Direct costs of antineoplastic and supportive treatment for progressive multiple myeloma in a tax-based health system.

Aim: To estimate current real-world costs of drugs and supportive care for the treatment of multiple myeloma in a tax-based health system. Methods: Forty-one patients were included from a personalized medicine study (2016-2019). Detailed information was collected from patient journals and hospital registries to estimate the total and mean costs using inverse probability weighting of censored data. Results: Total observed (censored) costs for the 41 patients was €8.84 million during 125 treatment years, with antineoplastic drugs as the main cost driver (€5.6 million). Individual costs showed large variations. Mean 3-year cost per patient from first progression was €182,103 (€131,800-232,405). Conclusion: Prediction of real-world costs is hindered by the availability of detailed costing data. Micro-costing analyses are needed for budgeting and real-world evaluation of cost-effectiveness.

Lay abstract In recent years, there has been a dramatic improvement in the treatment of multiple myeloma due to the introduction of new drugs. These drugs have significantly increased survival but have also had an immense impact on healthcare budgets. In this study, we used detailed treatment information for multiple myeloma patients in combination with billing data from the hospital pharmacy at a Danish hospital to calculate individual cost histories for both drugs and supportive care. Using these data, we estimated the mean 3-year cost of a multiple myeloma patient to be €182.103, but we also found large variation between patients, causing an uncertainty of €50.000 in either direction. We believe that detailed costing studies, similar to the present one, are necessary for evaluation of cost-effectiveness of drugs in clinical practice.

Analysing the attributes of Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres across Europe to identify key hallmarks.

There is a persistent variation in cancer outcomes among and within European countries suggesting (among other causes) inequalities in access to or delivery of high-quality cancer care. European policy (EU Cancer Mission and Europe's Beating Cancer Plan) is currently moving towards a mission-oriented approach addressing these inequalities. In this study, we used the quantitative and qualitative data of the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes' Accreditation and Designation Programme, relating to 40 large European cancer centres, to describe their current compliance with quality standards, to identify the hallmarks common to all centres and to show the distinctive features of Comprehensive Cancer Centres. All Comprehensive Cancer Centres and Cancer Centres accredited by the Organisation of European Cancer Institutes show good compliance with quality standards related to care, multidisciplinarity and patient centredness. However, Comprehensive Cancer Centres on average showed significantly better scores on indicators related to the volume, quality and integration of translational research, such as high-impact publications, clinical trial activity (especially in phase I and phase IIa trials) and filing more patents as early indicators of innovation. However, irrespective of their size, centres show significant variability regarding effective governance when functioning as entities within larger hospitals.

Semimechanistic Clearance Models of Oncology Biotherapeutics and Impact of Study Design: Cetuximab as a Case Study.

This study aimed to explore the currently competing and new semimechanistic clearance models for monoclonal antibodies and the impact of clearance model misspecification on exposure metrics under different study designs exemplified for cetuximab. Six clearance models were investigated under four different study designs (sampling density and single/multiple-dose levels) using a rich data set from two cetuximab clinical trials (226 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer) and using the nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach. A two-compartment model with parallel Michaelis-Menten and time-decreasing linear clearance adequately described the data, the latter being related to post-treatment response. With respect to bias in exposure metrics, the simplified time-varying linear clearance (CL) model was the best alternative. Time-variance of the linear CL component should be considered for biotherapeutics if response impacts pharmacokinetics. Rich sampling at steady-state was crucial for unbiased estimation of Michaelis-Menten elimination in case of the reference (parallel Michaelis-Menten and time-varying linear CL) model.

Evaluation of a Comprehensive Skin Toxicity Program for Patients Treated With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors at a Cancer Treatment Center.

Importance: Up to 90% of patients treated with an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRi) experience cutaneous toxic effects that are negatively associated with quality of life and lead to treatment interruptions. The Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab trial found reduced incidence of skin toxicity and quality of life impairment with preemptive use of doxycycline hyclate, topical corticosteroids, moisturizers, and sunscreen, demonstrating the benefit of prophylactic treatment for skin toxicity. Objective: To evaluate the association of a comprehensive skin toxicity program with adherence to prophylaxis guidelines for the prevention of EGFRi-associated cutaneous toxic effects. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of all adult patients receiving at least 1 dose of cetuximab at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in the calendar year 2012 (2 years after publication of the Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab) or the calendar year 2017 (2 years after full implementation of the Skin Toxicities from Anticancer Therapies program). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were rate of preemptive rash treatment and selection of preemptive agents. Secondary outcomes were incidence of rash, rates of rescue treatments, rates of cetuximab dose changes or interruptions, and overall survival at 2 years. Results: There were 118 patients (85 men; median age, 62.4 years [range, 23.5-91.7 years]) treated with cetuximab in 2012 and 90 patients (70 men; median age, 62.5 years [range, 30.7-90.5 years]) treated with cetuximab in 2017; 11 patients (9%) in 2012 and 31 patients (34%) in 2017 were treated at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute affiliate sites. At cetuximab treatment initiation, 29 patients (25%) in 2012 and 42 patients (47%) in 2017 were prophylactically treated for skin toxicity (P < .001). From 2012 to 2017, preemptive tetracycline use (13 of 29 [45%] to 30 of 42 [71%]; P = .02) and topical corticosteroid use (2 of 29 [7%] to 24 of 42 [57%]; P < .001) increased and topical antibiotic use (23 of 29 [79%] to 18 of 42 [43%]; P = .002) decreased. There was no significant difference in incidence of rash by prophylaxis status. Patients prescribed prophylactic treatment were 94% less likely to require a first rescue treatment for rash (adjusted odds ratio, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.02-0.16; P < .001), 74% less likely to require a second rescue treatment for rash (adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83; P = .02), and 79% less likely to experience a cetuximab dose change or interruption (adjusted odds ratio, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.81; P = .02) than patients not prescribed prophylactic treatment, adjusting for treatment site and year. Conclusions and Relevance: Dermatologists can add value to oncology care by raising awareness of appropriate treatment options and increasing adherence to evidence-based prophylaxis protocols for EGFRi-associated rash, which is associated with decreased interventions and toxicity-associated chemotherapy interruptions.

Proportion of Patients in Phase I Oncology Trials Receiving Treatments That Are Ultimately Approved.

BACKGROUND: Phase I oncology trials are often regarded as a therapeutic option for patients. However, such claims have relied on surrogate measures of benefit, such as objective response. METHODS: Using a systematic search of publications, we assessed the therapeutic value of phase I cancer trial participation by determining the probability that patients will receive active doses of treatments that eventually receive FDA approval or a National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline recommendation for their indication. ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, American Society of Clinical Oncology reports, NCCN guidelines, and Drugs@FDA were searched between May 1, 2018, and July 31, 2018. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: A total of 1000 phase I oncology trials initiated between 2005 and 2010 and enrolling 32 582 patients were randomly sampled from 3229 eligible trials on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 386 (1.2%) patients received a treatment that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for their malignancy at a dose delivered in the trial; including NCCN guideline recommendations, the number and proportion are 1168 (3.6%). Meta-regression showed a statistically significantly greater proportion of patients receiving a drug that was ultimately FDA approved in biomarker trials (rate ratio = 4.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.53 to 13.23; P = .006) and single-indication trials (rate ratio = 3.32, 95% CI = 1.21 to 9.15; P = .02); proportions were statistically significantly lower for combination vs monotherapy trials (rate ratio = 0.09, 95% CI = 0.01 to 0.68; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: One in 83 patients in phase I cancer trials received a treatment that was approved for their indication at the doses received. Given published estimates of serious adverse event rates of 10%-19%, this represents low therapeutic value for phase I trial participation.

Recommendations for spiritual care in cancer patients: a clinical practice guideline for oncology nurses in Iran.

BACKGROUND: In spite of the necessity of implementing spiritual care practices for cancer patients, there is no clear process in this regard in palliative care programs of the health system of countries. The present study was designed with the aim of developing a clinical practice guideline of spiritual care in cancer patients for oncology nurses in the current context. METHODS: This is a multi-method study which was conducted in five stages within the framework of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline. A research committee consisting of four focal and 16 secondary members was formed. The stages included determining the scope of the study, developing guideline (a qualitative study and a systematic review, triangulation of the data, and producing a preliminary draft), consultation stage (validation of the guideline in three rounds of the Delphi study), as well as revision and publication stages. RESULTS: The clinical guideline of spiritual care with 84 evidence-based recommendations was developed in three main areas, including the human resources, care settings, and the process of spiritual care. CONCLUSIONS: We are hoping by applying this clinical guideline in oncology settings to move towards an integrated spiritual care plan for cancer patients in the context of our health system. Healthcare organizations should support to form spiritual care teams under supervision of the oncology nurses with qualified healthcare providers and a trained clergy. Through holistic care, they can constantly examine the spiritual needs of cancer patients alongside their other needs by focusing on the phases of the nursing process.

A survey of oncology healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes toward the use of music as a therapeutic tool in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Music as a therapeutic tool, defined as "music care," can help manage physical and psychological symptoms in individuals with cancer. There is further need to understand interest level and the potential role of music care among health professionals working in the field of oncology. PURPOSE: To investigate knowledge of and attitudes toward the use of music as a therapeutic tool in cancer and palliative care, as well as to identify barriers associated with learning to use music in care among health professionals. METHODS: Participants (N = 204), mostly nurses working in oncology and palliative care, completed a survey to assess awareness, knowledge, and attitudes toward the use of music in healthcare practice. RESULTS: In total, 55.5% of participants reported being "somewhat or very knowledgeable" about how to apply/use music therapy for the management of symptoms or on how to make a music therapy referral or for any application of music care. Participants demonstrated a high interest level in learning how to incorporate music into practice (mean = 4.05; SD = 1.045). CONCLUSION: While there is generally high interest and perceived value among nurses in music care interventions, knowledge level about such interventions was low. The study has implications for knowledge translation and education needed to further support uptake and use of music care in nursing practice.

Naturopathic Oncology Care for Pediatric Cancers: A Practice Survey.

Background: The majority of pediatric oncology patients report use of complementary and alternative medicine. Some naturopathic doctors (NDs) provide supportive pediatric oncology care; however, little information exists to formally describe this clinical practice. A survey was conducted with members of the Oncology Association of Naturopathic Physicians (OncANP.org) to describe recommendations across four therapeutic domains: natural health products (NHPs), nutrition, physical medicine, and mental/emotional support. Results: We had 99 respondents with a wide variance of clinical experience and aptitude to treat children with cancer. Of the majority (52.5%) of respondents who choose not to treat these children, the three primary reasons for this are lack of public demand (45.1%), institutional or clinic restrictions (21.6%), and personal reasons/comfort (19.6%). The 10 most frequently considered NHPs by all NDs are fish-derived omega-3 fatty acid (83.3%), vitamin D (83.3%), probiotics (82.1%), melatonin (73.8%), vitamin C (72.6%), homeopathic Arnica (69.0%), turmeric/curcumin (67.9%), glutamine (66.7%), Astragalus membranaceus (64.3%), and Coriolus versicolor/PSK (polysaccharide K) extracts (61.9%). The top 5 nutritional recommendations are anti-inflammatory diets (77.9%), dairy restriction (66.2%), Mediterranean diet (66.2%), gluten restriction (61.8%), and ketogenic diet (57.4%). The top 5 physical modality interventions are exercise (94.1%), acupuncture (77.9%), acupressure (72.1%), craniosacral therapy (69.1%), and yoga (69.1%). The top 5 mental/emotional interventions are meditation (79.4%), art therapy (77.9%), mindfulness-based stress reduction (70.6%), music therapy (70.6%), and visualization therapy (67.6%). Conclusion: The results of our clinical practice survey highlight naturopathic interventions across four domains with a strong rationale for further inquiry in the care of children with cancer.

Development, implementation, and effects of a cancer center's exercise-oncology program.

BACKGROUND: National and international bodies acknowledge the benefit of exercise for people with cancer, yet limited accessibility to related programing remains. Given their involvement in managing the disease, cancer centers can play a central role in delivering exercise-oncology services. The authors developed and implemented a clinically integrated exercise-oncology program at a major cancer center and evaluated its effectiveness and participant experience. METHODS: A hospital-based program with prescribed at-home exercise was developed and accepted referrals over a 42-month period (3.5 years). Implementation was conducted in 2 phases: a pilot phase for women with breast cancer and men with genitourinary cancer and a roll-out phase for all patients with cancer. Enrolled patients were assessed and received an exercise prescription as well as a program manual, resistance bands, and a stability ball from a kinesiologist. Program participation and effectiveness were evaluated up to 48 weeks after the baseline assessment using intention-to-treat analyses. Participants in the roll-out phase were asked to complete a program experience questionnaire at the completion of the 48-week follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 112 participants enrolled in the pilot, and 150 enrolled in the roll-out phase. Program attrition to 48 weeks was 48% and 65% in the pilot and roll-out phases, respectively. In participants who consented to research evaluation of their performance, objective and patient-reported measures of functional capacity improved significantly from baseline in both phases. Participants were highly satisfied with the program. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant drop-out to program endpoints, our cancer-exercise program demonstrated clinically relevant improvement in functional outcomes and was highly appreciated by participants.

A Multicenter Comparison of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Discussions in Oncology Care: The Role of Time, Patient-Centeredness, and Practice Context.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is discussed in cancer care across varied settings in the U.S. METHODS: In two practices affiliated with one academic medical center in southern California (SoCal), and one in the upper Midwest (UM), we audio-recorded patient-clinician interactions in medical oncology outpatient practices. We counted the frequency and duration of CAM-related conversations. We coded recordings using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. We used chi-square tests for bivariate analysis of categorical variables and generalized linear models for continuous variables to examine associations between dialogue characteristics, practice setting, and population characteristics with the occurrence of CAM discussion in each setting followed by multivariate models adjusting for clinician clustering. RESULTS: Sixty-one clinicians and 529 patients participated. Sixty-two of 529 (12%) interactions included CAM discussions, with significantly more observed in the SoCal university practice than in the other settings. Visits that included CAM were on average 6 minutes longer, with CAM content lasting an average of 78 seconds. In bivariate tests of association, conversations containing CAM included more psychosocial statements from both clinicians and patients, higher patient-centeredness, more positive patient and clinician affect, and greater patient engagement. In a multivariable model including significant bivariate terms, conversations containing CAM were independently associated with higher patient-centeredness, slightly longer visits, and being at the SoCal university site. CONCLUSION: The frequency of CAM-related discussion in oncology varied substantially across sites. Visits that included CAM discussion were longer and more patient centered. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The Institute of Medicine and the American Society of Clinical Oncology have called for more open discussions of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). But little is known about the role population characteristics and care contexts may play in the frequency and nature of those discussions. The present data characterizing actual conversations in practice complements a much larger literature based on patient and clinician self-report about CAM disclosure and use. It was found that CAM discussions in academic oncology visits varied significantly by practice context, that the majority were initiated by the patient, and that they may occur more when visit time exists for lifestyle, self-care, and psychosocial concerns.

Reasons for complementary therapy use by cancer patients, information sources and communication with health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are known to commonly use complementary therapies (CT). However, it is emphasized that patients do not share sufficient information with health professionals about this subject and that the subject is ignored in oncology practice. The aim of the study is to assess cancer patients' reasons for using complementary therapy, information resources and communication with health professionals. METHODS: The study is a descriptive, cross-sectional study. In this study, a questionnaire was used by the researchers. A questionnaire form consisting of 3 parts was used. In the first part of this form, there were questions about the gender, age and educational status of the patients (8 questions). In the second part, there were questions about disease and treatment information (3 questions), and the third part had questions about the use of complementary therapies (9 questions). To determine the use of complementary therapy, patients were asked 'Do you currently use complementary treatment?' (Yes or No). 183 patients included in the study completed the questionnaire about complementary therapies. RESULTS: In this study, it was determined that 37.7% of the patients were using complementary therapies. The most commonly used complementary therapy was natural products (46.4%). The most common reason for using complementary therapy was to provide support for treatment. Almost half of the cancer patients (48.5%) did not talk about this issue with their physicians, and 41.1% of them did not talk about CT with their nurses. The study found that the most important reason why the patients did not talk about CT was that they were not asked about it by health professionals. CONCLUSION: This study determined that almost half of patients could not receive information about CT from health professionals. Patients expect physicians and nurses to initiate communication on this subject. Providing healthcare professionals with evidence-based counseling about CT is essential for improving patient safety and patient outcomes.

Production Trends, Collaboration, and Main Topics of the Integrative and Complementary Oncology Research Area: A Bibliometric Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of cancer has increased over time worldwide. Nevertheless, the number of deaths has been reduced during the past 2 decades. Thus, one-third of the cancer patients are users of complementary and alternative therapies, looking for other types of interventions. The main aim of the present study is to understand the current status of the research in integrative and complementary oncology. Three different aspects were analyzed: production trends, country collaboration, and leading research topics. METHODS: The dataset was obtained from the documents indexed under the Integrative and Complementary Medicine category of the Web of Science database from 1976 to 2017. VOSviewer and SciMAT software were employed to perform the bibliometric analysis. RESULTS: The Journal of Ethnopharmacology, China Medical University and the People's Republic of China are the leading producers in the field. Regarding the collaboration, the United States and China present a close connection. The scientific community is focused on the following topics: apoptosis, breast cancer, oxidative stress, chemotherapy, and nuclear factor-Kappa-B (NF-Kappa-B). CONCLUSIONS: The present article shows potentially important information that allows understanding of the past, present, and future of research in integrative and complementary oncology. It is a useful evidence-based framework on which to base future research actions and academic directions.

Timing of Palliative Care in Colorectal Cancer Patients: Does It Matter?

BACKGROUND: Palliative care can improve end-of-life care and reduce health care expenditures, but the optimal timing for initiation remains unclear. We sought to characterize the association between timing of palliative care, in-hospital deaths, and health care costs. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study including all patients who were diagnosed and died of colorectal cancer between 2004 and 2012 in Manitoba, Canada. The primary exposure was timing of palliative care, defined as no involvement, late involvement (less than 14 d before death), early involvement (14 to 60 d before death), and very early involvement (>60 d before death). The primary outcome was in-hospital deaths and end-of-life health care costs. RESULTS: A total of 1607 patients were included; 315 (20%) received palliative care and 162 (10%) died in hospital. Compared to those who did not receive palliative care, patients with early and very early involvement experienced significantly decreased odds of dying in hospital (OR 0.21 95% CI 0.06-0.69 P = 0.01 and OR 0.11 95% CI 0.01-0.78 P = 0.03, respectively) and significantly lower health care costs. There were no significant differences in in-hospital deaths and health care costs between patients without palliative care and those who received late palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Early palliative care involvement is associated with decreased odds of dying in hospital and lower health care utilization and costs in patients with colorectal cancer. These findings provide real-world evidence supporting early integration of palliative care, although the optimal timing (early versus very early) remains a matter of debate.

Unidentified cachexia patients in the oncologic setting: Cachexia UFOs do exist.

OBJECTIVES: Cachexia is an important outcome-modulating parameter in patients with cancer. In the context of a randomized controlled trial on cachexia and nutritional therapy, the TiCaCONCO (Tight Caloric Control in the Cachectic Oncologic Patient) trial, the contacts between patients with cancer and health care practitioners and oncologists were screened. The aim of this retrospective study was to identify in the charts the input of data on body weight (necessary to identify cachexia stage), relevant nutritional data, and nutritional interventions triggered or implemented by oncologists and dietitians. METHODS: In a tertiary, university oncology setting, over a time span of 8 mo (34 wk), the charts of patients admitted to an oncology, gastroenterology, or abdominal surgery unit were screened for the presence of information contributing to a cancer cachexia diagnosis. Data (patient characteristics, tumor type, and location) was gathered. RESULTS: We analyzed 9694 files. Data on body weight was present for >90% of patients. Of the 9694 screening, 118 new diagnoses of cancer were present (1.22% of patient contacts). Information on weight evolution or nutritional status was absent for 54 patients (46%). In contacts between oncologists and patients with cancer, at the time of diagnosis, cachexia was present in 50 patients (42%). In 7 of these patients (14%), no nutritional information was present in the notes. Of the 50 patients with cachexia, only 8 (16%) had a nutritional intervention initiated by the physician. Nutritional interventions were documented in the medical note in 11 patients (9%) in the overall study population. Dietitians made notes regarding nutrition and weight for 49 patients (42%). We could not demonstrate a difference in mortality between cachectic and non-cachectic patients, although numbers are small for analysis. CONCLUSION: Patients newly diagnosed with cancer are not systematically identified as being cachectic and if they are, interventions in the field of nutrition therapy are largely lacking. Important barriers exist between oncologists and dietitians, the former being mandatory to the success of a nutrition trial in cancer.

A Conceptual Model of Financial Toxicity in Pediatric Oncology.

The purpose of this article is to explicate a conceptual framework for financial toxicity in pediatric oncology to guide nursing practice and research. The framework is based on one for financial outcomes of severe illness attributed to Scott Ramsey and adapted by the National Cancer Institute to describe relationships between preexisting factors, a cancer diagnosis, financial distress, and health outcomes for adult cancer patients and survivors. The adaption for pediatric oncology was informed by the results of a systematic scoping review to identify advances and gaps in the recent literature about the personal costs of illness to parents in the pediatric oncology context. The conceptual model for pediatric oncology indicates that existing and dynamic parent and family factors, other risk and protective factors, the child's diagnosis and treatment, and treatment-related financial costs can affect parent financial coping behaviors and parent health and family financial outcomes, all of which may affect child outcomes. Additionally, nursing's historic emphasis on holistic care, quality of life, and health determinants justify attention to financial toxicity as a nursing role. Therefore, pediatric oncology nurses must be sensitive to financial toxicity and related risk factors, become comfortable communicating about treatment-related financial costs and financial distress with parents and other health professionals, and collaborate in efforts that draw on the expertise of multiple stakeholders to identify potential or actual financial toxicity in parents and mitigate its impact on childhood cancer health outcomes through direct care, referral, research, quality improvement, and health advocacy.

Evaluating the Strength of the Association Between Industry Payments and Prescribing Practices in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Financial relationships between physicians and the pharmaceutical industry are common, but factors that may determine whether such relationships result in physician practice changes are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated physician use of orally administered cancer drugs for four cancers: prostate (abiraterone, enzalutamide), renal cell (axitinib, everolimus, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib), lung (afatinib, erlotinib), and chronic myeloid leukemia (CML; dasatinib, imatinib, nilotinib). Separate physician cohorts were defined for each cancer type by prescribing history. The primary exposure was the number of calendar years during 2013-2015 in which a physician received payments from the manufacturer of one of the studied drugs; the outcome was relative prescribing of that drug in 2015, compared with the other drugs for that cancer. We evaluated whether practice setting at a National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center, receipt of payments for purposes other than education or research (compensation payments), maximum annual dollar value received, and institutional conflict-of-interest policies were associated with the strength of the payment-prescribing association. We used modified Poisson regression to control confounding by other physician characteristics. RESULTS: Physicians who received payments for a drug in all 3 years had increased prescribing of that drug (compared with 0 years), for renal cell (relative risk [RR] 1.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-2.07), CML (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.08-1.39), and lung (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.58-1.82), but not prostate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.93-1.02). Physicians who received compensation payments or >$100 annually had increased prescribing compared with those who did not, but NCI setting and institutional conflict-of-interest policies were not consistently associated with the direction of prescribing change. CONCLUSION: The association between industry payments and cancer drug prescribing was greatest among physicians who received payments consistently (within each calendar year). Receipt of payments for compensation purposes, such as for consulting or travel, and higher dollar value of payments were also associated with increased prescribing. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Financial payments from pharmaceutical companies are common among oncologists. It is known from prior work that oncologists tend to prescribe more of the drugs made by companies that have given them money. By combining records of industry gifts with prescribing records, this study identifies the consistency of payments over time, the dollar value of payments, and payments for compensation as factors that may strengthen the association between receiving payments and increased prescribing of that company's drug.

Conventional and complementary cancer treatments: where do conventional and complementary providers seek information about these modalities?

BACKGROUND: Both conventional health care providers and complementary therapists treat cancer patients. To provide effective treatment, both types of providers should to be familiar with their own as well as alternative types of treatment. Our aim was to compare how conventional health care providers (oncology doctors, oncology nurses, family physicians) and complementary therapists (acupuncturists, reflexologists, massage therapists) seek information about conventional and complementary cancer treatments. METHOD: This analysis was conducted on the basis of feedback from 466 participants. We used self-administered questionnaires in a cross-sectional study. RESULTS: The majority of the medical doctors (96%) searched for evidence-based information regarding conventional cancer treatments. They gathered this information mostly from guidelines, which is considered best practice and is expected from Norwegian health personnel. Eighty-one percent of the nurses gather this information from evidence based resources such as UpToDate. Colleagues were asked for information by 58% of the medical doctors and 64% of the nurses. Moreover, 50% of the medical doctors and 57% of the nurses searched for evidence-based information about complementary cancer modalities. The acupuncturists gathered evidence-based information for both conventional (79%) and complementary (77%) modalities, followed by the reflexologists (54 and 54%, respectively) and massage therapists (54 and 52%, respectively). Nearly half of the acupuncturist (49%) asked a colleague for information. CONCLUSION: To provide safe cancer care, it is important that advice about complementary modalities is based on current and evidence-based evaluations. The majority of the medical doctors and nurses in this study sought information according to evidence-based medicine regarding conventional cancer treatments, and about half of them gathered evidence-based information about complementary cancer modalities. This was also true for the complementary therapists as they gathered information about complementary and conventional treatments from evidence-based evaluations. This demonstrates that since the term evidence-based medicine was first introduced in 1991, the approach has grown extensively and both conventional and complementary providers use this approach to seek information.

A prospective comparison of cancer clinical trial availability and enrollment among adolescents/young adults treated at an adult cancer hospital or affiliated children's hospital.

BACKGROUND: Low cancer clinical trial (CCT) enrollment may contribute to survival disparities affecting adolescents and young adults (AYAs) (ages 15-39 years). The objective of this study was to evaluate whether differences in CCT availability related to treatment site could explain the low CCT enrollment. METHODS: This prospective, observational cohort study was conducted at an academic children's hospital and its affiliated but geographically separated adult cancer hospital within a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. For consecutive, newly diagnosed AYA patients, it was determined whether an appropriate CCT existed nationally, was available at the treatment site, and was used for enrollment. Proportions of AYAs in these categories were compared between sites using the chi-square test. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-two consecutive AYA patients were included from the children's hospital (n = 68; ages 15-20 years) and the adult cancer hospital (n = 84; ages 18-39 years). Although there was no difference in CCT existence for individual AYA patients by site (children's hospital [36 of 68 patients; 52.9%] vs adult cancer hospital [45 of 84 patients; 53.6%]; P = .938), CCT availability was significantly lower at the adult cancer hospital (14 of 84 patients [16.7%] vs 30 of 68 [44.1%] at the children's hospital; P < .001). The proportion of AYAs enrolled was low at both sites (8 of 68 patients [11.8%] vs 6 of 84 patients [7.1%], respectively; P = .327). Fewer existing CCTs were available at the adult cancer hospital (4 of 27 patients [14.8%] vs 8 of 14 patients [57.1%], respectively), and those were directed toward solid tumors and new agents. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to improve low CCT enrollment among AYAs should be differentiated by treatment site. In the adult setting, these efforts should be aimed at improving CCT availability by overcoming site-level barriers to opening existing CCTs.

Building Specialized Nursing Practice Capacity in Bangladesh: An Educational Program to Prepare Nurses to Care for Oncology and Bone Marrow Transplant Patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

In 2012, the Minister of Health and other leaders in the Bangladesh government approached Massachusetts General Hospital to establish the country's first bone marrow transplant program at Dhaka Medical College Hospital to serve the needs of the people of Bangladesh. Stated goals of this collaboration included a broad focus on the care of oncology patients with a specific emphasis on care of patients with hematologic malignancies and of women with gynecologic cancers. The purpose of this article is to describe the international nursing collaboration between Massachusetts General Hospital, Simmons College, the AK Khan Healthcare Trust in Dhaka, and Dhaka Medical College Hospital that was established to share nursing knowledge and to build specialized professional nursing capacities to deliver high-quality cancer care in the public sector. Over the past 3 years, through the educational programs that have been developed within this collaboration-the Enhanced Specialized Nurse Training Program-the Bangladeshi nurses have received continuing professional development based on Western standards of nursing and have been offering nursing care to patients who have undergone chemotherapy and bone marrow transplantation. The challenges, opportunities, and outcomes of this international collaboration have been highly rewarding and mutually beneficial.

Application of tumor treating fields for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: understanding of nationwide practice patterns.

BACKGROUND: Tumor treating fields (TTF) harness magnetic fields to induce apoptosis in targeted regions. A 2015 landmark randomized phase III trial of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients demonstrated TTF + temozolomide to be superior to temozolomide alone. Given these results, we sought to assess practice patterns of providers in TTF utilization for GBM. METHODS: A survey was administered to practices in the United States self-identifying as specializing in radiation oncology, medical oncology, neuro-oncology, neurosurgery, and/or neurology. Responses were collected anonymously; analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: A total of 106 providers responded; a minority (36%) were in private practice. Regarding case volume, 82% treated at least six high-grade gliomas/year. The provider most commonly certified to offer TTF therapy to GBM patients was the neuro-oncologist (40%), followed by the radiation oncologist (34%); 31% reported no TTF-certified physician in their practice. TTF users were more likely to have high volume, and be aware of TTF inclusion in National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: More than 80% of TTF for GBM in the United States is performed by groups who treat at least six high-grade gliomas per year; unfortunately more than 30% were in practices bereft of anyone certified to offer TTF therapy. These results indicate that there remains fertile soil for TTF therapy nationwide to be introduced into practices for GBM treatment. Providers seeking to refer newly diagnosed GBM patients for TTF should seek out practices with TTF user-associated characteristics to ensure optimal access for their patients.