New Anticancer Drugs: Reliably Assessing "Value" While Addressing High Prices.

Countries face challenges in paying for new drugs. High prices are driven in part by exploding drug development costs, which, in turn, are driven by essential but excessive regulation. Burdensome regulation also delays drug development, and this can translate into thousands of life-years lost. We need system-wide reform that will enable less expensive, faster drug development. The speed with which COVID-19 vaccines and AIDS therapies were developed indicates this is possible if governments prioritize it. Countries also differ in how they value drugs, and generally, those willing to pay more have better, faster access. Canada is used as an example to illustrate how "incremental cost-effectiveness ratios" (ICERs) based on measures such as gains in "quality-adjusted life-years" (QALYs) may be used to determine a drug's value but are often problematic, imprecise assessments. Generally, ICER/QALY estimates inadequately consider the impact of patient crossover or long post-progression survival, therapy benefits in distinct subpopulations, positive impacts of the therapy on other healthcare or societal costs, how much governments willingly might pay for other things, etc. Furthermore, a QALY value should be higher for a lethal or uncommon disease than for a common, nonlethal disease. Compared to international comparators, Canada is particularly ineffective in initiating public funding for essential new medications. Addressing these disparities demands urgent reform.

Patient and Family Financial Burden in Cancer: A Focus on Differences across Four Provinces, and Reduced Spending Including Decisions to Forego Care in Canada.

GOAL: This study aimed to examine provincial differences in patient spending for cancer care and reductions in household spending including decisions to forego care in Canada. METHODS: Nine-hundred and one patients with cancer, from twenty cancer centers across Canada, completed a self-administered questionnaire (P-SAFE version 7.2.4) (344 breast, 183 colorectal, 158 lung, and 216 prostate) measuring direct and indirect costs and spending changes. RESULTS: Provincial variations showed a high mean out-of-pocket cost (OOPC) of CAD 938 (Alberta) and a low of CAD 280 (Manitoba). Differences were influenced by age and income. Income loss was highest for Alberta (CAD 2399) and lowest for Manitoba (CAD 1126). Travel costs were highest for Alberta (CAD 294) and lowest for British Columbia (CAD 67). Parking costs were highest for Ontario (CAD 103) and lowest for Manitoba (CAD 53). A total of 41% of patients reported reducing spending, but this increased to 52% for families earning

[Health-economic aspects of radiotherapy]. / Aspects économiques de la radiothérapie.

Cancer care poses a significant economic burden, challenging healthcare budgets to balance patient benefits with affordability. Radiotherapy takes up only a limited part of oncology budgets, but the cost is rarely clear-cut due to influential factors such as complexity of treatments, highly-trained personnel and technologies. Health-economic appraisal is complex and can be performed in several ways, balancing costs and outcomes, but not all approaches are equally suitable for assessment of radiotherapy interventions. The concept of «value-based healthcare¼ offers a broader perspective to health-economic appraisal, considering various outcomes and the cost of the total cycle of care, thus addressing some of the challenges in radiotherapy: the diversity of interventions, a broad range of outcomes (including organ preservation or local control) and challenges in evidence generation. However, as the existing value-based frameworks in oncology are aimed at systemic therapies, a tailored approach for radiotherapy interventions is necessary to enhance access to innovative care and optimize resource allocation. This article explores the economic aspects of radiotherapy, providing an overview of radiotherapy cost determinants and calculations, discussing different health-economic strategies and value-based healthcare, and how these can address the specific challenges in radiotherapy.

Le coût économique du cancer représente un fardeau significatif, nécessitant un équilibre entre les bénéfices et la viabilité financière des budgets de santé. La radiothérapie ne représente qu'une part limitée des budgets d'oncologie, mais le coût est rarement clairement défini en raison, entre autres, de la complexité des traitements et du recours à un personnel hautement qualifié. L'évaluation est complexe et peut être réalisée de plusieurs manières, en équilibrant les coûts et les résultats, mais toutes les approches médico-économiques ne sont pas également adaptées à l'évaluation de la radiothérapie. Le concept de «value-based healthcare¼, qui prend en compte différents résultats et le coût du cycle total des soins, peut résoudre certains des défis de la radiothérapie : la diversité des interventions, un large éventail de résultats (comme le contrôle local) et les défis liés à la production de données probantes. Cependant, comme les cadres existants basés sur «value¼ en oncologie visent les thérapies systémiques, une approche adaptée à la radiothérapie est nécessaire pour améliorer l'accès aux soins innovants et optimiser l'allocation des ressources. Cet article explore les aspects économiques de la radiothérapie, en présentant les déterminants des coûts, ainsi qu'une discussion sur diverses stratégies et sur la manière dont elles peuvent répondre aux défis spécifiques de la radiothérapie.

Global burden and economic impact of vaccine-preventable cancer mortality.

BACKGROUND: Infections are responsible for approximately 13% of cancer cases worldwide and many of these infections can be prevented by vaccination. Human papillomavirus (HPV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) are among the most common infections that cause cancer deaths globally, despite effective prophylactic vaccines being available. This analysis aims to estimate the global burden and economic impact of vaccine-preventable cancer mortality across World Health Organization (WHO) regions. METHODS: The number of deaths and years of life lost (YLL) due to five different vaccine-preventable cancer forms (oral cavity, liver, laryngeal, cervical, and oropharyngeal cancer) in each of the WHO regions (African, Eastern Mediterranean, European, the Americas, South-East Asia Pacific, and Western Pacific) were obtained from the Institute for Health Metrics Evaluation global burden of disease dataset. Vaccine-preventable mortality was estimated considering the fraction attributable to infection, to estimate the number of deaths and YLL potentially preventable through vaccination. Data from the World Bank on GDP per capita were used to estimate the value of YLL (VYLL). The robustness of these results was explored with sensitivity analysis. Given that several Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) vaccines are in development, but not yet available, the impact of a potential vaccine for EBV was evaluated in a scenario analysis. RESULTS: In 2019, there were 465,740 potentially vaccine-preventable cancer deaths and 14,171,397 YLL across all WHO regions. The estimated economic impact due to this mortality was $106.3 billion globally. The sensitivity analysis calculated a range of 403,025-582,773 deaths and a range in productivity cost of $78.8-129.0 billion. In the scenario analysis EBV-related cancer mortality increased the global burden by 159,723 deaths and $32.4 billion. CONCLUSION: Overall, the findings from this analysis illustrate the high economic impact of premature cancer mortality that could be potentially preventable by vaccination which may assist decision-makers in allocating limited resources among competing priorities. Improved implementation and increased vaccination coverage of HPV and HBV should be prioritized to decrease this burden.

Economic Considerations for Implementing Tobacco Cessation Programs in Cancer Care Settings.

Increasingly, research demonstrates economic benefits of tobacco cessation in cancer care, as seen in a new study by Kypriotakis and colleagues of the MD Anderson cessation program, demonstrating median health care cost savings of $1,095 per patient over 3 months. While the cost-effectiveness of tobacco cessation programs from a hospital perspective is important, implementation decisions in a predominantly fee-for-service system, such as in the United States, too often insufficiently value this outcome. Economic barriers, stakeholder disincentives, and payment models all impact program implementation. Combining economic evaluation with implementation research, including assessment of return-on-investment, may enhance sustainability and inform decision-making in cancer care settings. See related article by Kypriotakis et al., p. 217.

The usage and costs of national drug price-negotiated anticancer medicines in a first-tier city in Northeast China: a study based on health insurance data.

BACKGROUND: The National Drug Price Negotiation (NDPN) policy has entered a normalisation stage, aiming to alleviate, to some extent, the disease-related and economic burdens experienced by cancer patients. This study analysed the use and subsequent burden of anticancer medicines among cancer patients in a first-tier city in northeast China. METHODS: We assessed the usage of 64 negotiated anticancer medicines using the data on the actual drug deployment situation, the frequency of medical insurance claims and actual medication costs. The affordability of these medicines was measured using the catastrophic health expenditure (CHE) incidence and intensity of occurrence. Finally, we used the defined daily doses (DDDs) and defined daily doses cost (DDDc) as indicators to evaluate the actual use of these medicines in the region. RESULTS: During the study period, 63 of the 64 medicines were readily available. From the perspective of drug usage, the frequency of medical insurance claims for negotiated anticancer medicines and medication costs showed an increasing trend from 2018 to 2021. Cancer patients typically sought medical treatment at tertiary hospitals and purchased medicines at community pharmacies. The overall quantity and cost of medications for patients covered by the Urban Employee Basic Medical Insurance (UEBMI) were five times higher than those covered by the Urban and Rural Resident Medical Insurance (URRMI). The frequency of medical insurance claims and medication costs were highest for lung and breast cancer patients. Furthermore, from 2018 to 2021, CHE incidence showed a decreasing trend (2.85-1.60%) under urban patients' payment capability level, but an increasing trend (11.94%-18.42) under rural patients' payment capability level. The average occurrence intensities for urban (0.55-1.26 times) and rural (1.27-1.74 times) patients showed an increasing trend. From the perspective of drug utilisation, the overall DDD of negotiated anticancer medicines showed an increasing trend, while the DDDc exhibited a decreasing trend. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that access to drugs for urban cancer patients has improved. However, patients' medical behaviours are affected by some factors such as hospital level and type of medical insurance. In the future, the Chinese Department of Health Insurance Management should further improve its work in promoting the fairness of medical resource distribution and strengthen its supervision of the nation's health insurance funds.

Real-world implications of IMACS malignancy screening guidelines for idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: An evaluation of compliance and economic impact at a tertiary referral center.

AIM: An inaugural set of consensus guidelines for malignancy screening in idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM) were recently published by an international working group. These guidelines propose different investigation strategies based on "high", "intermediate" or "standard" malignancy risk groups. This study compares current malignancy screening practices at an Australian tertiary referral center with the recommendations outlined in these guidelines. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of newly diagnosed IIM patients. Relevant demographic and clinical data regarding malignancy screening were recorded. Existing practice was compared with the guidelines using descriptive statistics; costs were calculated using the Australian Medicare Benefit Schedule. RESULTS: Of the 47 patients identified (66% female, median age: 63 years [IQR: 55.5-70], median disease duration: 4 years [IQR: 3-6]), only one had a screening-detected malignancy. Twenty patients (43%) were at high risk, while 20 (43%) were at intermediate risk; the remaining seven (15%) had IBM, for which the proposed guidelines do not recommend screening. Only three (6%) patients underwent screening fully compatible with International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies recommendations. The majority (N = 39, 83%) were under-screened; the remaining five (11%) overscreened patients had IBM. The main reason for guideline non-compliance was the lack of repeated annual screening in the 3 years post-diagnosis for high-risk individuals (0% compliance). The mean cost of screening was substantially lower than those projected by following the guidelines ($481.52 [SD 423.53] vs $1341 [SD 935.67] per patient), with the highest disparity observed in high-risk female patients ($2314.29/patient). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the proposed guidelines will significantly impact clinical practice and result in a potentially substantial additional economic burden.

The impact of humanitarian aid on financial toxicity among cancer patients in Northwest Syria.

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing crisis in Syria has divided the country, leading to significant deterioration of the healthcare infrastructure and leaving millions of people struggling with poor socioeconomic conditions. Consequently, the affordability of healthcare services for the population has been compromised. Cancer patients in Northwest Syria have faced difficulties in accessing healthcare services, which increased their financial distress despite the existence of humanitarian health and aid programs. This study aimed to provide insights into how humanitarian assistance can alleviate the financial burdens associated with cancer treatment in conflict-affected regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This research employed a quantitative, quasi-experimental design with a pre-test-post-test approach, focusing on evaluating the financial toxicity among cancer patients in Northwest Syria before and after receiving humanitarian aid. The study used purposeful sampling to select participants and included comprehensive demographic data collection. The primary tool for measuring financial toxicity was the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (FACIT-COST) tool, administered in Arabic. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS v25, employing various statistical tests to explore relationships and impacts. RESULTS: A total of 99 cancer patients were recruited in the first round of data collection, out of whom 28 patients affirmed consistent receipt of humanitarian aid throughout the follow-up period. The results of the study revealed that humanitarian aid has no significant relationship with reducing the financial toxicity experienced by cancer patients in Northwest Syria. Despite the aid efforts, many patients continued to face significant financial distress. CONCLUSION: The research findings indicate that current humanitarian assistance models might not sufficiently address the complex financial challenges faced by cancer patients in conflict zones. The research emphasizes the need for a more comprehensive and integrated approach in humanitarian aid programs. The study highlights the importance of addressing the economic burdens associated with cancer care in conflict settings and calls for a re-evaluation of aid delivery models to better serve the needs of chronic disease patients. The findings suggest a need for multi-sectoral collaboration and a systemic approach to improve the overall effectiveness of humanitarian assistance in such contexts.

Access to innovative anticancer medicines in China: a national survey on availability, price and affordability.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the availability, price, and affordability of nationally negotiated innovative anticancer medicines in China. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study based on data from a nationwide medical database. DATA SOURCES/SETTING: Quarterly data about the use of innovative anticancer medicines from 2020 to 2022 were collected from the Chinese Medicine Economic Information Network. This study covered 895 public general hospitals in 30 provincial administrative regions in China. Of the total hospitals, 299 (33.41%) were secondary and 596 (66.59%) were tertiary. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The adjusted WHO and Health Action International methodology was used to calculate the availability and affordability of 33 nationally negotiated innovative anticancer medicines in the investigated hospitals. Price is expressed as the defined daily dose cost. RESULTS: On average, the total availability of 33 innovative anticancer medicines increased annually from 2020 to 2022. The median availability of all investigated medicines in tertiary hospitals from 2020 to 2022 was 24.04%, 33.60% and 37.61%, respectively, while the indicators in secondary hospitals were 4.90%, 12.54% and 16.48%, respectively. The adjusted prices of the medicines newly put in Medicare (in March 2021) decreased noticeably, with the decline rate ranging from 39.98% to 82.45% in 2021 compared with those in 2020. Most generic brands were priced much lower than the originator brands. The affordability of anticancer medicines has improved year by year from 2020 to 2022. In comparison, rural residents had lower affordability than urban residents. CONCLUSIONS: The overall accessibility of 33 nationally negotiated innovative anticancer medicines improved from 2020 to 2022. However, the overall availability of most anticancer medicines in China remained at a low level (less than 50%). Further efforts should be made to sufficiently and equally benefit patients with cancer.

Health Care Lobbying and Oncology.

BACKGROUND: The health care industry spends more on lobbying than any other industry, with more than $700 million spent in 2022. However, health care lobbying related to cancer has not been characterized. In this study, we sought to describe overall health sector lobbying spending and oncology-related lobbying spending across patient and clinician organizations. METHODS: We obtained lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org and the Federal Election Commission. Overall health sector lobbying spending was categorized by OpenSecrets into 4 groups: pharmaceuticals/health products, health services/health maintenance organizations (HMOs), hospitals/nursing homes, and health professionals. We then identified and categorized 4 oncology-related lobbying groups: oncology physician professional organizations (OPPOs), prospective payment system (PPS)-exempt cancer hospitals, patient advocacy organizations, and provider networks (eg, US Oncology Network). We described temporal trends in lobbying spending from 2014 to 2022, in both overall dollar value (inflation-adjusted 2023 dollars) and in per-physician spending (using American Association of Medical Colleges [AAMC] data for number of hematologists/oncologists) using a Mann-Kendall trend test. RESULTS: Among the overall health sector lobbying, pharmaceuticals/health products had the greatest increase in lobbying spending, with an increase from $294 million in 2014 to >$376 million in 2022 (P=.0006). In contrast, lobbying spending by health professionals did not change, remaining at $96 million (P=.35). Regarding oncology-related lobbying, OPPOs and PPS-exempt cancer hospitals had a significant increase of 170% (P=.016) and 62% (P=.009), respectively. Per-physician spending also demonstrated an increase from $60 to $134 for OPPOs and from $168 to $226 for PPS-exempt cancer hospitals. Overall, OPPO lobbying increased as a percentage of overall physician lobbying from 1.16% in 2014 to 3.76% in 2022. CONCLUSIONS: Although overall health sector lobbying has increased, physician/health professional lobbying has remained relatively stable in recent years, spending for lobbying by OPPOs has increased. Continued efforts to understand the utility and value of lobbying in health care and across oncology are needed as the costs of care continue to increase.

Breakthrough Therapy Cancer Drugs and Indications With FDA Approval: Development Time, Innovation, Trials, Clinical Benefit, Epidemiology, and Price.

BACKGROUND: The breakthrough therapy designation (BTD) facilitates the development of drugs with a large preliminary benefit in treating serious or life-threatening diseases. This study analyzes the FDA approval, trials, benefits, unmet needs, and pricing of breakthrough and nonbreakthrough therapy cancer drugs and indications. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 355 cancer indications with FDA approval (2012-2022). Breakthrough and nonbreakthrough indications were compared regarding their FDA approval, innovativeness, clinical trials, epidemiology, and price. Data were extracted from FDA labels, the Global Burden of Disease study, and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and relative risk (RR) of tumor response were meta-analyzed across randomized controlled trials. Objective response rates (ORRs) were meta-analyzed for single-arm trials. RESULTS: We identified 137 breakthrough and 218 nonbreakthrough cancer indications. The median clinical development time was 3.2 years shorter for breakthrough drugs than for nonbreakthrough drugs (5.6 vs 8.8 years; P=.002). The BTD was more frequently granted to biomarker-directed indications (46% vs 34%; P=.025) supported by smaller trials (median, 149 vs 326 patients; P<.001) of single-arm (53% vs 27%; P<.001) and phase I or II design (61% vs 31%; P<.001). Breakthrough indications offered a greater OS (HR, 0.69 vs 0.74; P=.031) and tumor response (RR, 1.48 vs 1.32; P=.006; ORR, 52% vs 40%; P=.004), but not a PFS benefit (HR, 0.53 vs 0.58; P=.212). Median improvements in OS (4.8 vs 3.2 months; P=.002) and PFS (5.4 vs 3.3 months; P=.005) but not duration of response (8.7 vs 4.7 months; P=.245) were higher for breakthrough than for nonbreakthrough indications. The BTD was more frequently granted to first-in-class drugs (42% vs 28%; P=.001) and first-in-indication treatments (43% vs 29%; P<.001). There were no differences in treatment and epidemiologic characteristics between breakthrough and nonbreakthrough drugs. Breakthrough drugs were more expensive than nonbreakthrough drugs (mean monthly price, $38,971 vs $22,591; P=.0592). CONCLUSIONS: The BTD expedites patient access to effective and innovative, but also expensive, new cancer drugs and indications.

Toward identification and intervention to address financial toxicity and unmet health-related social needs among adolescents and emerging adults with cancer and their caregivers: A cross-cultural perspective.

PURPOSE: We qualitatively explored the unique needs and preferences for financial toxicity screening and interventions to address financial toxicity among adolescents and emerging adults (younger AYAs: 15-25 years) with cancer and their caregivers. METHODS: We recruited English- or Spanish-speaking younger AYAs who were treated for cancer within the past 2 years and their caregivers. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore preferences for screening and interventional study development to address financial toxicity. The data were coded using conventional content analysis. Codes were reviewed with the study team, and interviews continued until saturation was reached; codes were consolidated into categories and themes during consensus discussions. RESULTS: We interviewed 17 participants; nine were younger AYAs. Seven of the 17 preferred to speak Spanish. We identified three cross-cutting themes: burden, support, and routine, consistent, and clear. The burden came in the form of unexpected costs such as transportation to appointments, as well as emotional burdens such as AYAs worrying about how much their family sacrificed for their care or caregivers worrying about the AYA's physical and financial future. Support, in the form of familial, community, healthcare institution, and insurance, was critical to mitigating the effects of financial toxicity in this population. Participants emphasized the importance of meeting individual financial needs by routinely and consistently asking about financial factors and providing clear guidance to navigate these needs. CONCLUSION: Younger AYAs and their caregivers experience significant financial challenges and unmet health-related social needs during cancer treatment and often rely on key supports to alleviate these unmet needs. When developing interventions to mitigate financial toxicity, clinicians and health systems should prioritize clear, consistent, and tailorable approaches to support younger AYA cancer survivors and their families.

The indirect costs of human papillomavirus-related cancer in Central and Eastern Europe: years of life lost and productivity costs.

BACKGROUND: Human papilloma virus (HPV) is a common cause of several types of cancer, including head and neck (oral cavity, pharynx, oropharynx, hypopharynx, nasopharynx, and larynx), cervical, vulval, vaginal, anal, and penile cancers. As HPV vaccines are available, there is potential to prevent HPV-related disease burden and related costs. METHOD: A model was developed for nine Central Eastern European (CEE) countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia). This model considered cancer patients who died from 11 HPV-related cancers (oropharynx, oral cavity, nasopharynx, hypopharynx, pharynx, anal, larynx, vulval, vaginal, cervical, and penile) in 2019. Due to data limitations, Bulgaria only included four cancer types. The model estimated the number of HPV-related deaths and years of life lost (YLL) based on published HPV-attributable fractions. YLL was adjusted with labor force participation, retirement age and then multiplied by mean annual earnings, discounted at a 3% annual rate to calculate the present value of future lost productivity (PVFLP). RESULTS: In 2019, there were 6,832 deaths attributable to HPV cancers resulting in 107,846 YLL in the nine CEE countries. PVFLP related to HPV cancers was estimated to be €46 M in Romania, €37 M in Poland, €19 M in Hungary, €15 M in Czechia, €12 M in Croatia, €10 M in Serbia, €9 M in Slovakia, €7 M in Bulgaria and €4 M in Slovenia. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high disease burden of HPV-related cancer-related deaths in the CEE region, with a large economic impact to society due to substantial productivity losses. It is critical to implement and reinforce public health measures with the aim to reduce the incidence of HPV-related diseases, and the subsequent premature cancer deaths. Improving HPV screening and increasing vaccination programs, in both male and female populations, could help reduce this burden.

The suffering is expensive: comparison of therapeutic costs between palliative care and dysthanasia patients / El sufrimiento es caro: comparación de costos terapéuticos entre pacientes en cuidados paliativos y distanasia

Objectives: Several studies highlight benefits of palliative care for patients with life-threatening illnesses, especially in terms of pain control and improving life quality. However, there is still research gap, particularly in the Brazilian context, regarding its ability to reduce costs associated with unnecessary invasive tests and procedures often invested in dysthanasia patients, thereby relieving the burden on the healthcare system. Given this scenario, the objective was to determine whether there is a significant difference in healthcare costs between cancer patients receiving palliative care and those in dysthanasia. Method: Documentary research, analyzing 94 medical records of patients who died from cancer in a hospital, divided into two groups: 47 in palliative care and 47 in dysthanasia. The groups had their average costs compared by surveying all tests and procedures recorded in the last 30 days of each patient’s life, with values scored based on the price table of the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde). Results: Patients receiving curative care in dysthanasia incurred an average cost of 2,316.92 Brazilian Reais (SD = 3,146.60) for tests and procedures in the last 30 days of life. Patients in palliative care had an average cost of 945.40 Brazilian Reais (SD = 2,508.01). There is a statistically significant difference in the invested values between patients in palliative care and those in dysthanasia (U = 620.00; Z = -4.334; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Implementing palliative care can be considered an effective strategy for reducing hospital costs, leading to significant savings within the healthcare system.AU)

Objetivo: Varios estudios destacan los beneficios de los cuidados paliativos para pacientes con enfermedades potencialmente mortales, especialmente en términos de control del dolor y mejora de la calidad de vida. Sin embargo, todavía existe un vacío de investigación, particularmente en el contexto brasileño, con respecto a su capacidad para reducir los costos asociados con pruebas y procedimientos invasivos innecesarios que a menudo se invierten en pacientes con distanasia, aliviando así la carga sobre el sistema de salud. Ante este escenario, el objetivo fue determinar si existe una diferencia significativa en los costos de atención médica entre los pacientes con cáncer que reciben cuidados paliativos y aquellos en distanasia. Método: Investigación documental, analizando 94 historias clínicas de pacientes que fallecieron por cáncer en un hospital, divididas en dos grupos: 47 en cuidados paliativos y 47 en distanasia. Los grupos compararon sus costos promedio encuestando todas las pruebas y procedimientos registrados en los últimos 30 días de vida de cada paciente, con valores puntuados con base en la tabla de precios del Sistema Único de Salud. Resultados: Los pacientes que recibieron atención curativa en distanasia incurrieron en un costo promedio de 2,316,92 reales brasileños (SD=3.146,60) por pruebas y procedimientos en los últimos 30 días de vida. Los pacientes en cuidados paliativos tuvieron un costo promedio de 945,40 reales brasileños (DE=2,508,01). Existe una diferencia estadísticamente significativa en los valores invertidos entre pacientes en cuidados paliativos y aquellos en distanasia (U=620,00; Z=-4,334; p<0,001). Conclusiones: La implementación de cuidados paliativos puede considerarse una estrategia eficaz.(AU)

Financial-legal navigation reduces financial toxicity of pediatric, adolescent, and young adult cancers.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients with cancer and their caregivers are at high risk of financial toxicity, and few evidence-based oncology financial and legal navigation programs exist to address it. We tested the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance, a novel interdisciplinary financial and legal navigation intervention for pediatric, adolescent and young adult patients and their caregivers. METHODS: We used a single-arm feasibility and acceptability trial design in a pediatric hematology and oncology clinic and collected preintervention and postintervention surveys to assess changes in financial toxicity (3 domains: psychological response/Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity [COST], material conditions, and coping behaviors); health-related quality of life (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical and Mental Health, Anxiety, Depression, and Parent Proxy scales); and perceived feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. RESULTS: In total, 45 participants received financial navigation, 6 received legal navigation, and 10 received both. Among 15 adult patients, significant improvements in FACIT-COST (P = .041) and physical health (P = .036) were noted. Among 46 caregivers, significant improvements were noted for FACIT-COST (P < .001), the total financial toxicity score (P = .001), and the parent proxy global health score (P = .0037). We were able to secure roughly $335 323 in financial benefits for 48 participants. The intervention was rated highly for feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating financial and legal navigation through Financial and Insurance Navigation Assistance was feasible and acceptable and underscores the benefit of a multidisciplinary approach to addressing financial toxicity. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION: NCT05876325.

Severe housing cost burden and premature mortality from cancer.

Unaffordable housing has been associated with poor health. We investigated the relationship between severe housing cost burden and premature cancer mortality (death before 65 years of age) overall and by Medicaid expansion status. County-level severe housing cost burden was measured by the percentage of households that spend 50% or more of their income on housing. States were classified on the basis of Medicaid expansion status (expanded, late-expanded, nonexpanded). Mortality-adjusted rate ratios were estimated by cancer type across severe housing cost burden quintiles. Compared with the lowest quintile of severe housing cost burden, counties in the highest quintile had a 5% greater cancer mortality rate (mortality-adjusted rate ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.01 to 1.08). Within each severe housing cost burden quintile, cancer mortality rates were greater in states that did not expand Medicaid, though this association was significant only in the fourth quintile (mortality-adjusted rate ratio = 1.08, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.13). Our findings demonstrate that counties with greater severe housing cost burden had higher premature cancer death rates, and rates are potentially greater in non-Medicaid-expanded states than Medicaid-expanded states.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Geriatric Assessment and Management in Older Adults With Cancer: Economic Evaluation Within 5C Trial.

PURPOSE: Geriatric assessment (GA) is a guideline-recommended approach to optimize cancer management in older adults. We conducted a cost-utility analysis alongside the 5C randomized controlled trial to compare GA and management (GAM) plus usual care (UC) against UC alone in older adults with cancer. METHODS: The economic evaluation, conducted from societal and health care payer perspectives, used a 12-month time horizon. The Canadian 5C study randomly assigned patients to receive GAM or UC. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were measured using the EuroQol five dimension-5L questionnaire and health care utilization using cost diaries and chart reviews. We evaluated the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) for the full sample and preselected subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were included, of whom 173 received GAM and 177 UC. At 12 months, the average QALYs per patient were 0.728 and 0.751 for GAM and UC, respectively (ΔQALY, -0.023 [95% CI, -0.076 to 0.028]). Considering a societal perspective, the total average costs (in 2021 Canadian dollars) per patient were $46,739 and $45,177 for GAM and UC, respectively (ΔCost, $1,563 [95% CI, -$6,583 to $10,403]). At a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50,000/QALY, GAM was not cost-effective compared with UC (INMB, -$2,713 [95% CI, -$11,767 to $5,801]). The INMB was positive ($2,984 [95% CI, -$7,050 to $14,179]; probability of being cost-effective, 72%) for patients treated with curative intent, but remained negative for patients treated with palliative intent (INMB, -$9,909 [95% CI, -$24,436 to $4,153]). Findings were similar considering a health care payer perspective. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first cost-utility analysis of GAM in cancer. GAM was cost-effective for patients with cancer treated with curative but not with palliative intent. The study provides further considerations for future adoption of GAM in practice.

Economic Evaluation of Neoadjuvant Versus Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: In the absence of evidence on whether neoadjuvant (NAC) or adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) is more beneficial for various tumor treatments, economic evaluation (EE) can assist medical decision making. There is limited evidence on their cost-effectiveness and their prospective evaluation is less likely in the future. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis about EE for NAC versus AC in solid tumor help compare these therapies from various perspectives. METHODS: Various databases were searched for studies published from inception to 2021. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines and economic-specific guidelines. The data were pooled using a random effects model when possible. RESULTS: The retrieval identified 15 EE studies of NAC versus AC in 8 types of cancer. NAC is the dominant strategy for pancreatic, head and neck, rectal, prostate cancers and colorectal liver metastases. For ovarian cancer, NAC is cost-effective with a lower cost and higher or similar quality-adjusted life-year. There were no significant differences in cost and outcomes for lung cancer. For stage IV or high-risk patients with ovarian or prostate cancer, NAC was cost-effective but not for patients who were not high risk. CONCLUSIONS: The EEs results for NAC versus AC were inconsistent because of their different model structures, assumptions, cost inclusions, and a shortage of studies. There are multiple sources of heterogeneity across EEs evidence synthesis. More high-quality EE studies on NAC versus AC in initial cancer treatment are necessary.