RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The financial impact of cancer medicines on health systems is not well known. We describe temporal trends in expenditure on cancer medicines within the single-payer health system of Ontario, Canada, and the extent of clinical benefit these treatments offer. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we identified cancer medicines and expenditures from formularies and costing databases (the New Drug Funding Program, Ontario Drug Benefit Program, and The High-Cost Therapy Funding Program) during 10 consecutive years (April 1, 2012, to March 31, 2022) in Ontario, Canada. For intravenous medicines, we applied the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) to identify expenditures associated with substantial clinical benefit. We also identified treatments associated with improved overall survival or quality of life. FINDINGS: 69 intravenous and 98 oral or injectable medicines were funded during 2012-22. Annual expenditure on cancer medicines increased by approximately 15% per year during 2012-22; the increase was more rapid in the most recent 4 years. Total expenditure on cancer medicines in the 2021-22 financial year was CA$1·7 billion. Immune checkpoint inhibitors were the single biggest expense by class ($284 million), representing 17% of the entire cancer medicine annual budget. Drugs with the highest individual costs were lenalidomide ($178 million) and pembrolizumab ($163 million), each accounting for around 10% of the entire budget. 29 (76%) of 38 indications eligible for ESMO-MCBS scoring met the threshold for substantial clinical benefit. Eight (21%) indications had no randomised trial evidence of improved overall survival, and only four (11%) were associated with improved QOL. $346 million (67% of the expenditure on intravenous cancer medicines) was spent on drugs that improved median overall survival by more than 6 months, $82 million (16%) was spent on medicines with overall survival gains of 3-6 months, and $32 million (6%) was spent on medicines with overall survival gains of less than 3 months. $53 million (10%) was spent on medicines with no established improvement in overall survival. INTERPRETATION: Costs of cancer medicines to the Canadian health system are increasing rapidly. Most funded indications met thresholds for substantial clinical benefit and two-thirds of the expenditure were for medicines that improve survival by more than 6 months. Whether this cost trajectory can be maintained in a sustainable, equitable, high-quality health system is unclear. Efforts are needed to ensure the price of medicines with substantial benefit is affordable and funding of treatments with very modest benefit might need to be re-assessed, particularly when alternative supportive and palliative therapies are available. FUNDING: None.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Ontario , Salud Pública , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
The efficacy-effectiveness (EE) gap describes the differences in survival seen in clinical trials and routine clinical practice, where patients in real-world practice often have inferior outcomes compared to trial populations. However, EE gaps may exist beyond survival outcomes, including gaps in quality of life, toxicity, cost-effectiveness, and patient time, and these EE gaps should also influence patient and clinician treatment decisions. Failure to clearly acknowledge these EE gaps may cause patients, clinicians, and health care systems to have unrealistic expectations of the benefits of therapy across a range of important clinical and economic domains. In this commentary, the authors review the evidence supporting the existence of EE gaps in quality of life, time toxicity, cost and toxicities, and urge for further research into this important topic.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud , Calidad de Vida , Humanos , Oncología Médica , Análisis Costo-BeneficioRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The lack of sociodemographic diversity in clinical trials limits the generalizability of results. The authors examined participation rates and effect modification by sex and race in oncology trials. METHODS: The authors extracted outcome data stratified by sex and race for registration trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval (2010-2021). Effect modification by race and sex was examined using quantitative and qualitative methods. A random-effects meta-analysis and pairwise comparison of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes was conducted by sex and race. RESULTS: Ninety-five trials with 123 end points and 54,365 patients provided information on sex. Trial patients were more often male (n = 35,482; 65% vs. 56% male patients in US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] data), although the proportion of male patients was similar after adjusting by tumor type (60% in FDA data vs. 58% in SEER data). There was no difference in pooled outcomes among male versus female patients (PFS: hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.07; p = .89; OS: hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.07; p = .90). In total, 111 trials including 74,217 patients provided information on race, and 68% of patients identified as White, compared with 72.3% in US SEER incidence data. Black patients were under-represented compared with US SEER incidence data, although ethnicity was poorly reported throughout the data set. In the authors' network meta-analysis by race, there were no statistically significant differences in PFS or OS outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in PFS or OS outcomes were identified when the analyses were stratified by sex or race. Certain racial minorities remain under-represented, and clearer reporting of race and ethnicity is needed. Representation of female patients in FDA trials is similar to that in SEER data after adjusting for tumor type.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Etnicidad , Oncología Médica , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , United States Food and Drug Administration , Ensayos Clínicos como AsuntoRESUMEN
Financial toxicity (FT) describes either objective or perceived excess financial strain due to a cancer diagnosis on the well-being of patients, families, and society. The consequences of FT have been shown to span countries of varied economic tiers and diverse healthcare models. This study attempts to describe FT and its effects in a lower- to middle-income country delivering predominantly public nonfee-levying healthcare. This was a cross-sectional study involving 210 patients with breast cancer of any stage (I to IV), interviewed between 6 and 18 months from the date of diagnosis. Financial toxicity was highly prevalent with 81% reporting 3 or more on a scale of 1 to 5. Costs incurred for travelling (94%), out-of-hospital investigations (87%), and consultation fees outside the public system (81%) were the most common contributors to FT. Daily compromises for food and education were made by 30% and 20%, respectively, with loss of work seen in over one-third. Greater FT was seen with advanced cancer stage and increasing distance to the nearest radiotherapy unit (Pâ =â .008 and .01, respectively). Family and relatives were the most common form of financial support (77.6%). In conclusion, FT is substantial in our group, with many having to make daily compromises for basic needs. Many opt to visit the fee-levying private sector for at least some part of their care, despite the availability of an established public nonfee-levying healthcare.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Estrés Financiero , Sri Lanka/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Atención a la SaludRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Cancer is a major public health problem in Rwanda and other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While there have been some improvements in access to cancer treatment, the cost of care has increased, leading to financial toxicity and treatment barriers for many patients. This study explores the financial toxicity of cancer care in Rwanda. METHODS: This prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at 3 referral hospitals in Rwanda, which deliver most of the country's cancer care. Data were collected over 6 months from June 1 to December 1, 2022 by trained research assistants (RAs) using a modified validated data collection tool. RAs interviewed consecutive eligible patients with breast cancer, cervical cancer, colorectal cancer, Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who were on active systemic therapy. The study aimed to identify sources of financial burden. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 239 patients were included; 75% (nâ =â 180/239) were female and mean age was 51 years. Breast, cervix, and colorectal cancers were the most common diagnoses (42%, 100/239; 24%, 58/239; and 24%, 57/239, respectively) and 54% (nâ =â 129/239) were diagnosed with advanced stage (stages III-IV). Financial burden was high; 44% (nâ =â 106/239) of respondents sold property, 29% (nâ =â 70/239) asked for charity from public, family, or friends, and 16% (nâ =â 37/239) took loans with interest to fund cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: Despite health insurance which covers many elements of cancer care, a substantial proportion of patients on anti-cancer treatment in Rwanda experience major financial toxicity. Novel health financing solutions are needed to ensure accessible and affordable cancer care.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Humanos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Rwanda/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Estudios Prospectivos , Neoplasias de la Mama/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Effective techniques for eliciting patients' preferences regarding their own care, when treatment options offer marginal gains and different risks, is an important clinical need. We sought to evaluate the association between patients' considerations of the time burdens of care ("time toxicity") with decisions about hypothetical treatment options. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter, mixed-methods study that evaluated patients' attitudes and preferences toward palliative-intent cancer treatments that delayed imaging progression-free survival (PFS) but did not improve overall survival (OS). We classified participants based on if they spontaneously volunteered one or more consideration of time burdens during qualitative interviews after treatment trade-off exercises. We compared the percentage of participants who opted for treatments with no PFS gain, some PFS gain, or who declined treatment regardless of PFS gain (in the absence of OS benefit). We conducted narrative analysis of themes related to time burdens. RESULTS: The study cohort included 100 participants with advanced cancer (55% women, 63% age > 60 years, 38% with gastrointestinal cancer, and 80% currently receiving cancer-directed treatment. Forty-six percent (46/100) spontaneously described time burdens as a factor they considered in making treatment decisions. Participants who mentioned time (vs not) had higher thresholds for PFS gains required for choosing additional treatments (P value .004). Participants who mentioned time were more likely to decline treatments with no OS benefit irrespective of the magnitude of PFS benefit (65%, vs 31%). On qualitative analysis, we found that time burdens are influenced by several treatment-related factors and have broad-ranging impact, and illustrate how patients' experiences with time burdens and their preferences regarding time influence their decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of participating patients spontaneously raised the issue of time burdens of cancer care when making hypothetical treatment decisions. These patients had notable differences in treatment preferences compared to those who did not mention considerations of time. Decision science researchers and clinicians should consider time burdens as an important attribute in research and in clinic.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy for platinum-resistant (PL-R) ovarian cancer (OC) improved progression-free (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) in clinical trials. We explored real-world outcomes in Ontario, Canada, and compared survival in the pre- and post-bevacizumab era. METHODS: Administrative databases were utilized to identify all patients treated with bevacizumab for PL-R OC. Time on treatment (ToT) was used as surrogate for PFS. Median OS was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors associated with ToT/OS were identified using a Cox proportional hazard model. A before and after comparative effectiveness analysis was performed to determine mOS for patients treated pre- and post-bevacizumab approval. RESULTS: From 2017 to 2019, 176 patients received bevacizumab. Median ToT was 3 months and OS was 11 months. Sixty-four percent received liposomal doxorubicin and 34% received paclitaxel. ToT (6 vs 3 months; HR 0.44; p < 0.0001) and OS (14 vs 9 months; HR 0.45; p = 0.0089) were longer with bevacizumab/paclitaxel. OS was not significantly different pre- and post-bevacizumab funding (8 vs 9 months; HR 1.01; 0.937). Median OS increased for those receiving paclitaxel (6 vs 11 months), but those in the post group were younger, more likely to have undergone primary surgery and had less co-morbidities. CONCLUSION: Real-world outcomes with bevacizumab in PL-R OC are inferior to those in the pivotal clinical trial. Survival has not significantly improved since funding became publicly available, indicating a substantial efficacy-effectiveness gap between trial and real-world outcomes. Median OS and ToT were significantly better when bevacizumab was given with paclitaxel.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Bevacizumab , Resistencia a Antineoplásicos , Neoplasias Ováricas , Paclitaxel , Humanos , Bevacizumab/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Ováricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Ováricas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Ováricas/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Paclitaxel/administración & dosificación , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Ontario/epidemiología , Adulto , Doxorrubicina/administración & dosificación , Doxorrubicina/uso terapéutico , Doxorrubicina/análogos & derivados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma Epitelial de Ovario/mortalidad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , PolietilenglicolesRESUMEN
Health-care systems in sub-Saharan Africa are considered to be new markets for pharmaceutical companies. This perception is particularly relevant within oncology, as the pharmaceutical industry has changed strategic priorities in the past 10 years to focus on cancer. Since the 1930s, pharmaceutical companies have used advertisements, sample drugs, gifts, paid speaking engagements, advisory boards, and trips to conferences to influence clinical practice and policy. A large amount of literature describes the commonness of these practices and their effects on the behaviour of doctors. However, these data come almost exclusively from high-income countries. Industry-doctor relationships are increasingly common in sub-Saharan Africa and other low-income and middle-income countries. Although there are undoubtedly risks of industry engagement in low-income and middle-income countries, many programmes with educational, research, and clinical value would not occur in these countries without industry support. Thus, what is known about these relationships in high-income countries will not necessarily apply in low-income and middle-income countries. There is a need for widespread discussion about industry-oncologist interactions across the African continent and context-specific data to understand the potential risks and benefits of these relationships.
Asunto(s)
Medicina , Oncólogos , Humanos , África del Sur del Sahara/epidemiología , Industria Farmacéutica , Preparaciones FarmacéuticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Resource-stratified guidelines (RSGs) can inform systemic treatment decisions in the face of limited resources. The objective of this study was to develop a customisable modelling tool to predict the demand, cost, and drug procurement needs of delivering National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) RSG-based systemic treatment for colon cancer. METHODS: We developed decision trees for first-course systemic therapy for colon cancer based on the NCCN RSGs. Decision trees were merged with data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results programme, the International Agency for Research on Cancer's GLOBOCAN 2020 national estimates for colon cancer incidence, country-level income data, and data on drug costs from Redbook (USA), the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (Australia), and the Management Sciences for Health 2015 International Medical Products price guide to estimate global treatment needs and costs, and forecast drug procurement. Simulations and sensitivity analyses were used to explore the effect of scaling up services globally and the effect of alternative stage distributions on treatment demand and cost. We generated a customisable model, in which estimates can be tailored to local incidence, epidemiological, and costing data. FINDINGS: First-course systemic therapy is indicated in 608â314 (53·6%) of 1â135â864 colon cancer diagnoses in 2020. Indications for first-course systemic therapy are projected to rise to 926â653 in 2040; the indications in 2020 might be as high as 826â123 (72·7%), depending on stage distribution assumptions. Adhering to NCCN RSGs, patients with colon cancer in low-income and middle income countries (LMICs) would constitute 329â098 (54·1%) of 608â314 global systemic therapy demands, but only 10% of global expenditure on systemic therapies. The total cost of NCCN RSG-based first-course systemic therapy for colon cancer in 2020 would be between about US$4·2 and about $4·6 billion, depending on stage distribution. If all patients with colon cancer in 2020 were treated according to maximal resources, global expenditure on systemic therapy for colon cancer would rise to around $8·3 billion. INTERPRETATION: We have developed a customisable model that can be applied at global, national, and subnational levels to estimate systemic treatment needs, forecast drug procurement, and calculate expected drug costs on the basis of local data. This tool can be used to plan resource allocation for colon cancer globally. FUNDING: None.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Colon , Gastos en Salud , Humanos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Neoplasias del Colon/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias del Colon/epidemiología , Australia , Salud GlobalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over one half of cancer diagnoses occur in patients aged 65 and older. The authors quantified how treatment effects differ between older and younger patients in oncology registration trials. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of registration trials supporting US Food and Drug Administration approval of cancer drugs (from January 2010 to December 2021). The primary outcome was differential treatment effect by age (younger than 65 years vs. 65 years or older) for progression-free survival and overall survival. Random effects meta-analysis and a pairwise comparison of outcomes by age group also were performed. RESULTS: Among 263 trials that met the inclusion criteria, 120 trials with 153 end points and 83,152 patients presented age-specific outcome data. Among the included randomized patients, 38% were aged 65 years and older compared with an incidence proportion of 55% in data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Studies evaluating prostate cancer had the highest representation of patients aged 65 years or older (73%), whereas breast cancer studies had the lowest (20%). There were no changes in the proportion of patients aged 65 years or older over time (p = .86). Only 7% of end points showed a statistically significant interaction between outcome and age group. In a pooled analysis, there was an association between treatment effect and age for progression-free survival that approached but did not meet significance (hazard ratio, 0.95; p = .06), and there was no difference for overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.97; p = .79). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults remain under-represented in oncology registration trials. Significant differences in outcomes by age group were uncommon in individual trials and pooled analyses. However, clinical trial participants differ from real-world patients older than 65 years, and increased enrollment and ongoing research into differential treatment effects by age are needed.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Neoplasias de la Mama , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Mama/tratamiento farmacológico , Aprobación de Drogas , Oncología Médica , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , United States Food and Drug Administration , FemeninoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Oncology randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are increasingly global in scope. Whether authorship is equitably shared between investigators from high-income countries (HIC) and low-middle/upper-middle incomes countries (LMIC/UMIC) is not well described. The authors conducted this study to understand the allocation of authorship and patient enrollment across all oncology RCTs conducted globally. METHODS: A cross-sectional retrospective cohort study of phase 3 RCTs (published 2014-2017) that were led by investigators in HIC and recruited patients in LMIC/UMIC. FINDINGS: During 2014-2017, 694 oncology RCTs were published; 636 (92%) were led by investigators from HIC. Among these HIC-led trials, 186 (29%) enrolled patients in LMIC/UMIC. One-third (33%, 62 of 186) of RCTs had no authors from LMIC/UMIC. Forty percent (74 of 186) of RCTs reported patient enrollment by country; in 50% (37 of 74) of these trials, LMIC/UMIC contributed <15% of patients. The relationship between enrollment and authorship proportion is very strong and is comparable between LMIC/UMIC and HIC (Spearman's ρ LMIC/UMIC 0.824, p < .001; HIC 0.823, p < .001). Among the 74 trials that report country enrollment, 34% (25 of 74) have no authors from LMIC/UMIC. CONCLUSIONS: Among trials that enroll patients in HIC and LMIC/UMIC, authorship appears to be proportional to patient enrollment. This finding is limited by the fact that more than half of RCTs do not report enrollment by country. Moreover, there are important outliers as a significant proportion of RCTs had no authors from LMIC/UMIC despite enrolling patients in these countries. The findings in this study reflect a complex global RCT ecosystem that still underserves cancer control outside high-income settings.
Asunto(s)
Autoria , Países en Desarrollo , Humanos , Estudios Transversales , Renta , Oncología Médica , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: When cancer treatments have similar oncologic outcomes, the number of days with in-person healthcare contact (""contact days'') can help contextualize expected time use with each treatment. We assessed contact days in a completed randomized clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the CCTG LY.12 RCT that evaluated 2-3 cycles of gemcitabine, dexamethasone, and cisplatin (GDP) vs. dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin (DHAP) in 619 patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoma prior to stem cell transplant. Primary analyses reported similar response rates and survival. We calculated patient-level "contact days" by analyzing trial forms. The study period was from assignment to progression or transplant. Days without healthcare contact were considered "home days''. We compared measures of contact days across arms. RESULTS: The study period was longer in the GDP arm (median 50, vs. 47 days, P = .007). Contact days were comparable in both arms (median 18 vs 19, P = 0.79), but home days were higher in the GDP arm (median 33 vs 28, P < .001). The proportion of contact days was lower in the GDP arm (34%, vs. 38%, P = .009). The GDP arm experienced more contact days related to planned outpatient chemotherapy (median, 10 vs. 8 days), but the DHAP arm experienced many more inpatient contact days (median, 11 vs. 0 days). CONCLUSIONS: Measures of time use, such as contact days, can be extracted from RCTs. In LY.12, despite comparable oncologic outcomes, GDP was associated with fewer contact days. Such information can guide decision-making for patients with hematological cancers, who already face significant healthcare contact.
Asunto(s)
Cisplatino , Neoplasias , Humanos , Cisplatino/efectos adversos , Desoxicitidina/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Dexametasona/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Medical journal publishing has changed dramatically over the past decade. The shift from print to electronic distribution altered the industry's economic model. This was followed by open access mandates from funding organizations and the subsequent imposition of article processing charges on authors. The medical publishing industry is large and while there is variation across journals, it is overall highly profitable. As journals have moved to digital dissemination, advertising revenues decreased and publishers shifted some of the losses onto authors by way of article processing charges. The number of open access journals has increased substantially in recent years. The open access model presents an equity paradox; while it liberates scientific knowledge for the consumer, it presents barriers to those who produce research. This emerging "pay-to-publish" system offers advantages to authors who work in countries and at institutes with more resources. Finally, the medical publishing industry represents an unusual business model; the people who provide both the content and the external peer review receive no payment from the publisher, who generates revenue from the content. The very unusual economic model of this industry makes it vulnerable to disruptive change. The economic model of medical publishing is rapidly evolving and this will lead to disruption of the industry. These changes will accelerate dissemination of science and may lead to a shift away from lower-impact journals towards pre-print servers.
Asunto(s)
Revisión por Pares , Edición , Humanos , Modelos Económicos , ElectrónicaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Although early palliative care is recommended, resource limitations prevent its routine implementation. We report on the preliminary findings of a mixed methods study involving a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of Symptom screening with Targeted Early Palliative care (STEP) and qualitative interviews. METHODS: Adults with advanced solid tumors and an oncologist-estimated prognosis of 6-36 months were randomized to STEP or symptom screening alone. STEP involved symptom screening at each outpatient oncology visit; moderate to severe scores triggered an email to a palliative care nurse, who offered referral to in-person outpatient palliative care. Patient-reported outcomes of quality of life (FACT-G7; primary outcome), depression (PHQ-9), symptom control (ESAS-r-CS), and satisfaction with care (FAMCARE P-16) were measured at baseline and 2, 4, and 6 months. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a subset of participants. RESULTS: From Aug/2019 to Mar/2020 (trial halted due to COVID-19 pandemic), 69 participants were randomized to STEP (n = 33) or usual care (n = 36). At 6 months, 45% of STEP arm patients and 17% of screening alone participants had received palliative care (p = 0.009). Nonsignificant differences for all outcomes favored STEP: difference in change scores for FACT-G7 = 1.67 (95% CI: -1.43, 4.77); ESAS-r-CS = -5.51 (-14.29, 3.27); FAMCARE P-16 = 4.10 (-0.31, 8.51); PHQ-9 = -2.41 (-5.02, 0.20). Sixteen patients completed qualitative interviews, describing symptom screening as helpful to initiate communication; triggered referral as initially jarring but ultimately beneficial; and referral to palliative care as timely. CONCLUSION: Despite lack of power for this halted trial, preliminary results favored STEP and qualitative results demonstrated acceptability. Findings will inform an RCT of combined in-person and virtual STEP.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Adulto , Humanos , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias/terapia , Neoplasias/patología , Calidad de VidaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Similarly to several other upper-middle-income countries, there is a major shortfall in radiotherapy services for the treatment of cancer in Brazil. In this study, we developed the linear accelerator (LINAC) shortage index to assess the LINAC shortage and support the prioritisation of new LINAC distribution in Brazil. METHODS: This cross-sectional, population-based study used data from the National Cancer Institute 2020 Cancer estimates, the Ministry of Health 2019 radiotherapy census, the Minister of Health radiotherapy expansion programme progress reports, and the Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo public database of the Cancer Hospital Registry of the State of São Paulo to calculate the LINAC shortage index. Data collected were number of new cancer cases in Brazil, number of LINACs per region and state, number of cancer cases treated with radiotherapy, patient state of residence, and radiotherapy treatment centre and location. National, regional, and state-level data were collected for analysis. LINAC numbers, cancer incidence, geographical distribution, and radiotherapy needs were estimated. A LINAC shortage index was calculated as a relative measure of LINAC demand compared with supply based on number of new cancer cases, number of patients requiring radiotherapy, and the number of LINCAS in the region or state. We then built a prioritisation framework using the LINAC shortage index, cancer incidence, and geographical factors. Finally, using patient-level public cancer registry data from the Fundação Oncocentro de São Paulo and Google maps, we estimated the geospatial distance travelled by patients with cancer from their state of residence to radiotherapy treatment in São Paulo from 2005-14. Non-parametric statistics were used for analysis. FINDINGS: Data were collected between Feb 2 and Dec 31, 2021. In 2020, there were 625 370 new cancer cases in Brazil and 252 LINAC machines. The number of LINACs was inadequate in all Brazilian regions, with a national LINAC shortage index of 221 (ie, 121% less than the required radiotherapy capacity). The LINAC shortage index was higher in the midwest (326), north (313), and northeast (237) regions, than the southeast (210) and south (192) regions. Four states (Tocantins, Acre, Amapá, and Roraima) in the north region were ranked first on the prioritisation rank due to no availability of LINACs. There was an association between LINAC shortage index and the number of patients who travelled to receive radiotherapy (p<0·0001). Patients living in the midwest (793 km), north (2835 km), and northeast (2415 km) regions travelled significantly longer average distances to receive radiotherapy treatment in São Paulo than patients living in the southeast or south regions (p=0·032). The reduced number of LINACs in these regions was associated with longer distance travelled (p=0·032). INTERPRETATION: There is substantial discordance between distribution of cancer cases and LINAC availability in Brazil. We developed a tool using the LINACs shortage index to help prioritise the development of radiotherapy infrastructure across Brazil; this approach might also be useful in other health systems. FUNDING: None.
Asunto(s)
Oncología por Radiación , Brasil/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Aceleradores de Partículas , InvestigaciónRESUMEN
In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), urgent action is needed to curb a growing crisis in cancer incidence and mortality. Without rapid interventions, data estimates show a major increase in cancer mortality from 520 348 in 2020 to about 1 million deaths per year by 2030. Here, we detail the state of cancer in SSA, recommend key actions on the basis of analysis, and highlight case studies and successful models that can be emulated, adapted, or improved across the region to reduce the growing cancer crises. Recommended actions begin with the need to develop or update national cancer control plans in each country. Plans must include childhood cancer plans, managing comorbidities such as HIV and malnutrition, a reliable and predictable supply of medication, and the provision of psychosocial, supportive, and palliative care. Plans should also engage traditional, complementary, and alternative medical practices employed by more than 80% of SSA populations and pathways to reduce missed diagnoses and late referrals. More substantial investment is needed in developing cancer registries and cancer diagnostics for core cancer tests. We show that investments in, and increased adoption of, some approaches used during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as hypofractionated radiotherapy and telehealth, can substantially increase access to cancer care in Africa, accelerate cancer prevention and control efforts, increase survival, and save billions of US dollars over the next decade. The involvement of African First Ladies in cancer prevention efforts represents one practical approach that should be amplified across SSA. Moreover, investments in workforce training are crucial to prevent millions of avoidable deaths by 2030. We present a framework that can be used to strategically plan cancer research enhancement in SSA, with investments in research that can produce a return on investment and help drive policy and effective collaborations. Expansion of universal health coverage to incorporate cancer into essential benefits packages is also vital. Implementation of the recommended actions in this Commission will be crucial for reducing the growing cancer crises in SSA and achieving political commitments to the UN Sustainable Development Goals to reduce premature mortality from non-communicable diseases by a third by 2030.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasias , Enfermedades no Transmisibles , África del Sur del Sahara/epidemiología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Niño , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Neoplasias/terapia , PandemiasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Over the past 2 decades there has been a substantial increase in the number of new cancer medicines; this has been accompanied by a dramatic rise in drug costs. It is unknown how these trends impact the revenue of the pharmaceutical sector. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study to characterize temporal trends of revenue generated from cancer medicines as a proportion of total drug revenue among 10 large pharmaceutical companies from 2010 to 2019. Itemized product-sales data publicly available through company websites or annual filings were used to identify annual drug revenue. Revenue data were adjusted for inflation and converted to 2019 US dollars. RESULTS: During the study period, cumulative annual revenue generated from cancer drugs increased by 70%: from $55.8 billion to $95.1 billion, while cumulative revenue from nononcology drugs decreased 18%: from $342.2 billion to $281.5 billion. The proportion of total drug revenue generated from oncology drugs increased substantially over the study period: from 14% in 2010 to 25% in 2019 (τ = 1.0, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Among 10 of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies, revenues generated from the sale of cancer drugs have increased by 70% over the past decade, while revenues from other medicines have decreased by 18%. Revenues from cancer drugs now account for one-quarter of the net revenues from these companies. Further work is needed to understand if this increase in sales revenue reflects industry profit, and to what extent increased spending has translated into improvements in patient and population outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Costos de los Medicamentos , Industria Farmacéutica , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Estudios de Cohortes , Comercio , Humanos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) may be at increased risk for cancer. CKD may also be associated with worse cancer outcomes. This study examined cancer incidence and mortality across the spectrum of CKD. STUDY DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All adult Ontario residents with data on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or who were receiving maintenance dialysis or had received a kidney transplant (2007-2016). EXPOSURE: Patients were categorized as of the first date they had 2 eGFR assessments or were registered as receiving maintenance dialysis or having received a kidney transplant. eGFR levels were further categorized as ≥60, 45-59, 30-44, 15-29, and <15 mL/min/1.73 m2; the latter 4 groups are consistent with KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) CKD categories G3a, G3b, G4, and G5, respectively. OUTCOMES: Overall and site-specific cancer incidence and mortality. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard models. RESULTS: Among 5,882,388 individuals with eGFR data, 29,809 receiving dialysis, and 4,951 having received a kidney transplant, there were 325,895 cancer diagnoses made during 29,993,847 person-years of follow-up. The cumulative incidence of cancer ranged between 10.8% and 15.3% in patients with kidney disease. Compared with patients with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2, adjusted hazard ratios (AHRs) for a cancer diagnosis among patients with CKD G3a, G3b, G4, and G5 were 1.08 (95% CI, 1.07-1.10), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.01), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.88), and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.73-0.90), respectively. The AHRs for patients receiving dialysis and who had received a transplant were 1.01 (95% CI, 0.96-1.07) and 1.25 (95% CI, 1.12-1.39), respectively. Patients with kidney disease had higher proportions of stage 4 cancers at diagnosis. Patients with CKD G3a, G3b, and G4 and transplant recipients had increased risks of cancer-specific mortality (AHRs of 1.27 [95% CI, 1.23-1.32], 1.29 [95% CI, 1.24-1.35], 1.25 [95% CI, 1.18-1.33], and 1.48 [95% CI, 1.18-1.87], respectively). The risks of bladder and kidney cancers and multiple myeloma were particularly increased in CKD, and mortality from these malignancies increased with worsening kidney function. LIMITATIONS: Possible unmeasured confounding and limited ability to infer causal associations. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer incidence in the setting of kidney disease is substantial. Cancer risk was increased in mild to moderate CKD and among transplant recipients, but not in advanced kidney disease. Cancer-related mortality was significantly higher among patients with kidney disease, particularly urologic cancers and myeloma. Strategies to detect and manage these cancers in the CKD population are needed.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Riñón , Neoplasias , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Humanos , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/epidemiología , Diálisis Renal , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/epidemiología , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/terapiaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Mortality secondary to cirrhosis in North America is increasing. We describe the incidence of cirrhosis stratified by birth cohort and cirrhosis etiology and project disease burden to 2040. APPROACH AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using population-based administrative health care data. Individuals with incident cirrhosis (2000-2017) were identified, and etiology was defined as HCV, HBV, NAFLD, alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), or autoimmune liver disease/other using validated case definitions. Annual age/sex-adjusted cirrhosis incidence rate per 100,000 person-years was calculated with incidence projection to 2040 using age-period-cohort modeling along with average annual percent change (AAPC) in cirrhosis incidence stratified by birth cohort and etiology. In total, 159,549 incident cases of cirrhosis were identified. Incidence increased by 26% with an AAPC of 2%/year (95% CI, 1.6-2.4; P < 0.001). The largest increases were for HCV (AAPC, 4.1%/year; 95% CI, 2.6-5.7; P < 0.001) and NAFLD (AAPC, 3.3%/year; 95% CI, 2.6-4.1%; P < 0.001). ALD and HCV cirrhosis in those born >1980 increased by 11.6%/year (95% CI, 9.3-13.9; P < 0.001) and 9.5%/year (95% CI, 6.2-13.0; P < 0.001), respectively. However, by 2040, cirrhosis incidence is projected to continue to increase, driven mostly by NAFLD, especially in postmenopausal women, and ALD in individuals born >1980. CONCLUSIONS: Cirrhosis incidence will continue to increase over the next two decades secondary to NAFLD with a worrisome rapid rise in ALD cirrhosis among young adults. Public education, policy, and intervention targeting NAFLD risk factors and alcohol use in young adults are urgently needed.
Asunto(s)
Cirrosis Hepática Alcohólica/epidemiología , Cirrosis Hepática/epidemiología , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/epidemiología , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Canadá/epidemiología , Costo de Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Cirrosis Hepática/etiología , Cirrosis Hepática Alcohólica/complicaciones , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad del Hígado Graso no Alcohólico/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores SexualesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Abdominal surgery and chemotherapy are well-established risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer, but their specific contribution in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer is unclear. We aim to quantify the risk of VTE, identify risk factors associated with VTE, and determine the association between VTE and survival in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal or gastric cancer. METHODS: A retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted using linked administrative healthcare databases. We used the Ontario Cancer Registry to identify patients with esophageal or gastric cancer between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 who underwent surgical resection. Incidence of first VTE event was identified using International Classification of Diseases 9 and 10 codes. VTE incidence was calculated at clinically relevant time points 180 days before and after surgery. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with VTE with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) reported. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate associations between covariates and survival. Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare overall (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) by VTE status. RESULTS: A total of 4894 patients had esophagectomy or gastrectomy, of which 8% (n = 383/4894) had VTE. VTE risk was 2.5% (n = 123/4894) 180 days before surgery, 2.8% (n = 138/4894) within 30 days of surgery, and 2.5% (n = 122/4894) from 31 to ≤ 180 days after surgery. Of the patients with VTE within 30 days of surgery, 34% (n = 47/138) were diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Receipt of preoperative chemotherapy was associated with VTE 180 days before surgery (odds ratio [OR] 3.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.41, 6.11). Increased hospital length of stay (LOS) was associated with VTE 30 days after surgery (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02, 1.14, per week). Patients with VTE had inferior median OS and CSS (2.2 vs. 3.7 years; 2.3 vs. 4.4 years, respectively). In adjusted models VTE was associated with inferior OS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.13, 1.63) and CSS (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.16, 1.75). CONCLUSIONS: The highest risk of VTE is within 30 days of surgery with one third of patients diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Longer hospital LOS and receipt of preoperative chemotherapy are associated with increased risk of VTE. VTE is an independent risk factor for inferior survival in patients with esophageal or gastric cancer.