Population-level impact of adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine on the incidence of metastatic breast cancer: an epidemiological prediction model of women with HER2-positive early breast cancer and residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy.

PURPOSE: Treating early-stage breast cancer (eBC) may delay or prevent subsequent metastatic breast cancer (mBC). In the phase 3 KATHERINE study, women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive eBC with residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy containing trastuzumab and a taxane experienced 50% reductions in disease recurrence or death when treated with adjuvant trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) vs adjuvant trastuzumab. We predicted the population-level impact of adjuvant T-DM1 on mBC occurrence in five European countries (EU5) and Canada from 2021-2030. METHODS: An epidemiological prediction model using data from national cancer registries, observational studies, and clinical trials was developed. Assuming 80% population-level uptake of adjuvant treatment, KATHERINE data were extrapolated prospectively to model projections. Robustness was evaluated in alternative scenarios. RESULTS: We projected an eligible population of 116,335 women in Canada and the EU5 who may be diagnosed with HER2-positive eBC and have residual disease following neoadjuvant therapy from 2021-2030. In EU5, the cumulative number of women projected to experience relapsed mBC over the 10-year study period was 36,009 vs 27,143 under adjuvant trastuzumab vs T-DM1, a difference of 8,866 women, equivalent to 25% fewer cases with the use of adjuvant T-DM1 in EU5 countries from 2021-2030. Findings were similar for Canada. CONCLUSION: Our models predicted greater reductions in the occurrence of relapsed mBC with adjuvant T-DM1 vs trastuzumab in the indicated populations in EU5 and Canada. Introduction of T-DM1 has the potential to reduce population-level disease burden of HER2-positive mBC in the geographies studied.

Impact of Influenza and Influenza-Like Illness on Work Productivity Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Influenza is a persistent public health problem with a significant burden on patients, employers, and society. A systematic review by Keech and Beardsworth (2008) characterized the burden of influenza/influenza-like illness (ILI) on absenteeism. We conducted a systematic literature review evaluating the impact of influenza/ILI on work productivity among adults as an update to the work of Keech and Beardsworth. METHODS: This systematic review identified studies evaluating the impact of influenza/ILI on absenteeism, presenteeism, or related work productivity measures for employees and employed caregivers based on laboratory confirmation, physician diagnosis, and/or self-reported illness. Eligible studies were in English, French, or German published from 7 March 2007 through 15 February 2022, in PubMed, Embase, or BIOSIS. Two reviewers completed screening and full-text review, with conflicts resolved by a third advisor. Summary data were extracted by two analysts; all records were quality checked by one analyst. Work productivity outcomes were summarized qualitatively, and risk of bias was not evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 14,387 records were retrieved; 12,245 titles/abstracts were screened and 145 full-text publications were reviewed, of which 63 were included in the qualitative assessment. Studies of self-reported ILI were most frequent (49%), followed by laboratory-confirmed cases (37%) and physician diagnoses (11%). Overall, approximately 20-75% of employees missed work due to illness across study settings and populations. Mean time out of work among ill employees varied widely across study designs and populations, ranging from < 1 to > 10 days, and was often reported to be approximately 2-3 days. Considerable heterogeneity was observed across study designs, populations, and outcomes. Most employees (≈ 60-80%) reported working while experiencing influenza/ILI symptoms. Reporting of costs was sparse and heterogeneous; one study reported annual costs of influenza-related absences equating to $42,851 per 100,000 employee health plan members. Results were partitioned based on the following categories. Among otherwise healthy adults, 1-74% of workers missed ≥1 workday due to influenza/ILI, for a mean [standard deviation (SD)] of 0.5 (1.44) to 5.3 (4.50) days, and 42-89% reported working while ill, for a mean (SD) of 0.3 (0.63) to 4.4 (3.73) days. Among working caregivers, 50-75% missed work to care for children/household members with influenza/ILI, for 1-2 days on average. Similarly, the mean absenteeism among healthcare workers ranged from 0.5 to 3.2 days. Across studies evaluating vaccination status, generally smaller proportions of vaccinated employees missed time from work due to influenza/ILI. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review summarized the productivity burden of influenza/ILI on the worldwide working-age population. Despite notable heterogeneity in study designs, influenza/ILI case definitions, and productivity outcome measures, this review highlighted the substantial productivity burden that influenza/ILI may have on employees, employers, and society, consistent with the findings of Keech and Beardsworth (2008).

The flu ('influenza') has an effect on patients, their families, employers, and society. A review of medical studies from 1995 to 2007 reported how having the flu or a flu-like illness causes people to miss work. We updated that paper using the same approach, and found 63 new studies from 2007 to February 2022. Overall, up to 75% of employees missed work when they had the flu or a flu-like illness. Their average time out of work was usually 2­3 days each time they were sick. Most employees who had the flu or flu-like illness also said that they continued to work while they were sick (60­80%). Most employed adults who were caregivers for someone else with the flu said that they missed work to care for someone else for an average of 1­2 days. Overall, people who were vaccinated against the flu missed less time from work compared with their peers who were not vaccinated. This review of published medical studies showed that the flu and flu-like illness has a meaningful impact on people's ability to work, which also impacts their employers and society.

A cost-utility analysis of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors in the treatment of erectile dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Patent expiration for erectile dysfunction (ED) treatments like sildenafil means loss of exclusivity (LOE), and other manufacturers may bring generics to the market. This has resulted in price reductions, which influences the cost-effectiveness. In Norway, this development has led to a discussion on whether reimbursement should be granted. Cost-effectiveness analysis in this treatment area is scarce and more research is demanded. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of three separate phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors in ED therapy in a Norwegian setting. METHODS: The cost-effectiveness was analyzed using two patient populations: (1) 55-year-old patients diagnosed with ED and with no specific underlying illness, and (2) 55-year-old patients diagnosed with ED and with diabetes as an underlying illness. Using a state-transition Markov model with a 10-year time horizon, a "no-treatment" option was compared with three treatment strategies: (1) treatment using 50/100 mg sildenafil; (2) treatment using 10/20 mg tadalafil; (3) treatment using 10 mg vardenafil. A societal perspective was applied. RESULTS: All PDE5 inhibitor treatment strategies were cost-effective compared to a "no-treatment" option, with cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year of less than €15,000. With a willingness-to-pay threshold greater than €13,500, sildenafil was estimated as the dominant treatment strategy. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated robust results. However, as the expected value of information was considerable, the cost-effectiveness of conducting further research to reduce uncertainty should be considered. Treating a diabetic population was less cost-effective for all PDE5 inhibitors and was associated with greater uncertainty with regard to choosing the optimal strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Sildenafil treatment of erectile dysfunction was a cost-effective alternative compared to tadalafil and vardenafil, as well as compared to a "no-treatment" option. Treating a diabetic population is less cost-effective for all PDE5 inhibitors and was associated with greater uncertainty.