Expression III: patients' expectations and preferences regarding physician-patient relationship and clinical management-results of the international NOGGO/ENGOT-ov4-GCIG study in 1830 ovarian cancer patients from European countries.

Backround: The primary aim of this study was to investigate information needs and treatment preferences of patients with ovarian cancer, focusing especially on physician-patient relationship and treatment. Patients and methods: A questionnaire was developed based on the experiences of the national German survey 'Expression II', and was provided to patients with ovarian cancer either at initial diagnosis or with recurrent disease via Internet (online-version) or as print-out-version. Results: From December 2009 to October 2012, a total of 1830 patients with ovarian cancer from eight European countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain) participated, 902 (49.3%) after initial diagnosis and 731 (39.9%) with recurrent ovarian cancer. The median age was 58 years (range 17-89). Nearly all patients (96.2%) had experienced upfront surgery followed by first-line chemotherapy (91.8%). The majority of patients were satisfied with the completeness and comprehensibility of the explanation about the diagnosis and treatment options. The three most important aspects, identified by patients to improve the treatment for ovarian cancer included: 'the therapy should not induce alopecia' (42%), 'there must be more done to counter fatigue' (34.5%) and 'the therapy should be more effective' (29.7%). Out of 659 (36%) patients, who were offered participation in a clinical trial, 476 (26%) were included. Conclusion: This study underlines the high need of patients with ovarian cancer for all details concerning treatment options irrespective of their cultural background, the stage of disease and the patient's age. Increased information requirements regarding potential side effects and treatment alternatives were recorded. Besides the need for more effective therapy, alopecia and fatigue are the most important side effects of concern to patients.

Cost effectiveness of newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: a simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Early detection of cystic fibrosis (CF) by newborn screening (NBS) reduces the rate of avoidable complications. NBS protocols vary by jurisdiction and the cost effectiveness of these different protocols is debated. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost effectiveness of various CF NBS options. METHODS: A Markov model was built to simulate the cost effectiveness of various CF-NBS options for a hypothetical CF-NBS program over a 5-year time horizon assuming its integration into an existing universal NBS program. NBS simulated options were based on a combination of tests between the two commonly used immunoreactive trypsinogen (IRT) cutoffs (96th percentile and 99.5th percentile) as first tier tests, and, as a second tier test, either a second IRT, pancreatic-associated protein (PAP) or CFTR mutation panels. CFTR mutation panels were also considered as an eventual third tier test. Data input parameters used were retrieved from a thorough literature search. Outcomes considered were the direct costs borne by the Quebec public health care system and the number of cases of CF detected through each strategy, including the absence of screening option. RESULTS: IRT-PAP with an IRT cutoff at the 96th percentile is the most favorable option with a ratio of CAD$28,432 per CF case detected. The next most favorable alternative is the IRT1-IRT2 option with an IRT1 cutoff at the 96th percentile. The no-screening option is dominated by all NBS screening protocols considered. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that NBS for cystic fibrosis is a cost-effective strategy compared to the absence of NBS. The IRT-PAP newborn screening algorithm with an IRT cutoff at the 96th percentile is the most cost effective NBS approach for Quebec.

Methodology of antiemetic trials: response assessment, evaluation of new agents and definition of chemotherapy emetogenicity.

Establishing appropriate and practical methodology is a key to progress in the investigation of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Critical issues include patient response assessment, proper trial design for evaluating new agents, and the definition of chemotherapy emetogenicity. In assessing antiemetic response, the primary end-point should be complete control of emesis and nausea. Emesis and nausea should be independently assessed with the period of observation defined (acute, delayed, anticipatory). Emesis can be evaluated by measuring the number of emetic episodes either by direct observation or by patient self-report using patient-completed diaries. Nausea should be measured by patient self-report with the standard parameters, including frequency and intensity. New antiemetic drug development should proceed in an orderly progression from open-label phase I-II trials defining tolerance and minimally fully effective dose to phase III comparative trials. A randomized, parallel, double-blind study is the preferred design for the latter, and the comparator arm should always include the current best available treatment. Antiemetic placebos are no longer acceptable with chemotherapy regimens known to produce emesis in a majority of patients. None of the emetogenic classifications proposed to date adequately accounts for all known important patient- and treatment-related prognostic variables. A modification of a recently reported schema is proposed for use in making antiemetic treatment recommendations and defining the emetogenic challenge in clinical trials.

[Effectiveness and cost of 5-HT3-antagonists in acute chemotherapy-induced emesis. Health-economic analysis based on current meta-analytic data]. / Wirksamkeit und Kosten der 5-HT3-Antagonisten beim akuten chemotherapieinduzierten Erbrechen. Gesundheitsökonomische Analyse auf der Basis aktueller metaanalytischer Daten.

BACKGROUND: Cost containment measures in hospitals suspect the efficiency of 5-HT3-receptor antagonists (5-HT3-RA) in treating chemotherapy-induced emesis. RESEARCH: This paper compares the cost-efficacy of acute antiemetic interventions both for high and moderate emetogenic cancer treatments. The cost-efficacy-analysis is based on a recent metaanalysis comparing metoclopramide (MCP)- and 5-HT3-RA-containing antiemetic regimens both in comedication with corticosteroids. Total costs for treating moderate emetogenic cancer treatments sum up to DM 53.- for MCP-regimens and DM 55.- for 5-HT3-RA resp. In high emetogenic cancer treatments total costs for MCP-regimens are DM 76.- and DM 61.- for 5-HT3-RA. Total costs for fully controlled patients in moderate emetogenic cancer treatments are DM 77.- for MCP and DM 71.- for 5-HT3-RA. In high emetogenic cancer treatments costs for the fully controlled patient with MCP-regimens are DM 126.- and DM 79.- with 5-HT3-RA. CONCLUSION: Even under mere economical considerations 5-HT3-RAs should be prescribed in treating acute chemotherapy-induced emesis.