High Prevalence of Cardiometabolic Risks and Health Needs Among Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Treatment: A Cross-sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have indicated that inadequate health-related behavior is associated with the progression of cancer and cardiometabolic disorders. Because patients with hepatocellular carcinoma may adopt inadequate health behaviors, they are at risk for cancer recurrence, mortality, cardiometabolic disease progression, and worse quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence of cardiometabolic risks and health-promoting behaviors associated with quality of life among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after treatment. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from October 2021 to August 2022. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a structured questionnaire, and cardiometabolic information was recorded from medical charts. RESULTS: In total, 115 patients with liver cancer after treatment were enrolled; 73% were male. The mean age was 67.7 years, and high prevalence rates of central obesity (72.2%) and metabolic syndrome (47%) were noted. Inadequate exercise, oral hygiene, and cigarette smoking were common. The health-promoting score was significantly associated with exercise, the number of remaining teeth, and metabolic syndrome, which correlated with quality of life, including positive functional and negative symptoms dimensions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated a high prevalence of cardiometabolic risks and inadequate health-related behaviors among patients with liver cancer after treatment. This study highlights the need for healthcare providers to help patients increase health literacy for preventing cardiometabolic risks at outpatient clinics. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Findings from this study can be used to advise healthcare providers to educate patients with liver cancer during and after treatment on improving their health-promoting behaviors.

Economic Analysis of Tissue-First, Plasma-First, and Complementary NGS Approaches for Treatment-Naïve Metastatic Lung Adenocarcinoma.

Background: To compare the testing costs and testing turnaround times of tissue-first, plasma-first, and complementary next-generation sequencing (NGS) approaches in patients with treatment-naïve metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Materials and Methods: We developed a decision tree model to compare three different approaches. Patients were entered into the model upon cancer diagnosis and those with both insufficient tissue specimens and negative liquid-based NGS were subjected to tissue re-biopsy. Actionable gene alterations with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved therapies included epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangement, ROS proto-oncogene 1 (ROS1) rearrangement, B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) V600E mutation, rearranged during transfection (RET) gene rearrangement, mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) mutation, neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene rearrangement, K-Ras proto-oncogene (KRAS) G12C mutation, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) mutation. Model outcomes were testing costs, testing turnaround times, and monetary losses taking both cost and time into consideration. We presented base-case results using probabilistic analysis. Stacked one-way and three-way sensitivity analyses were also performed. Results: In terms of testing costs, tissue-first approach incurred US$2,354($1,963-$2,779) and was the most cost-efficient strategy. Complementary approach testing turnaround time (days) of 12.7 (10.8 to 14.9) was found as the least time-consuming strategy. Tissue-first, complementary, and plasma-first approaches resulted in monetary losses in USD of $4,745 ($4,010-$5,480), $6,778 ($5,923-$7,600), and $7,006 ($6,047-$7,964) respectively, and identified the same percentage of patients with appropriate FDA-approved therapies. Costs for liquid-based NGS, EGFR mutation rates, and quantity of tissue specimens were the major determinants in minimizing monetary loss. Plasma-first approach would be the preferable strategy if its testing price was reduced in USD to $818, $1,343, and $1,869 for populations with EGFR mutation rates of 30%, 45%, and 60% respectively. Conclusion: The tissue-first approach is currently the best strategy in minimizing monetary loss. The complementary approach is an alternative for populations with a low EGFR mutation rate. The plasma-first approach becomes increasingly preferable as EGFR mutation rates gradually increase.

Economic Analysis of Exclusionary EGFR Test Versus Up-Front NGS for Lung Adenocarcinoma in High EGFR Mutation Prevalence Areas.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine whether exclusionary EGFR mutation testing followed by next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a cost-efficient and timely strategy in areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation. METHODS: We developed a decision tree model to compare exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS and up-front NGS. Patients entered the model upon diagnosis of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. Gene alterations with FDA-approved targeted therapies included EGFR, ALK, ROS1, BRAF, RET, MET, NTRK, and KRAS. Model outcomes were testing-related costs; time-to-test results; monetary loss, taking both costs and time into consideration; and percentage of patients who could be treated by FDA-approved therapies. Stacked 1-way and 3-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Exclusionary EGFR testing incurred testing-related costs of US $1,387 per patient, a savings of US $1,091 compared with the costs of up-front NGS. The time-to-test results for exclusionary EGFR testing and up-front NGS were 13.0 and 13.6 days, respectively. Exclusionary EGFR testing resulted in a savings of US $1,116 in terms of net monetary loss, without a reduction of patients identified with FDA-approved therapies. The EGFR mutation rate and NGS cost had the greatest impact on minimizing monetary loss. Given that the tissue-based NGS turnaround time was shortened to 7 days, up-front NGS testing would become the best strategy if its price could be reduced to US $568 in Taiwan. CONCLUSIONS: In areas with high prevalence rates of EGFR mutation, exclusionary EGFR testing followed by NGS, rather than up-front NGS, is currently a cost-efficient strategy for metastatic lung adenocarcinoma.

Comprehensive assessment of HER2 alteration in a colorectal cancer cohort: from next-generation sequencing to clinical significance.

PURPOSE: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) is an emerging therapeutic target in colorectal cancer (CRC). Currently, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) have been used to determine HER2-positive CRCs; however, the clinical utility of next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based techniques for determining HER2 status in CRC has been limited. Here, we detail our experience regarding the assessment of HER2 alterations in a CRC cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 73 CRC patients who underwent surgery and received adjuvant oxaliplatin treatment. We then examined HER2 alterations using the Oncomine Comprehensive Assay version 1, as well as clinical outcomes, in this cohort. RESULTS: Using the NGS-based assay, HER2 copy number gains in 12 of 73 CRCs were determined to range from 2.74 to 92.62. Of these 12 tumors, 6 had HER2 high-level copy number gain (92.6, 57.9, 57.0, 52.0, 35.2, and 8.42) and were all defined as HER2-positive CRC using HERACLES Diagnostic Criteria. Nevertheless, other 6 patients with low-level copy number gain (ranging from 2.74 to 3.04) and the remaining 61 patients without increase in HER2 copy number were all HER2-negative. Among the 6 HER2-positive CRCs, KRAS and PIK3CA mutations were detected in 1 (17%; G13D) and 2 (33.3%; 1 Q546R and 1 H1047R) patients, respectively. Moreover, 2 of the 6 (33.3%) HER2-positive patients had recurrent disease, while one patient had a partial response after anti-HER2 therapy. CONCLUSION: NGS-based tools could assist in the simultaneous detection of HER2 and other genomic alterations in patients with CRC. Only CRCs with HER2 high-level copy number gain were HER2-postive by current diagnostic criteria.