RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) is the ninth most common cancer worldwide. In Italy, the prevalence of the disease is approximately 10%, making it the fourth most prevalent cancer in the country. The increase in prevalence requires continuous surveillance and care, resulting in a significant burden on Italian National Health Service, making any improvement to the strategy for diagnosing and treating this disease important to the medical and scientific community. The aim of this study was to evaluate the UBC cost of illness in the Italian context, collecting the total costs of the disease. METHODS: An economic analysis was carried out in the context of the National Health Service, using data collected from six centers, in order to evaluate direct costs in terms of outpatient, inpatient, and emergency care; pharmaceuticals and follow-up procedures; and indirect costs in terms of productivity losses. Data were collected through aggregated form reports, focusing on patients with an existing diagnosis of UBC who were treated in the last year. The Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) guidelines were used to identify diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Statistical analysis was conducted to explore variations among centers. RESULTS: The weighted mean total annual cost per patient was 3,591, where the cost for superficial disease was 3,252 and that for metastatic disease was 606. The analysis confirmed a proportional relation between disease severity and disability grade. The UBC cost of illness, considering prevalence and incidence data coming from the 2016 AIOM/Italian Association of Cancer Registries report, was 1,187,036,344. Indirect costs accounted to 44%, represented by estimated productivity losses. CONCLUSION: Our analysis represents the first economic study of UBC in the Italian context, as well as the first real-life evidence of the current therapeutic algorithm. This study opens the possibility for further analysis on the indirect cost components that represent a great burden for the society, especially for those in the severest stages of the disease with high disability grades.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The incidence of noncancer pain (NCP) in cancer patients is unknown. An analysis of incidence, severity, impact on quality of life (QoL), and appropriateness of NCP treatment in a cohort of cancer patients referred to a radiotherapy center is reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pain was scored from 0 (absence) to 3 (severe) and the adequacy of analgesic therapy was evaluated according to International Guidelines. Correlation between Pain Management Index and World Health Organization Analgesic Ladder was used to analyze the appropriateness of NCP treatment. In addition, pain was differentiated according to its origin and types and a comparison was performed between cancer pain (CP) and NCP. RESULTS: A total of 903 patients were eligible and 865 (95.8%) were considered evaluable. Three hundred ninety-eight patients (46.0%) had pain. CP and NCP pain incidence was 11.2% and 34.8%, respectively. Pain intensity was higher in patients with CP versus NCP (P=0.021). A neuropathic pain lower incidence (P=0.024) in NCP versus CP was recorded. Moreover, NCP was more inadequately treated than CP (P<0.001). QoL was significantly lower in patients with NCP when compared with patients without pain (P<0.001). In addition, QoL of patients with CP was significantly lower than QoL of patients with NCP (P<0.001). DISCUSSION: In a cancer patients' population referred to a radiotherapy center, the NCP incidence was higher than the CP incidence and NCP intensity was only slightly lower than CP. NCP was significantly pharmacologically undertreated and it was related to a decline in QoL.
