Optimising oncology drug expenditure in Ireland.

A combination of improvements in patient survival, increasing treatment duration, and the development of more expensive agents has led to a doubling of per-capita spending on cancer medicines in Ireland (2008-2018). Despite this, access to new drugs is poor in comparison to other EU countries. We examine methods to optimise oncology drug spending to facilitate access to newer anticancer agents. Key targets for spending optimisation (biosimilar use, clinical trials and expanded access programs, waste reduction, avoidance of futile treatment, and altered drug scheduling) were identified through an exploratory analysis. A structured literature search was performed, with a focus on articles relevant to the Irish Healthcare system, supplemented by reports from statutory bodies. At the present time, EMA-approved agents are available once approved by the NCPE. Optimising drug costs occurs through guideline-based practice and biosimilar integration, the latter provides €80 million in cost savings annually. Access to novel therapies can occur via over 50 clinical trials and 28 currently available expanded access programmes. Additional strategies include reversion to weight-based immunotherapy dosing, potentially saving €400,000 per year in our centre alone, vial sharing, and optimisation of treatment schedules. A variety of techniques are being employed by oncologists to optimise costs and increase access to innovation for patients. Use of biosimilars, drug wastage, and prescribing at end of life should be audited as key performance indicators, which may lead to reflective practice on treatment planning. Such measures could further optimise oncology drug expenditure nationally facilitating approval of new agents.

DPD deficiency in an Irish oncology centre: Prevalence and clinical implications.

INTRODUCTION: Fluorouracil (5FU) and capecitabine are metabolised by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). Up to 9% of people have low levels of a working DPD enzyme and are at risk of severe toxicity from 5FU/capecitabine. In April 2020, the EMEA recommended patients undergo prospective screening for DPD deficiency before starting treatment, and this was introduced in our hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of all patients receiving 5FU/capecitabine in a tertiary Irish cancer centre from May 2020 to April 2021 (n = 197), and those starting first-line treatment in May 2019-April 2020 (n = 97). Our primary outcome was to estimate the prevalence of DPYD variant genes by prospective genotypic screening, with secondary outcomes including variant prevalence by prospective and reactive screening in patients receiving first-line treatment, and 5FU toxicity/tolerability in those with detected variants. RESULTS: In those treated 2020-2021, cancer subtypes included colorectal (n = 120, 61%), breast (n = 34, 17%), and biliary/pancreatic cancers (n = 21, 11%). Median patient age was 62 (range 25-86 years); 40% (n = 79) of patients were screened overall, with a prospective-screening deficiency prevalence of 6.8% (n = 3 of 44). Three patients had pathogenic DPYD-variants detected by prospective screening and tolerated treatment with 50% up-front dose reduction of 5FU, two had variants of uncertain significance detected by reactive screening. DISCUSSION: Other Irish studies estimated prevalence at 11-12%. As the number of variants detected was small, and screening rates were incomplete, our study may have underestimated prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 6.8% of Irish patients may carry DPD deficiencies, prospective screening is essential to reduce the risk of life-threatening toxicity in these patients.

A permanent legacy of the pandemic? Outcomes of and staff views on the introduction of virtual clinics to an Irish oncology service.

BACKGROUND: Virtual clinics were introduced to our practice in March 2020. We aimed to assess outcomes from virtual clinics and to assess staff views on them and their barriers to implementation nationally. METHODS: We prospectively assessed outcomes from 53 planned virtual consultations in a cancer centre oncology outpatient department (April-July 2020). Thirty-two oncologists completed an online survey. RESULTS: Visit durations ranged from < 5 min (n = 2, 4%) to 30 + min/patient (n = 9, 20%) (median: 18 min (range 4-141, IQR 10-30 min)). Median time spent preparing for patients who did not attend (n = 6, 11%) was 15 min (range 9-15 min). Most patients were scheduled for routine follow-up (n = 41, 87%), with some planned for an early in-person visit (n = 3) or investigation (n = 3). Where bloods had been requested (n = 25), samples had often not been taken (n = 20, 80%) or results were unavailable (n = 3, 12%). Different plans may have been agreed with two patients (4%) had they attended in-person. Virtual visits were perceived as faster by most doctors in the online survey (n = 26, 84%), with some (n = 5, 16%) reporting a difference of 10 min per patient. Many (n = 13, 42%) arranged earlier follow-up appointments. Low satisfaction was associated with difficulty with patient assessment (81%) or communication (63%), resource limitation (48%), or poor access to results of investigations (40%). The majority (n = 21, 67%) do not feel their virtual clinic quality is as good as in-person. CONCLUSIONS: If virtual clinics are to play a long-term role in oncology, it is essential to monitor clinic quality and plan visits proactively.

Patient knowledge, personal experience, and impact of the first wave of the COVD-19 pandemic in an Irish oncology cohort.

BACKGROUND: Oncology patients have had to make many changes to minimise their exposure to COVID-19, causing stress. Despite education, some patients still do not recognise potential COVID symptoms. AIMS: We assessed patient knowledge of COVID, and its impact on their behaviours, concerns, and healthcare experience. METHODS: A 16-page questionnaire was distributed to 120 oncology patients attending the day unit of a tertiary Irish cancer centre for systemic anti-cancer therapy (May/June 2020). The Irish 7-day COVID incidence during this period ranged from 2 to 11 cases/100,000 people. RESULTS: One hundred and one responses were received, 1% had tested positive for COVID, and 31% had undergone testing. Participant insight into their knowledge about COVID and their own behaviour was limited in some cases. Seventy-five percent reported total compliance with restrictions, but many were not fully compliant. Self-reported confidence in knowledge was high, but did not predict demonstrated knowledge. Sixty percent did not recognise two or more symptoms; 40% did not self-identify as high-risk. Patients reported more health-related worry (72%), loneliness (51%), and lower mood (42%) since the pandemic began. Financial toxicity worsened, with increased financial worry (78%), reductions in household income (40%), and increased costs due to lockdown (62%). Use of facemasks introduced new communications barriers for 67% of those with hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: Despite self-reported confidence in knowledge, some patient's recognition of COVID symptoms and the preventative strategies they should use are not optimal, highlighting the need for further education in this regard. COVID has been a significant stressor for patients and more practical, financial, and psychological supports are needed.

A comparison of beers and STOPP criteria in assessing potentially inappropriate medications in nursing home residents attending the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: The Beers (2012) criteria and the screening tool of older persons' potentially inappropriate prescriptions (STOPP) criteria are often used to identify potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use in elderly patients. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of PIM use in nursing home residents (NHRs) aged ≥65 years presenting to the Emergency Department (ED); to compare the Beers and STOPP criteria and to identify the potential role of PIMs in ED attendances. SETTING: The ED of an urban tertiary referral hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Acutely unwell long-term care NHRs seeking medical assistance at the ED. DESIGN AND MEASUREMENTS: This is a retrospective cohort study. Demographic and clinical data were retrieved from the ED electronic record system, from the clinical records, and transfer letters for all NHRs who attended the ED in 2011. Beers 2012 and STOPP criteria were used to identify PIMs. RESULTS: Of 195 NHRs identified, 165 were included. The mean age (±standard deviation) was 82.5 (±7.7) years; 110 (66.7%) were female and 157 (95.2%) were prescribed at least 1 PIM by either criterion. One hundred forty patients (84.8%) received a PIM according to STOPP criteria and 147 (89.1%) according to the Beers criteria. In the majority of patients (148; 89.7%), there was a difference in the medications Beers and STOPP identified as inappropriate. Fifty patients (30.3%) were considered to have a link between their attendance at ED and the PIM prescribed when assessed subjectively. Objective assessment using the WHO-UMC criteria found 7 (4.2%) had a 'probable' link and 45 (27.3%) a 'possible' link. CONCLUSIONS: These results show a high rate of PIM prescribing in this cohort. The use of criteria such as Beers and STOPP may be a useful guide for physicians coordinating the long-term care of NHRs and may have the potential to reduce attendances at ED.