 NSAID versus NSAID RCTs (sample size >or=50); and 103 observational studies. RESULTS: The majority of clinical trials were of good quality. Meta-regression identified an increased risk of dyspepsia for users of specific NSAIDs (adjusted odds ratio [OR] of indomethacin, meclofenamate, piroxicam = 2.8), and for high dosages of other NSAIDs (OR = 3.1), but not for other NSAIDs regardless of dosage (OR = 1.1). Dyspepsia was not reported as an outcome in the case control or cohort studies. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trial data indicate that high dosages of any NSAID along with any dosage of indomethacin, meclofenamate, or piroxicam increase the risk of dyspepsia by about 3-fold. Other NSAIDs at lower dosages were not associated with an increased risk of dyspepsia.