Reporting of tobacco use and tobacco-related analyses in cancer cooperative group clinical trials: a systematic scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Continued smoking after a diagnosis of cancer negatively impacts cancer outcomes, but the impact of tobacco on newer treatments options is not well established. Collecting and evaluating tobacco use in clinical trials may advance understanding of the consequences of tobacco use on treatment modalities, but little is known about the frequency of reporting and analysis of tobacco use in cancer cooperative clinical trial groups. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify cancer cooperative group clinical trials published from January 2017-October 2019. Eligible studies evaluated either systemic and/or radiation therapies, included ≥100 adult patients, and reported on at least one of: overall survival, disease/progression-free survival, response rates, toxicities/adverse events, or quality-of-life. RESULTS: A total of 91 studies representing 90 trials met inclusion criteria with trial start dates ranging from 1995 to 2015 with 14% involving lung and 5% head and neck cancer patients. A total of 19 studies reported baseline tobacco use; 2 reported collecting follow-up tobacco use. Seven studies reported analysis of the impact of baseline tobacco use on clinical outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in the reporting of baseline tobacco use: 7 reported never/ever status, 10 reported never/ex-smoker/current smoker status, and 4 reported measuring smoking intensity. None reported verifying smoking status or second-hand smoke exposure. Trials of lung and head and neck cancers were more likely to report baseline tobacco use than other disease sites (83% versus 6%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Few cancer cooperative group clinical trials report and analyze trial participants' tobacco use. Significant heterogeneity exists in reporting tobacco use. Routine standardized collection and reporting of tobacco use at baseline and follow-up in clinical trials should be implemented to enable investigators to evaluate the impact of tobacco use on new cancer therapies.

Reimbursement recommendations for cancer drugs supported by phase II evidence in Canada.

Background: Phase ii data are increasingly being used as primary evidence for public reimbursement for oncologic drugs. We compared the frequency of reimbursement recommendations for phase ii and phase iii submissions and assessed for variables associated with a positive or conditional recommendation. Methods: We identified submissions made to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review's Expert Review Committee (perc), of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, July 2011 to July 2019, that were supported only by phase ii data. We identified variables within the perc's deliberative framework, including clinical and economic factors, associated with the final reimbursement recommendation. We conducted a multivariable analysis with logistic regression for these variables: feasibility of phase iii study, hematologic indication, and unmet need. Results: We identified 139 submissions with a perc final recommendation. In 27 instances (19%), the submission had only phase ii evidence, and a positive recommendation was issued for 63% of them (the positive recommendation rate was 82% for submissions with phase iii evidence). Clinical benefit (p < 0.001), unmet need (p = 0.047), and patient alignment (p = 0.015) were associated with a positive recommendation. If a future phase iii study was deemed feasible for submissions with only phase ii evidence, then in univariable (p = 0.040) and multivariable analysis (p = 0.024), the perc was less likely to recommend reimbursement (odds ratio: 0.132). Conclusions: Although more than half the oncologic submissions with phase ii data were recommended for public reimbursement, compared with submissions having phase iii data, they were less likely to be recommended. A positive or conditional recommendation was more likely if clinical benefit and alignment with patient values was demonstrated. The perc was less likely to recommend reimbursement for submissions with phase ii evidence if a phase iii trial was deemed possible.

Describing the resource utilisation and costs associated withvertebral fractures: the Build Better Bones with Exercise (B3E) Pilot Trial.

This analysis examined costs/resources of 141 women with vertebral fractures, randomised to a home exercise programme or control group. Total, mean costs and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. Quality of life was collected. Cost drivers were caregiver time, medications and adverse events (AEs). Results show adding an exercise programme may reduce the risk of AEs. INTRODUCTION: This exploratory economic analysis examined the health resource utilisation and costs experienced by women with vertebral fractures, and explored the effects of home exercise on those costs. METHODS: Women ≥ 65 years with one or more X-ray-confirmed vertebral fractures were randomised 1:1 to a 12-month home exercise programme or equal attention control group. Clinical and health system resources were collected during monthly phone calls and daily diaries completed by participants. Intervention costs were included. Unit costs were applied to health system resources. Quality of life (QoL) information was collected via EQ-5D-5L at baseline, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one women were randomised. Overall total costs (CAD 2018) were $664,923 (intervention) and $614,033 (control), respectively. The top three cost drivers were caregiver time ($250,269 and $240,811), medications ($151,000 and $122,145) and AEs ($58,807 and $71,981). The mean cost per intervention participant of $9365 ± $9988 was higher compared with the mean cost per control participant of $8772 ± $9718. The mean EQ-5D index score was higher for the intervention participants (0.81 ± 0.11) compared with that of controls (0.79 ± 0.13). The differences in quality-adjusted life year (QALY) (0.02) and mean cost ($593) were used to calculate the ICER of $29,650. CONCLUSIONS: Women with osteoporosis with a previous fracture experience a number of resources and associated costs that impact their care and quality of life. Caregiver time, medications and AEs are the biggest cost drivers for this population. The next steps would be to expand this feasibility study with more participants, longer-term follow-up and more regional variability.

The generation of two specific cancer costing algorithms using Ontario administrative databases.

Cancer treatment and management have become increasingly economically burdensome. Consequently, to help with planning health service delivery, it is vital to understand the associated costs. Administrative databases can be used to help understand and generate real-world system-level costs. Using databases to generate costs can take one of two approaches: top-down or bottom-up. Top-down approaches disaggregate the total health care spending from a global health care budget by sector and provider. A bottom-up approach begins with individual-level health care use and its costs, which are then aggregated.

The economic impact of the transition from branded to generic oncology drugs.

Background: Economic evaluations are an integral component of many clinical trials. Costs used in those analyses are based on the prices of branded drugs when they first enter the market. The effect of genericization on the cost-effectiveness (ce) or cost-utility (cu) of an intervention is unknown because economic analyses are rarely updated using the costs of generic drugs. Methods: We re-examined the ce or cu of regimens previously evaluated in Canadian Cancer Trials Group (cctg) studies that included prospective economic evaluations and where genericization has occurred or is anticipated in Canada. We incorporated the new costs of generic drugs to characterize changes in ce or cu. We also determined acceptable cost levels of generic drugs that would make regimens reimbursable in a publicly funded health care system. Results: The four randomized controlled trials included (representing 1979 patients) were cctg br.10 (early lung cancer, adjuvant vinorelbine-cisplatin vs. observation, n = 172), cctg br.21 (metastatic lung cancer, erlotinib vs. placebo, n = 731), cctg co.17 (metastatic colon cancer, cetuximab vs. best supportive care, n = 557), and cctg ly.12 (relapsed or refractory lymphoma, gemcitabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin vs. cytarabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin, n = 619). Since the initial publication of those trials, the genericization of vinorelbine, erlotinib, cetuximab, and cisplatin has taken place or is expected in Canada. Costs of generics improved the ces and cus of treatment significantly. For example, genericization of erlotinib ($1460.25 per 30 days) resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) of $45,746 per life-year gained compared with $94,638 for branded erlotinib. Likewise, genericization of cetuximab ($275.80 per 100 mg) produced an icer of $261,126 per quality-adjusted life-year (qaly) gained compared with $299,613 for branded cetuximab. Decreases in the cost of generic cetuximab to $129.39 and $63.51 would further improve the icer to $150,000 and $100,000 per QALY respectively. Conclusions: Genericization of a costly oncology drug can modify the ce and cu of a regimen significantly. Failure to revisit economic analyses with the costs of generics could be a missed opportunity for funding bodies to optimize value-based allocation of health care resources. At current levels, the costs of generics might not be sufficiently low to sustain publicly funded health care systems.

Combined cancer patient-reported symptom and health utility tool for routine clinical implementation: a real-world comparison of the ESAS and EQ-5D in multiple cancer sites.

Background: We assessed whether the presence and severity of common cancer symptoms are associated with the health utility score (hus) generated from the EQ-5D (EuroQol Research Foundation, Rotterdam, Netherlands) in patients with cancer and evaluated whether it is possible pragmatically to integrate routine hus and symptom evaluation in our cancer population. Methods: Adult outpatients at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre with any cancer were surveyed cross-sectionally using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (esas) and the EQ-5D-3L, and results were compared using Spearman correlation coefficients and regression analyses. Results: Of 764 patients analyzed, 27% had incurable disease. We observed mild-to-moderate correlations between each esas symptom score and the hus (Spearman coefficients: -0.204 to -0.416; p < 0.0001 for each comparison), with the strongest associations being those for pain (R = -0.416), tiredness (R = -0.387), and depression (R =-0.354). Multivariable analyses identified pain and depression as highly associated (both p < 0.0001) and tiredness as associated (p = 0.03) with the hus. The ability of the esas to predict the hus was low, at 0.25. However, by mapping esas pain, anxiety, and depression scores to the corresponding EQ-5D questions, we could derive the hus using partial esas data, with Spearman correlations of 0.83-0.91 in comparisons with direct EQ-5D measurement of the hus. Conclusions: The hus derived from the EQ-5D-3L is associated with all major cancer symptoms as captured by the esas. The esas scores alone could not predict EQ-5D scores with high accuracy. However, esas-derived questions assessing the same domains as the EQ-5D-3L questions could be mapped to their corresponding EQ-5D questions to generate the hus, with high correlation to the directly measured hus. That finding suggests a potential approach to integrating routine symptom and hus evaluations after confirmatory studies.

Changes in preoperative endoscopic and percutaneous bile drainage in patients with periampullary cancer undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy in Ontario: effect on clinical practice of a randomized trial.

Background: In 2010, a multicentre randomized controlled trial reported increased postoperative complications in pancreaticoduodenectomy (pde) patients undergoing preoperative biliary decompression (pbd). We evaluated the effect of that publication on rates of pbd at the population level. Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study identified patients undergoing pde for malignancy, 2005-2013, linking them with administrative health care databases covering medical services for a population of 13.5 million. Patients undergoing pbd within 6 weeks before their surgery were identified using physician billing codes and were divided into those undergoing pde before and after article publication, with a 6-month washout period. Chi-square tests were used to compare rates of pbd. Results: Of 1997 pde patients identified, 963 underwent surgery before article publication, and 911, after (123 during the washout period). The rate of pbd was 47.5% before publication, and 41.6% after (p = 0.01). The lowest pbd rates occurred immediately after publication, in 2010 and 2011. Similar results were observed when the cohort was restricted to patients seen preoperatively by a gastroenterologist (n = 1412). Conclusions: Rates of pbd have declined a small, but significant, amount after randomized trial publication. Persistence of pbd might relate to suboptimal knowledge translation, the role of pbd in diagnosis of periampullary malignancy, and treatment of complications (cholangitis, severe hyperbilirubinemia) or anticipation of delay from diagnosis to surgery. The nadir in pbd rates after article publication and the subsequent rise suggest an element of transience in the effect of article publication on clinical practice. Further investigation into the reasons for persistent pbd is needed.

Build better bones with exercise (B3E pilot trial): results of a feasibility study of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 12 months of home exercise in older women with vertebral fracture.

We pilot-tested a trial of home exercise on individuals with osteoporosis and spine fracture. Our target enrollment was met, though it took longer than expected. Participants stayed in the study and completed the exercise program with no safety concerns. Future trials should expand the inclusion criteria and consider other changes. PURPOSE: Osteoporotic fragility fractures create a substantial human and economic burden. There have been calls for a large randomized controlled trial examining the effect of exercise on fracture incidence. The B3E pilot trial was designed to evaluate the feasibility of a large trial examining the effects of home exercise on individuals at high risk of fracture. METHODS: Community-dwelling women ≥ 65 years with radiographically confirmed vertebral compression fractures were recruited at seven sites in Canada and Australia. We randomized participants in a 1:1 ratio to a 12-month home exercise program or equal attention control group, both delivered by a physiotherapist (PT). Participants received six PT home visits in addition to monthly phone calls from the PT and a blinded research assistant. The primary feasibility outcomes of the study were recruitment rate (20 per site in 1 year), retention rate (75% completion), and intervention adherence rate (60% of weeks meeting exercise goals). Secondary outcomes included falls, fractures and adverse events. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one participants were recruited; an average of 20 per site, though most sites took longer than anticipated. Retention and adherence met the criteria for success: 92% of participants completed the study; average adherence was 66%. The intervention group did not differ significantly in the number of falls (IRR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.63) or fragility fractures (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.05) compared to the control group. There were 18 serious adverse events in the intervention group and 12 in the control group. CONCLUSION: An RCT of home exercise in women with vertebral fractures is feasible but recruitment was a challenge. Suggestions are made for the conduct of future trials.

Health utility scores from EQ-5D and health-related quality of life in patients with esophageal cancer: a real-world cross-sectional study.

Esophageal cancer and its treatment can cause serious morbidity/toxicity. These effects on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) can be measured using disease-specific scales such as FACT-E, generic scales such as EQ-5D-3L, or through symptoms. In a two-year cross-sectional study, we compared HRQOL across esophageal cancer patients treated in an ambulatory clinic and across multiple disease states, among patients with all stages of esophageal cancer. Consenting patients completed FACT-E, EQ-5D, a visual analog scale, and patient reported (PR)-ECOG. Symptom complexes were constructed from FACT-E domains. Responses were categorized by disease state: pre-, during, and post-treatment, surveillance, progression, and palliative chemotherapy. Spearman correlation and multivariable linear regression characterized these associations. In total, 199 patients completed 317 questionnaires. Mean FACT-E and subscale scores dropped from baseline through treatment and recovered during post-treatment surveillance (P < 0.001); EQ-5D health utility scores (HUS) displayed a similar pattern but with smaller differences (P = 0.07), and with evidence of ceiling effect. Among patients with stage II/III esophageal cancer, mean EQ-5D HUS varied across disease states (P < 0.001), along with FACT-E and subscales (P < 0.001). Among patients with advanced disease, there was no significant difference between baseline and on-treatment total scores, but improved esophageal cancer-specific scales were noted (P = 0.003). Strong correlation was observed between EQ-5D and FACT-E (R = 0.73), along with physical and functional subscales. In addition, the association between FACT-E and EQ-5D HUS was maintained in a multivariable model (P < 0.001). We interpret these results to suggest that in a real-world clinic setting, FACT-E, EQ-5D HUS, and symptoms were strongly correlated. Most HRQOL and symptom parameters suggested that patients had worse HRQOL and symptoms during curative therapy, but recovered well afterwards. In contrast, palliative chemotherapy had a neutral to positive impact on HRQOL/symptoms when compared to their baseline pre-treatment state.

Patterns and Drivers of Costs for Neuroendocrine Tumor Care: A Comparative Population-Based Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about resource use in the care of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). This study defined patterns of costs in NET management and compared them with those of a more common malignancy, colon cancer (CC). METHODS: Using a provincial cancer registry (2004-2012), NET patients were identified and matched at a ratio of 1-3 with CC patients. Four phases of care were examined: pre-diagnostic (PreDx: -2 years to -181 days), diagnostic (Dx: -180 days to +180 days), postdiagnostic (PostDx: +181 days to +3 years), and prolonged post-diagnostic (PPostDx: +181 days to +9 years). The mean costs per patient were compared, and cost predictors were analyzed with quintile regression. RESULTS: Of 3827 NETs, 3355 were matched with 9320 CCs. The PreDx mean NET costs were higher than the CC costs ($5877 vs $5368; p = 0.06), driven by nondrug costs. They were lower in the Dx and PostDx phases (both p < 0.01). For PPostDx, the drug costs were higher for NETs ($26,788 vs $7827; p < 0.01), representing 41% of the costs versus 16% of the costs for CC. Older age and comorbidities predicted higher NET costs in all phases. Lower socioeconomic status (SES) predicted higher costs in the initial phases and higher SES costs in the PPost-Dx phase. Gastroenteric NETs were associated with lower costs in the Dx phase [parameter estimate (PE), -$13,644] and pancreatic NETs with higher costs in PostDx phase (PE, $3348). CONCLUSION: Currently, NETs represent a potential important health care burden. The NET cost patterns differed from those for CC, with the highest costs during the PPostDx phase. The SES and primary NET site affected costs differently at different time points. These data can inform resource allocation tailored to the needs for NETs.

Resource utilization and costs of managing patients with advanced melanoma: a Canadian population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The use and detailed costs of services provided for people with advanced melanoma (amel) are not well known. We conducted an analysis to determine the use of health care services and the associated costs delineated by relevant attributable costs, which we defined for subjects in the province of Ontario. METHODS: Through the Ontario Cancer Data Linkage Project, a cohort of amel patients with diagnoses between 31 August 2005 and 2012 (follow-up to 2013) and with valid International Classification of Diseases (9th revision, Clinical Modification) 172 codes and histology codes was identified. A cohort of individuals with amel having a combination of at least 1 palliative, 1 medical oncology, and 1 hospitalization code was generated. The health system services used by this population were clustered into hospitalization, palliation, physician medical visits, medication, homecare, laboratory, diagnostics, and other resources. Overall rates of use and disaggregated costs were determined by phase of care for the entire cohort. RESULTS: The mean age for the 2748 individuals in the cohort was 67 years. The greater proportion of the patients were men (65.6%) and were more than 65 years of age (>50%). In this advanced cohort, fewer than 45% of patients were alive 3 years after the malignant melanoma diagnosis. The average annual cost per patient over the time horizon was $6,551. At $15,830, year 1 after diagnosis was the most expensive, followed by year 2, at $8,166. CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide a baseline for the costs associated with amel treatment. Future studies will include newer agents and comparative effectiveness research for personalized therapies.

Cost-of-illness studies in chronic ulcers: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the published academic literature on the cost of chronic ulcers. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthSTAR, Econlit and CINAHL up to 12 May 2016 to identify potential studies for review. Cost search terms were based on validated algorithms. Clinical search terms were based on recent Cochrane reviews of interventions for chronic ulcers. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers to determine eligibility for full text review. Study characteristics were summarised. The quality of reporting was evaluated using a modified cost-of-illness checklist. Mean costs were adjusted and inflated to 2015 $US and presented for different durations and perspectives. RESULTS: Of 2267 studies identified, 36 were eligible and included in the systematic review. Most studies presented results from the health-care public payer or hospital perspective. Many studies included hospital costs in the analysis and only reported total costs without presenting condition-specific attributable costs. The mean cost of chronic ulcers ranged from $1000 per year for patient out of pocket costs to $30,000 per episode from the health-care public payer perspective. Mean one year cost from a health-care public payer perspective was $44,200 for diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), $15,400 for pressure ulcer (PU) and $11,000 for leg ulcer (LU). CONCLUSIONS: There was large variability in study methods, perspectives, cost components and jurisdictions, making interpretation of costs difficult. Nevertheless, it appears that the cost for the treatment of chronic ulcers is substantial and greater attention needs to be made for preventive measures.

Examining the medical resource utilization and costs of relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia in Ontario.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to collect medical resource utilization data and costs in Ontario for the management of patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic lymphoma (cll) who have undergone at least 1 treatment course and have been stratified by Rai staging. METHODS: This retrospective longitudinal cohort study, conducted by chart review, analyzed anonymized patient records from two cancer centres in Ontario. Comprehensive records of 86 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were used to obtain resource utilization, which, multiplied by unit costs, were used to determine overall and mean costs. Descriptive statistics are presented for patient demographics, medical resource utilization, and costing data. RESULTS: The total cost for the cohort was $2.2 million over a mean follow-up period of 4.7 years. The mean total cost per patient (regardless of follow-up) was $25,736. In terms of Rai staging, overall mean costs were highest for stage iv patients. Almost 50% of the total cost was attributable to cll treatments, among which fludarabine-based treatments had the highest utilization. CONCLUSIONS: For this Canadian cll cohort, medical resource utilization and costs were determined to be $2.2 million, with cll treatments accounting for about half the cost. Costs generally increased with Rai stage.

Predictors of adjuvant treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at the population level.

BACKGROUND: In the present study, we aimed to describe, at the population level, patterns of adjuvant treatment use after curative-intent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (pcc) and to identify independent predictors of adjuvant treatment use. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, patients undergoing pcc resection in the province of Ontario (population 13 million) during 2005-2010 were identified using the provincial cancer registry and were linked to administrative databases that include all treatments received and outcomes experienced in the province. Patients were defined as having received chemotherapy (ctx), chemoradiation (crt), or observation (obs). Clinicopathologic factors associated with the use of ctx, crt, or obs were identified by chi-square test. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of adjuvant treatment versus obs, and ctx versus crt. RESULTS: Of the 397 patients included, 75.3% received adjuvant treatment (27.2% crt, 48.1% ctx) and 24.7% received obs. Within a single-payer health care system with universal coverage of costs for ctx and crt, substantial variation by geographic region was observed. Although the likelihood of receiving adjuvant treatment increased from 2005 to 2010 (p = 0.002), multivariate analysis revealed widespread variation between the treating hospitals (p = 0.001), and even between high-volume hepatopancreatobiliary hospitals (p = 0.0006). Younger age, positive lymph nodes, and positive surgical resection margins predicted an increased likelihood of receiving adjuvant treatment. Among patients receiving adjuvant treatment, positive margins and a low comorbidity burden were associated with crt compared with ctx. CONCLUSIONS: Interinstitutional medical practice variation contributes significantly to differential patterns in the rate of adjuvant treatment for pcc. Whether such variation is warranted or unwarranted requires further investigation.

Radiation costing methods: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Costs for radiation therapy (rt) and the methods used to cost rt are highly diverse across the literature. To date, no study has compared various costing methods in detail. Our objective was to perform a thorough review of the radiation costing literature to identify sources of costs and methods used. METHODS: A systematic review of Ovid medline, Ovid oldmedline, embase, Ovid HealthStar, and EconLit from 2005 to 23 March 2015 used search terms such as "radiation," "radiotherapy," "neoplasm," "cost," " cost analysis," and "cost benefit analysis" to locate relevant articles. Original papers were reviewed for detailed costing methods. Cost sources and methods were extracted for papers investigating rt modalities, including three-dimensional conformal rt (3D-crt), intensity-modulated rt (imrt), stereotactic body rt (sbrt), and brachytherapy (bt). All costs were translated into 2014 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: Most of the studies (91%) reported in the 33 articles retrieved provided rt costs from the health system perspective. The cost of rt ranged from US$2,687.87 to US$111,900.60 per treatment for imrt, followed by US$5,583.28 to US$90,055 for 3D-crt, US$10,544.22 to US$78,667.40 for bt, and US$6,520.58 to US$19,602.68 for sbrt. Cost drivers were professional or personnel costs and the cost of rt treatment. Most studies did not address the cost of rt equipment (85%) and institutional or facility costs (66%). CONCLUSIONS: Costing methods and sources were widely variable across studies, highlighting the need for consistency in the reporting of rt costs. More work to promote comparability and consistency across studies is needed.

Omission of Breast Radiotherapy in Low-risk Luminal A Breast Cancer: Impact on Health Care Costs.

AIMS: The economic burden of cancer care is substantial, including steep increases in costs for breast cancer management. There is mounting evidence that women age ≥ 60 years with grade I/II T1N0 luminal A (ER/PR+, HER2- and Ki67 ≤ 13%) breast cancer have such low local recurrence rates that adjuvant breast radiotherapy might offer limited value. We aimed to determine the total savings to a publicly funded health care system should omission of radiotherapy become standard of care for these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The number of women aged ≥ 60 years who received adjuvant radiotherapy for T1N0 ER+ HER2- breast cancer in Ontario was obtained from the provincial cancer agency. The cost of adjuvant breast radiotherapy was estimated through activity-based costing from a public payer perspective. The total saving was calculated by multiplying the estimated number of luminal A cases that received radiotherapy by the cost of radiotherapy minus Ki-67 testing. RESULTS: In 2010, 748 women age ≥ 60 years underwent surgery for pT1N0 ER+ HER2- breast cancer; 539 (72%) underwent adjuvant radiotherapy, of whom 329 were estimated to be grade I/II luminal A subtype. The cost of adjuvant breast radiotherapy per case was estimated at $6135.85; the cost of Ki-67 at $114.71. This translated into an annual saving of about $2.0million if radiotherapy was omitted for all low-risk luminal A breast cancer patients in Ontario and $5.1million across Canada. CONCLUSION: There will be significant savings to the health care system should omission of radiotherapy become standard practice for women with low-risk luminal A breast cancer.

Estimation of drug cost avoidance and pathology cost avoidance through participation in NCIC Clinical Trials Group phase III clinical trials in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Cost avoidance occurs when, because of provision of a drug therapy [drug cost avoidance (dca)] or a pathology test [pathology cost avoidance (pca)] during trial participation, health care payers need not pay for standard treatments or testing. The aim of our study was to estimate the total dca and pca for Canadian patients enrolled in relevant phase iii trials conducted by the ncic Clinical Trials Group. METHODS: Phase iii trials that had completed accrual and resulted in dca or pca were identified. The pca was calculated based on the number of patients screened and the test cost. The dca was estimated based on patients randomized, the protocol dosing regimen, drug cost, median dose intensity, and median duration of therapy. Costs are presented in Canadian dollars. No adjustment was made for inflation. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2011, 4 trials (1479 patients) resulted in pca and 17 trials (3195 patients) resulted in dca. The total pca was estimated at $4,194,849, which included testing for KRAS ($141,058), microsatellite instability ($18,600), and 21-gene recurrence score ($4,035,191). The total dca was estimated at $27,952,512, of which targeted therapy constituted 43% (five trials). The combined pca and dca was $32,147,361. CONCLUSIONS: Over the study period, trials conducted by the ncic Clinical Trials Group resulted in total cost avoidance (pca and dca) of approximately $7,518 per patient. Although not all trials lead to cost avoidance, such savings should be taken account when the financial impact of conducting clinical research is being considered.