O impacto da pandemia da COVID-19 nos exames de rastreamento do câncer no Brasil: um estudo comparativo dos cânceres de mama, próstata e colo de útero / The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening tests in Brazil: a comparative study of breast, prostate, and cervical cancers

Objetivo: Analisar a influência da pandemia da COVID-19 na execução dos exames de rastreamento e diagnóstico dos cânceres de próstata, mama e colo uterino na população brasileira. Métodos: Estudo analítico transversal e quantitativo com levantamento do número desses exames realizados pelo SUS (Sistema Único de Saúde). Os dados foram extraídos do Datasus nos períodos de pré-pandemia (março/2019 a fevereiro/2020) e pandemia (março/2020 a fevereiro/2021). Foram extraídos os números de exames realizados mês a mês e comparados os períodos pré-pandemia com o de pandemia. Foi realizada uma análise estatística descritiva, e as médias mensais de exames realizados nos dois períodos foram comparadas usando o teste t de Student. Resultados: Na comparação entre os períodos pré-pandemia e de pandemia, houve diminuição de média de 45,2% no número de exames citopatológicos, (194.978 exames por mês a menos; p < 0,00001), de 44,4% nos exames de mamografia (142.015 mamografias a menos por mês; p < 0,00001) e de 24,4% nos exames de antígeno prostático específico (PSA) (148.815 exames a menos por mês; p = 0,0012). Conclusão: A influência da pandemia gerou uma diminuição considerável no número de exames de rastreamento, mamografia, dosagem de PSA e citopatológico, o que deverá se traduzir em aumento nos casos de doença avançada, com graves consequências negativas para os pacientes e para o sistema de saúde.

Objective: To analyze the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the number of screening and diagnostic cancer tests performed for prostate, breast and cervical cancer in the Brazilian population. Methods: This was a transversal analytical and quantitative study on the number of screening and diagnostic cancer tests performed in the public Brazilian health care system SUS (Sistema Único de Saúde). Data were collected from the Datasus (online SUS database) during pre-pandemic (March/2019 to February/2020) and pandemic periods (March/2020 to February/2021). We obtained the number of tests performed monthly for each of the tests and compared the two periods. Descriptive statistics were employed and the monthly average number of tests performed in each period were compared using the T Student test. Results: Comparing the pre-pandemic levels with pandemic levels, we found that there was a 45.2% decrease in the number of Papanicolaou (PAP smear) tests (194,978 less exams per month, p < 0,00001), 44.4% decrease in mammograms (142,015 less tests per month, p < 0,00001), and a reduction of 24.4% in the number of prostate specific antigen (PSA) tests per month (minus 148,815 exams performed, p < 0.0012). Conclusion: There was a statistically significant reduction in the number of screening/diagnostic mammograms, PAP smears and PSA performed during the pandemic period, compared to the period before COVID-19. This reduction may result in an increase in the number of cases diagnosed at an advanced stage, with grave consequences for the patients and for the sustainability of the healthcare system.

Revisão sistemática e análise de custo- minimização de lipegfilgrastim na profilaxia da neutropenia e da neutropenia febril relacionadas à quimioterapia citotóxica / Systematic review and cost-minimization analysis of lipegfilgrastim in the prophylaxis of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia related to cytotoxic chemotherapy

Objetivo: Realizar avaliação econômica de lipegfilgrastim, fator de crescimento de longa duração (G-CSF), com os demais medicamentos da classe terapêutica disponíveis para a diminuição da duração da neutropenia grave (NG) e da incidência de neutropenia febril (NF), em pacientes adultos tratados com quimioterapia citotóxica para neoplasias malignas. Métodos: Revisão sistemática da literatura de evidências científicas sobre a eficácia e a segurança de lipegfilgrastim e análise de custo-minimização em comparação com pegfilgrastim ou filgrastim sob a perspectiva do Sistema Suplementar no Brasil. A análise incluiu tempo de tratamento de estudos clínicos, custo de infusão/ honorários médicos e custo com aquisição de medicamentos, distribuídos em três perspectivas: cenário 1 (conservador), cenário 2 (moderado) e cenário 3 (mundo real). Resultados: Seis estudos foram incluídos na análise, sendo três estudos randomizados e três revisões sistemáticas. O lipegfilgrastim resultou numa duração média de NG significativamente menor ao placebo e não inferior ao pegfilgrastim. Um estudo que comparou indiretamente lipegfilgrastim com filgrastim não encontrou diferenças estatisticamente significativas em redução de duração de NG e incidência de NF. O lipegfilgrastim apresentou redução de custos diretos de -R$ 3.673,50/paciente comparado com pegfilgrastim em todos os cenários avaliados e, na comparação com filgrastim, observou-se redução de -R$ 57.403,40; -R$ 19.183,67 e de -R$ 42,50/paciente nos cenários 1, 2 e 3, respectivamente. Conclusões: Lipegfilgrastim apresentou perfil de custo-minimização favorável em comparação com pegfilgrastim ou filgrastim, e surge como uma importante alternativa para o tratamento da redução da duração da neutropenia e da incidência da neutropenia febril durante a realização de tratamento quimioterápico, que pode representar economia de recursos para o Sistema de Saúde Suplementar.

jective: To develop an economic evaluation of lipegfilgrastin, long acting G-CSF, compared to other available G-CSF to reduce the duration of severe neutropenia (SN) and the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) in adult patients treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy for cancer in the Brazilian private Health System. Methods: Systematic literature review of scientific evidence evaluating the efficacy and safety of lipegfilgrastin and cost-minimization analysis comparing to pegfilgrastin or filgrastin in the Brazilian private Health System. The analysis includes time of treatment with filgrastin from clinical trials (scenario 1) or real world data (scenario 2 and 3) and considers direct medical costs. Results: Six studies were included in the analysis: three randomized controlled trials and three systematic reviews. Lipegfilgrastin resulted in a statistically significant reduction of median SN duration compared to placebo and non-inferior compared to pegfilgrastin. A study that performed an indirect comparison of lipegfilgrastin and filgrastin did not find any difference statistically significant reduction of SN duration and FN incidence. Lipefilgrastin resulted in a cost-difference of -R$ 3.673,50/patient compared to pegfilgrastin in all scenarios and -R$ 57.403,40; -R$ 19.183,67 and -R$ 42,50/patient compared to filgrastin in scenario 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Conclusions: Lipegfilgrastim showed a favorable cost-minimization profile compared to pegfilgrastin or filgrastin and is an important alternative treatment in reducing the duration of neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia during the course of chemotherapy, and may result in resource savings for the Brazilian Private Health System.

Amino acid formula as a new strategy for diagnosing cow's milk allergy in infants: is it cost-effective?

AIMS: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a new strategy that uses an amino acid formula in the elimination diet of infants with suspected cow's milk allergy (CMA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pharmacoeconomic study was developed from the perspective of the Brazilian Public Healthcare System. The new strategy proposes using an amino acid formula in the diagnostic elimination diet of infants (≤24 months) with suspected CMA. The rationale is that infants who do not respond to the amino acid formula do not suffer from CMA. Patients with a positive oral challenge test receive a therapeutic elimination diet based on Brazilian Food Allergy Guidelines. This approach was compared to the current recommendations of the Brazilian Food Allergy Guidelines. A decision model was constructed using TreeAge Pro 2012 software. Model inputs were based on a literature review and the opinions of a panel of experts. A univariate sensitivity analysis of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was performed. RESULTS: The mean cost per patient of the new amino acid formula strategy was R$3,341.57, while the cost of the current Brazilian guidelines strategy was R$3,641.08. The mean number of symptom-free days per patient, which was used as an indicator of effectiveness, was 900.6 and 875.7 days, respectively. The new strategy is, therefore, dominant. In the sensitivity analysis, the dominance was maintained with parameter variation. LIMITATIONS: In the absence of information in the literature, some premises were defined by a panel of specialists. CONCLUSIONS: The new strategy, which uses an amino acid formula in the elimination diagnostic diet followed by an oral food challenge, is a dominant pharmacoeconomic approach that has a lower cost and results in an increased number of symptom-free days.

Decision tree cnnstruction and cost-effectivenes analysis of treatment of ulceerative colitis with pentasa® mesalazine 2 g sachet / Construcao de arvore de decisao e analise de custo-efetividade do tratamento da retocolite ulcerativa com Pentasa (mesalazina) 2 g sache

Context Unspecified Ulcerative Rectocolitis is a chronic disease that affects between 0.5 and 24.5/105 inhabitants in the world. National and international clinical guidelines recommend the use of aminosalicylates (including mesalazine) as first-line therapy for induction of remission of unspecified ulcerative rectocolitis, and recommend the maintenance of these agents after remission is achieved. However, multiple daily doses required for the maintenance of disease remission compromise compliance with treatment, which is very low (between 45% and 65%). Use of mesalazina in granules (2 g sachet) once daily - Pentasa® sachets 2 g - can enhance treatment adherence, reflecting in an improvement in patients' outcomes. Objective To evaluate the evidence on the use of mesalazine for the maintenance of remission in patients with unspecified ulcerative rectocolitis and its effectiveness when taken once versus more than once a day. From an economic standpoint, to analyze the impact of the adoption of this dosage in Brazil's public health system, considering patients' adherence to treatment. Methods A decision tree was developed based on the Clinical Protocol and Therapeutic Guidelines for Ulcerative Colitis, published by the Ministry of Health in the lobby SAS/MS n° 861 of November 4 th, 2002 and on the algorithms published by the Associação Brasileira de Colite Ulcerativa e Doença de Crohn, aiming to get the cost-effectiveness of mesalazine once daily in granules compared with mesalazine twice daily in tablets. Results The use of mesalazine increases the chances of remission induction and maintenance when compared to placebo, and higher doses are associated with greater chance of success without increasing the risk of adverse events. Conclusion The use of a single daily dose in the maintenance of remission is effective and related to higher patient compliance when compared to the multiple daily dose regimens, ...

Contexto A retocolite ulcerativa inespecífica é uma doença crônica que atinge entre 0,5 e 24,5/105 habitantes no mundo. Diretrizes clínicas nacionais e internacionais recomendam o emprego de aminosalicilatos (entre eles, a mesalazina) como terapia de primeira linha na indução da remissão da retocolite ulcerativa inespecífica, com manutenção destes agentes após a remissão. Mas as múltiplas doses diárias necessárias comprometem a adesão ao tratamento, que é muito baixa (entre 45% e 65%). A utilização de mesalazina em grânulos (sachê 2 g) dose única diária - Pentasa® sachê 2 g - pode aumentar a aderência ao tratamento, refletindo numa melhora nos desfechos dos pacientes. Objetivo Avaliar as evidências sobre o uso de mesalazina para a manutenção da remissão em pacientes com retocolite ulcerativa inespecífica e sua eficácia quando tomada uma vez versus mais de uma vez ao dia. Do ponto de vista econômico, avaliar o impacto que a adoção desta posologia teria para o sistema público de saúde do país, comparada ao tratamento padrão atual, considerando a adesão dos pacientes. Métodos Foi elaborada uma árvore de decisão construída a partir do Protocolo Clínico e Diretrizes Terapêuticas de Colite Ulcerativa, publicado pelo Ministério da Saúde na portaria SAS/MS n° 861, de 04 de novembro de 2002, e de algoritmos publicados pela Associação Brasileira de Colite Ulcerativa e Doença de Crohn, objetivando-se obter o custo-efetividade da mesalazina dose única diária em grânulos comparado com mesalazina duas vezes ao dia em comprimidos. Resultados O emprego de mesalazina aumenta as chances de indução da remissão e sua manutenção, quando comparado a ...

Decision tree construction and cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment of ulcerative colitis with pentasa® mesalazine 2 g sachet.

CONTEXT: Unspecified Ulcerative Rectocolitis is a chronic disease that affects between 0.5 and 24.5/105 inhabitants in the world. National and international clinical guidelines recommend the use of aminosalicylates (including mesalazine) as first-line therapy for induction of remission of unspecified ulcerative rectocolitis, and recommend the maintenance of these agents after remission is achieved. However, multiple daily doses required for the maintenance of disease remission compromise compliance with treatment, which is very low (between 45% and 65%). Use of mesalazina in granules (2 g sachet) once daily--Pentasa® sachets 2 g--can enhance treatment adherence, reflecting in an improvement in patients' outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence on the use of mesalazine for the maintenance of remission in patients with unspecified ulcerative rectocolitis and its effectiveness when taken once versus more than once a day. From an economic standpoint, to analyze the impact of the adoption of this dosage in Brazil's public health system, considering patients' adherence to treatment. METHODS: A decision tree was developed based on the Clinical Protocol and Therapeutic Guidelines for Ulcerative Colitis, published by the Ministry of Health in the lobby SAS/MS n° 861 of November 4 th, 2002 and on the algorithms published by the Associação Brasileira de Colite Ulcerativa e Doença de Crohn, aiming to get the cost-effectiveness of mesalazine once daily in granules compared with mesalazine twice daily in tablets. RESULTS: The use of mesalazine increases the chances of remission induction and maintenance when compared to placebo, and higher doses are associated with greater chance of success without increasing the risk of adverse events. CONCLUSION: The use of a single daily dose in the maintenance of remission is effective and related to higher patient compliance when compared to the multiple daily dose regimens, with lower costs.

Implante por cateter de bioprótese valvular aórtica para tratamento de estenose valvar aórtica grave em pacientes inoperáveis sob perspectiva da saúde suplementar: análise de custo-efetividade / Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis in inoperable patients under the perspective of the brazilian supplemental health system: cost-effectiveness analysis

INTRODUÇÃO: O implante por cateter de bioprótese valvular aórtica (TAVI, do inglês transcatheter aortic valve implantation) constitui nova modalidade de tratamento destinada, sobretudo, aos pacientes com elevado risco cirúrgico. Para esses pacientes, o TAVI resultou em aumento da sobrevivência e melhora da qualidade de vida, comparativamente ao tratamento padrão (medicamentoso, com ou sem valvuloplastia aórtica percutânea). Nosso objetivo foi realizar análise de custo-efetividade da implementação do TAVI no Sistema de Saúde Suplementar brasileiro. MÉTODOS: Foram desenvolvidos um modelo preditivo, para avaliar custo-efetividade real do procedimento em longo prazo, e uma regressão de Weibull com tempo horizonte de 5 e 10 anos, para estimar dados de sobrevida por mais de 24 meses. Adicionalmente, foi desenvolvido modelo de Markov sequencial e determinístico. Resultados foram expressos como razão de custo-efetividade incremental (RCEI) por anos de vida ganhos e anos de vida livres de progressão. RESULTADOS: Para o cenário padrão, no qual o custo da TAVI foi estipulado em R$ 65 mil, o valor da RCEI (custo/ano de vida salvo) em 5 anos foi de R$ 72.520,65. Alterando-se o tempo horizonte para 10 anos, esse valor diminuiu para R$ 41.653,01. CONCLUSÕES: O modelo apontou que o TAVI apresenta efetividade superior e maior custo incremental. Além disso, a incorporação do TAVI no Rol de Procedimentos e Eventos em Saúde da Agência Nacional de Saúde Suplementar acarretaria impacto orçamentário incremental nos próximos 5 anos, variando de R$ 70 milhões a R$ 121 milhões, compatível com o de outras tecnologias já incorporadas no âmbito da Saúde Suplementar.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a new modality of treatment especially dedicated to patients with high surgical risk. In these patients, TAVI increased survival and improved quality of life when compared to standard treatment (drug therapy with or without percutaneous aortic balloon valvuloplasty). Our objective was to perform a cost-efficacy analysis of the implementation of TAVI in the Brazilian Supplemental Health System. METHODS: We developed a predictive model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the procedure in the long-term, and a Weibull regression analysis with a time horizon of 5 and 10 years, to estimate survival data for over 24 months. In addition, a deterministic sequential Markov model was developed. Results were expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per years of life saved and progression-free years of life. RESULTS: In a standard scenario, where the cost of TAVI was estimated as R$ 65 millions, the ICER value (cost/year of life saved) in 5 years was R$ 72,520.65. When the time horizon was adjusted for 10 years, this amount decreased to R$ 41,653.01. CONCLUSIONS: The model indicated that TAVI has superior effectiveness and higher incremental cost. Furthermore, the incorporation of TAVI in the List of Health Procedures and Events of the Brazilian Supplemental Health System would have an incremental budgetary impact over the next 5 years, ranging from R$ 70 millions to R$ 121 millions, consistent with other technologies which have already been incorporated by the system.

Ideal vial size for bortezomib: real-world data on waste and cost reduction in treatment of multiple myeloma in Brazil.

OBJECTIVES: Single-size vials of drugs may be a source of waste and increase in treatment costs. Bortezomib, indicated for multiple myeloma (MM) treatment, is available in 3.5-mg vials, a quantity higher than the average dose commonly prescribed. This analysis aimed to demonstrate, through real-world data, which would be the optimal vial presentation for bortezomib in Brazil and quantify the reduction in medication waste related to this option. METHODS: From November 2007 to October 2009 all patients with MM treated with bortezomib were identified via the Evidências database. Analysis of prescribed, dispensed, and wasted doses, their costs and projections of the ideal vial size were performed. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (mean body surface area of 1.73 m(2)) received 509 infusions in 131 cycles of treatment (average of 3.77 cycles per patient). The average dose prescribed was 2.1 mg per infusion (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.97-2.26) with average waste of 39.5% of the vial content (95% CI 35.35-43.76). The mean waste per patient per day was 1.38 mg (95% CI 1.24-1.52). If a 3-mg vial were available, the average drug waste per patient per day would be 0.88 mg (95% CI 0.74-1.03) or 36.2% less. With a 2.5-mg vial the waste would be 1.05 mg (95% CI 0.81-1.29) or 23.9% less. If two presentations were available (2.5 mg and 0.5 mg), the waste would be 0.52 mg (95% CI 0.4-0.63) or 62.5% less. Considering the price of the different vials to be proportional to the original 3.5-mg vial, the cost would be also reduced by the same rates described above. CONCLUSIONS: A simple adjustment in vial size may reduce the waste of bortezomib by 36% to 62% and can also reduce the cost of treatment.

Cost of the treatment of myelodisplastic syndrome in Brazil

INTRODUCTION: Myelodysplastic syndrome is an incurable and rare hematological disease that affects the production of blood cells. One aim of treatment is to maintain the blood-cell count to near-normal levels. This is mainly achieved with hematopoietic- growth factors and transfusions. Our objective was to determine the cost of supportive treatment/care for patients with low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome in respect to private healthcare plans in Brazil. METHOD: We adapted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines for intermediate risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients to the Brazilian reality, adopting a decision tree to explore treatment combinations. Then, we calculated the costs for each branch of the tree, according to national prices. We also estimated total costs for a cohort of 100 patients, distributed across treatment combinations according to the expected epidemiology. We assumed a horizon of one year of treatment. RESULTS: The mean cost of treatment for low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome is US$ 42,758/patient/year. This cost can vary from US$ 24,282 to US$ 121,952, according to patient characteristics and the treatment used. Overall, patients that require immunotherapy with antithymocyte globulins are associated with the highest cost. Those that achieve disease stability solely with the use of erythropoietin were associated with the lowest cost. CONCLUSION: In Brazil, treatment of low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome is associated with a mean cost of the order of US$ 42,700/patient/year. New types of therapy have the potential to change this scenario if they can diminish the requirements for supportive care.

Cost of the treatment of myelodisplastic syndrome in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: Myelodysplastic syndrome is an incurable and rare hematological disease that affects the production of blood cells. One aim of treatment is to maintain the blood-cell count to near-normal levels. This is mainly achieved with hematopoietic- growth factors and transfusions. Our objective was to determine the cost of supportive treatment/care for patients with low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome in respect to private healthcare plans in Brazil. METHOD: We adapted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines for intermediate risk myelodysplastic syndrome patients to the Brazilian reality, adopting a decision tree to explore treatment combinations. Then, we calculated the costs for each branch of the tree, according to national prices. We also estimated total costs for a cohort of 100 patients, distributed across treatment combinations according to the expected epidemiology. We assumed a horizon of one year of treatment. RESULTS: The mean cost of treatment for low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome is US$ 42,758/patient/year. This cost can vary from US$ 24,282 to US$ 121,952, according to patient characteristics and the treatment used. Overall, patients that require immunotherapy with antithymocyte globulins are associated with the highest cost. Those that achieve disease stability solely with the use of erythropoietin were associated with the lowest cost. CONCLUSION: In Brazil, treatment of low and intermediate I risk myelodysplastic syndrome is associated with a mean cost of the order of US$ 42,700/patient/year. New types of therapy have the potential to change this scenario if they can diminish the requirements for supportive care.

Use of re-randomized data in meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes collected in randomized clinical trials are observations of random variables that should be independent and identically distributed. However, in some trials, the patients are randomized more than once thus violating both of these assumptions. The probability of an event is not always the same when a patient is re-randomized; there is probably a non-zero covariance coming from observations on the same patient. This is of particular importance to the meta-analysts. METHODS: We developed a method to estimate the relative error in the risk differences with and without re-randomization of the patients. The relative error can be estimated by an expression depending on the percentage of the patients who were re-randomized, multipliers (how many times more likely it is to repeat an event) for the probability of reoccurrences, and the ratio of the total events reported and the initial number of patients entering the trial. RESULTS: We illustrate our methods using two randomized trials testing growth factors in febrile neutropenia. We showed that under some circumstances the relative error of taking into account re-randomized patients was sufficiently small to allow using the results in the meta-analysis. Our findings indicate that if the study in question is of similar size to other studies included in the meta-analysis, the error introduced by re-randomization will only minimally affect meta-analytic summary point estimate. We also show that in our model the risk ratio remains constant during the re-randomization, and therefore, if a meta-analyst is concerned about the effect of re-randomization on the meta-analysis, one way to sidestep the issue and still obtain reliable results is to use risk ratio as the measure of interest. CONCLUSION: Our method should be helpful in the understanding of the results of clinical trials and particularly helpful to the meta-analysts to assess if re-randomized patient data can be used in their analyses.

Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether funding of drug studies by the pharmaceutical industry is associated with outcomes that are favourable to the funder and whether the methods of trials funded by pharmaceutical companies differ from the methods in trials with other sources of support. METHODS: Medline (January 1966 to December 2002) and Embase (January 1980 to December 2002) searches were supplemented with material identified in the references and in the authors' personal files. Data were independently abstracted by three of the authors and disagreements were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: 30 studies were included. Research funded by drug companies was less likely to be published than research funded by other sources. Studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies were more likely to have outcomes favouring the sponsor than were studies with other sponsors (odds ratio 4.05; 95% confidence interval 2.98 to 5.51; 18 comparisons). None of the 13 studies that analysed methods reported that studies funded by industry was of poorer quality. CONCLUSION: Systematic bias favours products which are made by the company funding the research. Explanations include the selection of an inappropriate comparator to the product being investigated and publication bias.