Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(11): e2133388, 2021 11 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34779846

RESUMO

Importance: Gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (GEMNAB) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) both improve survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer when compared with single-agent gemcitabine in clinical trials. Objective: To describe changes in the survival of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer associated with sequential drug-funding approvals and to determine if there exist distinct patient populations for whom GEMNAB and FOLFIRINOX are associated with survival benefit. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, retrospective cohort study examined all incident cases of advanced pancreatic cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada (2008-2018) that were identified from the Cancer Care Ontario (Ontario Health) New Drug Funding Program database. Statistical analysis was performed from October 2020 to January 2021. Exposures: First-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the proportion of patients treated with each chemotherapy regimen over time and overall survival for each regimen. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare overall survival between treatment regimens after adjustment for confounding variables, inverse probability of treatment weighting, and matching. Results: From 2008 to 2018, 5465 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with first-line chemotherapy in Ontario, Canada. The median (range) age of patients was 66.9 (27.8-93.4) years; 2447 (45%) were female; 878 (16%) had prior pancreatic resection, and 328 (6%) had prior adjuvant gemcitabine. During the time period when only gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX were funded (2011-2015), 49% (929 of 1887) received FOLFIRINOX. When GEMNAB was subsequently funded (2015-2018), 9% (206 of 2347) received gemcitabine, 44% (1034 of 2347) received FOLFIRINOX, and 47% (1107 of 2347) received GEMNAB. The median overall survival increased from 5.6 months (95% CI, 5.1-6.0 months) in 2008 to 2011 to 6.9 months (95% CI, 6.5-7.4 months) in 2011 to 2015 to 7.6 months (95% CI, 7.1-8.0 months) in 2015 to 2018. Patients receiving FOLFIRINOX were younger and healthier than patients receiving GEMNAB. After adjustment and weighting, FOLFIRINOX was associated with better overall survival than GEMNAB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75 [95% CI, 0.69-0.81]). In analyses comparing patients treated with GEMNAB and gemcitabine, GEMNAB was associated with better overall survival (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.78-0.94]). Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving first-line palliative chemotherapy within a universal health care system found that drug funding decisions were associated with increased uptake of new treatment options over time and improved survival. Both FOLFIRINOX and GEMNAB were associated with survival benefits in distinct patient populations.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Cuidados Paliativos/economia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidade , Adulto , Idoso , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/economia , Estudos de Coortes , Desoxicitidina/economia , Desoxicitidina/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Fluoruracila/economia , Fluoruracila/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Irinotecano/economia , Irinotecano/uso terapêutico , Leucovorina/economia , Leucovorina/uso terapêutico , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ontário , Oxaliplatina/economia , Oxaliplatina/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/economia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Taxa de Sobrevida , Gencitabina , Neoplasias Pancreáticas
2.
Curr Oncol ; 28(2): 1056-1066, 2021 02 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33652898

RESUMO

The COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on cancer patients and the delivery of cancer care. To allow clinicians to adapt treatment plans for patients, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) issued a series of interim funding measures for the province's New Drug Funding Program (NDFP), which covers the cost of most hospital-delivered cancer drugs. To assess the utility of the measures and the need for their continuation, we conducted an online survey of Ontario oncology clinicians. The survey was open 3-25 September 2020 and generated 105 responses. Between April and June 2020, 46% of respondents changed treatment plans for more than 25% of their cancer patients due to the pandemic. Clinicians report broad use of interim funding measures. The most frequently reported strategies used were treatment breaks for stable patients (62%), extending dosing intervals (59%), and deferring routine imaging (56%). Most clinicians anticipate continuing to use these interim funding measures in the coming months. The survey showed that adapting cancer drug funding policies has supported clinical care in Ontario during the pandemic.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/economia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Custos de Medicamentos , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Coleta de Dados , Política de Saúde , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Oncologia/economia , Oncologia/organização & administração , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Ontário/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários
3.
Patient Educ Couns ; 104(6): 1398-1405, 2021 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33257201

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The development of patient education (PE) materials is costly and resource-intensive, and no mechanisms exist for sharing materials across cancer centers/hospitals to limit duplicated effort. The aim of this study was to explore the incidence and cost implication of duplicated PE efforts. METHODS: PE leaders from all (14) cancer centers in Ontario, Canada, submitted their collections of systemic therapy PE materials. Materials were categorized by topic and were coded as duplicate (more than one other material exists on the same topic and there was significant content and/or textual overlap), adapted (material was adapted from an existing material) or unique (no other material addresses the topic). RESULTS: 304 materials were included and <50 % of materials had duplicate content (n = 166, 55 %), a small proportion were adapted (n = 27, 9%), and less than half were unique (n = 111, 37 %). The majority of materials were considered amenable to adaptation meaning that the content was not dependent on a specific institutional context (n = 283, 93 %). The opportunity for cost savings if duplication of effort could be avoided is approximately $800 K for systemic therapy materials produced in cancer centers. CONCLUSION: There is need to refine the process for developing PE materials. Creating mechanisms of sharing can help facilitate equal access to materials and can result in significant cost savings. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Efforts are needed to better coordinate the development of PE materials among patient educators. Better coordination would allow patient education programs to focus on other important challenges.


Assuntos
Educação de Pacientes como Assunto , Humanos , Incidência , Ontário
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA