Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
J Oncol Pract ; 13(2): e139-e151, 2017 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28029298

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Medicare currently enrolls ≥ 45 million adults, and by 2030 this is projected to increase to ≥ 80 million beneficiaries. With this growth, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a proposal, the Medicare Part B Drug Payment Model, to shrink drug expenditures, a major contributor to overall health care costs. For this to not adversely affect patient outcomes, lower-cost alternative medications with equivalent efficacy and no increased toxicity must be available. This is often not true in the treatment of cancer. Herein, we examine the flaws in the rationale of the CMS and the potential unintended consequences of this experiment. METHODS: We identified the top three oncology expenditures (rituximab, bevacizumab, and trastuzumab) and their vetted alternatives (per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines) to ascertain whether lower-cost equivalent alternatives are available. Drug cost was based on April 2016 average sale price. We explored both efficacy of the agents and, when applicable, toxicity to compare alternatives to these high-dollar medications. RESULTS: For the largest Medicare oncology drug expenditures, there is not a lower-cost option with equal efficacy for their primary indications. Without lower-cost alternatives, the unintended consequence of this CMS experiment may include curtailing access to care or an increase in patient/program costs. CONCLUSION: The CMS proposal, by simply lowering reimbursement for drugs, does not acknowledge the value of these agents and could unintentionally reduce quality of care. Alternative approaches to value-based care, such as the Oncology Care Model and similar frameworks, should be explored.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/economia , Custos de Medicamentos , Medicare Part B/economia , Neoplasias/economia , Bevacizumab/economia , Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, U.S./economia , Humanos , Medicare/economia , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Rituximab/economia , Trastuzumab/economia , Estados Unidos
2.
Med Oncol ; 29(2): 786-94, 2012 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21479699

RESUMO

Safety and treatment patterns of sunitinib and sorafenib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) had been previously reported using retrospective chart review of patients treated in US tertiary centers. Because practice patterns may vary between hospital- and office-based settings, this study examined safety and treatment patterns of these agents in US community oncology clinics. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed for 250 patients with mRCC treated at 18 community oncology clinics. Eligible patients were ≥18 years old and received ≥1 prescription for sunitinib (n = 131) or sorafenib (n = 119) as first-line anti-angiogenic treatment. Rates of adverse events (AEs) and treatment modifications were analyzed; reasons for treatment modifications were examined. Median duration of first-line sunitinib and sorafenib treatment was 5.9 and 5.5 months, respectively. Among patients treated with sunitinib and sorafenib, 86% (30%) and 87% (28%), respectively, experienced ≥1 all-grade (grade 3/4) AE. The most common AEs were fatigue/weakness in sunitinib (all-grade: 42%; grade 3/4: 5%) and skin rash in sorafenib (all-grade: 35%; grade 3/4: 6%). Sixty-two and 64% of patients treated with sunitinib and sorafenib, respectively, had ≥1 treatment modification due to AEs. Recorded AE rates in patients with mRCC treated with angiogenesis inhibitors in community practice tended to be lower than in tertiary centers, possibly due to shorter treatment duration. Rates of treatment modifications due to AEs tended to be higher in community practice. This study provides evidence from an office-based setting of unmet need for agents that may provide improved tolerability in mRCC.


Assuntos
Inibidores da Angiogênese/uso terapêutico , Benzenossulfonatos/uso terapêutico , Carcinoma de Células Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Indóis/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Renais/tratamento farmacológico , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Padrões de Prática Médica/organização & administração , Piridinas/uso terapêutico , Pirróis/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Institutos de Câncer , Carcinoma de Células Renais/mortalidade , Carcinoma de Células Renais/secundário , Serviços de Saúde Comunitária , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Neoplasias Renais/mortalidade , Neoplasias Renais/patologia , Masculino , Prontuários Médicos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Niacinamida/análogos & derivados , Compostos de Fenilureia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sorafenibe , Sunitinibe , Estados Unidos
3.
Can Oncol Nurs J ; 20(2): 75-9, 2010.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20572430

RESUMO

Evidence-based guidelines recommend that patients at high risk (> or = 20%) for febrile neutropenia (FN) should receive prophylactic colony-stimulating factors (Aapro et al., 2006; Kouroukis et al., 2008; National Comprehensive Cancer Network [NCCN], 2008; Smith et al., 2006). We studied the utility of having nurses routinely assess FN risk in new patients before the initiation of chemotherapy. Fifteen nurses used a standardized tool to evaluate FN risk in 150 patients. In 94% of patients studied, nurses detected risk factors that prompted interventions to reduce the incidence of FN. On final evaluation, 67% of nurses said the use of a standardized tool helped them to identify patients at risk for FN, and 73% planned to assess FN risk routinely. Thus, it is feasible and valuable for nurses to assess FN risk using a standardized checklist prior to the initiation of chemotherapy.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Lista de Checagem/métodos , Febre/diagnóstico , Neutropenia/diagnóstico , Avaliação em Enfermagem/métodos , Enfermagem Oncológica/métodos , Adulto , Algoritmos , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Lista de Checagem/normas , Árvores de Decisões , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Febre/induzido quimicamente , Febre/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Neutropenia/induzido quimicamente , Neutropenia/epidemiologia , Papel do Profissional de Enfermagem , Avaliação em Enfermagem/normas , Pesquisa em Avaliação de Enfermagem , Registros de Enfermagem , Enfermagem Oncológica/normas , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco
4.
Transfusion ; 50(1): 190-9, 2010 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19719471

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) or severe anemia requiring repeated red blood cell (RBC) transfusions risk developing transfusional iron overload, which can reduce survival. Iron chelation therapy (ICT) has been shown to improve survival and quality of life in patients; however, ICT utilization in clinical practices is not well understood. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Medical records of patients diagnosed with MDS or severe anemia at least 6 months before data extraction, aged at least 21 years at diagnosis, and who received at least one RBC transfusion were reviewed. ICT eligibility was defined as at least 20 units of RBCs transfused or at least two serum ferritin levels exceeding 1000 microg/L. Study endpoint was ICT treatment rate among ICT-eligible patients with lower-risk MDS (International Prognostic Scoring System [low or intermediate-1]; World Health Organization [refractory anemia {RA}, refractory anemia with ringed sideroblasts {RARS}, refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia {RCMD}, refractory cytopenia with multilineage dysplasia and ringed sideroblasts, or 5q]; French-American-British [RA/RARS]). RESULTS: Among 78 ICT-eligible patients with lower-risk MDS, 32 (41%) received ICT. At ICT initiation, treated patients received on average 13.3 transfusions (27.6 units) and mean first post-ICT initiation serum ferritin was twice the MDS Foundation recommendation at 1949 microg/L. Median overall survival for all ICT-eligible patients was significantly longer for those ICT-treated patients than untreated patients (8.7 years vs. 4.7 years, log-rank p = 0.02; multivariate hazard ratio 0.372, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This study finds only 41% of ICT-eligible patients with lower-risk MDS received ICT in clinical practice, and treatment was initiated later than recommended. Receipt of ICT was associated with significantly longer survival.


Assuntos
Anemia Ferropriva/terapia , Sobrecarga de Ferro/terapia , Síndromes Mielodisplásicas/terapia , Reação Transfusional , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anemia Ferropriva/mortalidade , Transfusão de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Sobrecarga de Ferro/mortalidade , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Síndromes Mielodisplásicas/mortalidade , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA