Treatment, healthcare utilization and outcomes in patients with glioblastoma in Ontario: a 10-year cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common malignant primary brain tumour in adults. Receipt of adjuvant therapies has been shown to exert a significant positive effect on patient survival. Little is known however about how changes in standards of care and healthcare system factors, such as access, affect real-world outcomes. In this study, we provide an overview of GBM in Ontario and examine elements of care, including treatment patterns, healthcare utilization, and overall survival, from 2010 to 2019, to interpret the impact of the changes in practice standards and expansion of the care network within this period. METHODS: Using linked health-administrative databases from Ontario, Canada, we conducted a population-based cohort study to examine the clinical and biological characteristics, treatment, and healthcare utilization patterns of adult GBM patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2019. The primary outcomes were enrollment in adjuvant chemoradiation treatment and 1-, 2-, and 5-year survival. All analyses were performed using the Statistical Analysis Software (SAS). RESULTS: 5392 patients were diagnosed with GBM in Ontario from 2010 to 2019 (58% male, 42% female). The median age at diagnosis was 64. Receipt of adjuvant chemoradiation within one year of diagnosis increased from 51% in 2010 to 63% in 2019. 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year overall survival for all patients remained stable, ranging between 40 and 43%, 15-19%, and 5-7%, respectively. For patients above the age of 65, however, 1-year survival increased from 19% in 2010 to 26% in 2019. INTERPRETATION: Regionalization enabled access to treatment closer to home for many patients. Over the last decade, receipt of adjuvant chemoradiation increased among elderly patients, but the improvement in 1-year overall survival over time was accounted for by sociodemographic and clinical covariates. Our findings support the efforts for regionalization of services to improve accessibility. CONCLUSION: This Ontario-based study provides insight into the effect of practice evolution and healthcare utilization on the overall survival of patients with GBM. Overall survival for most patients with glioblastoma has remained stagnant over the past decade. Changes in treatment standards and expansion of access to treating centres have been associated with prolonged survival in elderly glioblastoma patients.

Choreographed expansion of services results in decreased patient burden without compromise of outcomes: An assessment of the Ontario experience.

Background: Neuro-oncology care in Ontario, Canada has been historically centralized, at times requiring significant travel on the part of patients. Toward observing the goal of patient-centered care and reducing patient burden, 2 additional regional cancer centres (RCC) capable of neuro-oncology care delivery were introduced in 2016. This study evaluates the impact of increased regionalization of neuro-oncology services, from 11 to 13 oncology centers, on healthcare utilization and travel burden for glioblastoma (GBM) patients in Ontario. Methods: We present a cohort of GBM patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2019. Incidence of GBM and treatment modalities were identified using provincial health administrative databases. A geographic information system and spatial analysis were used to estimate travel time from patient residences to neuro-oncology RCCs. Results: Among the 5242 GBM patients, 79% received radiation as part of treatment. Median travel time to the closest RCC was higher for patients who did not receive radiation as part of treatment than for patients who did (P = .03). After 2016, the volume of patients receiving radiation at their local RCC increased from 62% to 69% and the median travel time to treatment RCCs decreased (P = .0072). The 2 new RCCs treated 35% and 41% of patients within their respective catchment areas. Receipt of standard of care, surgery, and chemoradiation (CRT), increased by 11%. Conclusions: Regionalization resulted in changes in the healthcare utilization patterns in Ontario consistent with decreased patient travel burden for patients with GBM. Focused regionalization did not come at the cost of decreased quality of care, as determined by the delivery of a standard of care.

Prevalence and predictors of long-delayed (> 120 h) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)-a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Although there have been reports of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) beyond 120 h, its overall prevalence has not been systematically examined. The aim of this review and meta-analysis was to report on the prevalence of this long-delayed CINV. METHODS: This review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022346963). PubMed (Medline), Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until August 2022. Articles were included if they reported on CINV > 120 h after initiation of the chemotherapy regimen and patients received a single-agent highly emetogenic (HEC) or moderately emetogenic (MEC) antineoplastic agent for 1 day alone or in combination with low/minimal emetogenic chemotherapy. For all eligible articles, individual study authors were contacted and requested to provide individual patient-level data of demographics, emetogenicity of chemotherapy regimens, and daily incidence of nausea and vomiting. Forward stepwise logistic regression identified predictors for the incident day's CINV based on prior day's CINV episodes, controlling for patient demographics, and stratified by regimen emetogenicity. RESULTS: A total of 2048 patients from 2 studies were included in this individual patient data meta-analysis: 1333 patients (65%) received HEC and 715 (35%) received MEC. Among those receiving HEC, 325 (24%) experienced acute, 652 (49%) delayed, and 393 (31%) long-delayed nausea; 107 (8%) experienced acute, 179 (14%) delayed, and 79 (6%) long-delayed vomiting. Among those receiving MEC, 48 (7%) experienced acute, 272 (38%) delayed, and 167 (24%) long-delayed nausea; 12 (2%) experienced acute, 97 (14%) delayed, and 42 (6%) long-delayed vomiting. Nausea in the long-delayed phase was as severe as in the delayed phase. Patients experiencing nausea and vomiting on days 4 and 5 were at significant risk of experiencing long-delayed CINV. CONCLUSION: While not as prevalent as delayed nausea and vomiting, long-delayed CINV affects a significant proportion of patients and severity is similar. Patients with delayed CINV, specifically on days 4-5, are at risk of experiencing long-delayed CINV.