Advanced Lung Cancer Patients' Use of EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Overall Survival: Real-World Evidence from Quebec, Canada.

EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are breakthrough palliative treatments for advanced lung cancer patients with tumors harboring mutations in the EGFR gene. Using healthcare administrative data, three cohorts were created to describe the use of three EGFR-TKIs that are publicly funded in Quebec for specific indications (i.e., 1st-line gefitinib, 1st-line afatinib, and post-EGFR-TKI osimertinib). The main objective was to compare overall survival (OS) among patients receiving these treatments to those in previous experimental and real-world studies. The patients who received EGFR-TKIs for indications of interest between 1 April 2001, and 31 March 2019 (or 31 March 2020, for post-EGFR-TKI osimertinib) were included to estimate the Kaplan-Meier-based median OS for each cohort. An extensive literature search was conducted to include comparable studies. For the gefitinib 1st-line (n = 457), the afatinib 1st-line (n = 80), and the post-EGFR-TKI osimertinib (n = 119) cohorts, we found a median OS (in months) of 18.9 (95%CI: 16.3-21.9), 26.6 (95%CI: 13.7-NE) and 19.9 (95%CI: 17.4-NE), respectively. Out of the 20 studies that we retained from the literature review and where comparisons were feasible, 17 (85%) had similar OS results, which further confirms the value of these breakthrough therapies in real-world clinical practice.

Intensity of hospital resource use following traumatic brain injury: a multicentre cohort study, 2013-2016.

BACKGROUND: The knowledge gap regarding acute care resource use for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) impedes efforts to improve the efficiency and quality of the care of these patients. Our objective was to evaluate interhospital variation in resource use for patients with TBI, identify determinants of high resource use and assess the association between hospital resource use and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective cohort study including patients aged 16 years and older admitted to the inclusive trauma system of Quebec following TBI, between 2013 and 2016. We estimated resource use using activity-based costs. Clinical outcomes included mortality, complications and unplanned hospital readmission. Interhospital variation was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Correlations between hospital resource use and clinical outcomes were evaluated using correlation coefficients on weighted, risk-adjusted estimates with 95% CIs. RESULTS: We included 6319 patients. We observed significant interhospital variation in resource use for patients discharged alive, which was not explained by patient case mix (ICC 0.052, 95% CI 0.043 to 0.061). Adjusted mean resource use for patients discharged to long-term care was more than twice that of patients discharged home. Hospitals with higher resource use tended to have a lower incidence of mortality (r -0.347, 95% CI -0.559 to -0.087) and unplanned readmission (r -0.249, 95% CI -0.481 to 0.020) but a higher incidence of complications (r 0.491, 95% CI 0.255 to 0.666). CONCLUSION: Resource use for TBI varies significantly among hospitals and may be associated with differences in mortality and morbidity. Negative associations with mortality and positive associations with complications should be interpreted with caution but suggest there may be a trade-off between adverse events and survival that should be evaluated further.

Low-value clinical practices in injury care: A scoping review and expert consultation survey.

BACKGROUND: Tests and treatments that are not supported by evidence and could expose patients to unnecessary harm, referred to here as low-value clinical practices, consume up to 30% of health care resources. Choosing Wisely and other organizations have published lists of clinical practices to be avoided. However, few apply to injury and most are based uniquely on expert consensus. We aimed to identify low-value clinical practices in acute injury care. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review targeting articles, reviews and guidelines that identified low-value clinical practices specific to injury populations. Thirty-six experts rated clinical practices on a five-point Likert scale from clearly low value to clearly beneficial. Clinical practices reported as low value by at least one level I, II, or III study and considered clearly or potentially low-value by at least 75% of experts were retained as candidates for low-value injury care. RESULTS: Of 50,695 citations, 815 studies were included and led to the identification of 150 clinical practices. Of these, 63 were considered candidates for low-value injury care; 33 in the emergency room, 9 in trauma surgery, 15 in the intensive care unit, and 5 in orthopedics. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which did not meet our criteria for low-value care. CONCLUSION: We identified 63 low-value clinical practices in acute injury care that are supported by empirical evidence and expert opinion. Conditional on future research, they represent potential targets for guidelines, overuse metrics and de-implementation interventions. We also identified 87 "gray zone" practices, which may be interesting targets for value-based decision-making. Our study represents an important step toward the deimplementation of low-value clinical practices in injury care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic Review, Level IV.