ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Management of COVID-19 patients with mild and moderate symptoms could be isolated at home isolation (HI), community isolation (CI) or hospitel. However, it was still unclear which strategy was more cost-effective. Therefore, this study was conducted to evaluate this. METHODS: This study used data from patients who initially stayed at HI, CI, and hospitel under supervision of Ramathibodi Hospital between April and October 2021. Outcomes of interest were hospitalisation and mortality. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) was calculated based on hospital perspective using home isolation as the reference. RESULTS: From 7,077 patients, 4,349 2,356, and 372 were admitted at hospitel, HI, and CI, respectively. Most patients were females (57.04%) and the mean age was 40.42 (SD = 16.15). Average durations of stay were 4.47, 3.35, and 3.91 days for HI, CI, and hospitel, respectively. The average cost per day for staying in these corresponding places were 24.22, 63.69, and 65.23 US$. For hospitalisation, the ICER for hospitel was at 41.93 US$ to avoid one hospitalisation in 1,000 patients when compared to HI, while CI had more cost, but less cases avoided. The ICER for hospitel and CI were at 46.21 and 866.17 US$ to avoid one death in 1,000 patients. CONCLUSIONS: HI may be cost-effective isolated strategy for preventing hospitalisation and death in developing countries with limited resources.
ABSTRACT
Background: Despite significant benefits of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, access remains limited in Thailand and elsewhere. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients with locally advanced/recurrent NSCLC and known EGFR mutation (EGFRm) status treated at Ramathibodi Hospital (2012-2017). Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), including treatment type and healthcare coverage, were analyzed using Cox regression. Results: Of 750 patients, 56.3% were EGFRm-positive. After first-line therapy (n=646), 29.4% received no subsequent (second-line) treatment. EGFR-TKI-treated EGFRm-positive patients survived significantly longer than EGFRm-negative patients without EGFR-TKIs (median OS [mOS] 36.4 vs. 11.9 months; hazard ratio HR=0.38 [95%CI 0.32-0.46], P<0.001). Cox regression indicated significantly longer OS in patients with comprehensive healthcare coverage that included reimbursement of EGFR-TKIs, versus basic coverage (mOS 27.2 vs. 18.3 months; adjusted HR=0.73 [95%CI 0.59-0.90]). Compared with best supportive care (BSC; reference), EGFR-TKI-treated patients survived significantly longer (mOS 36.5 months; adjusted HR (aHR)=0.26 [95%CI 0.19-0.34]), and versus chemotherapy alone (14.5 months; aHR=0.60 [95%CI 0.47-0.78]). In EGFRm-positive patients (n=422), relative survival benefit of EGFR-TKI treatment remained highly significant (aHR[EGFR-TKI]=0.19 [95%CI 0.12-0.29]; aHR(chemotherapy only)=0.50 [95%CI 0.30-0.85]; reference:BSC), indicating that healthcare coverage (reimbursement) affected treatment choice and survival. Conclusion: Our analysis describes EGFRm prevalence and survival benefit of EGFR-TKI therapy for EGFRm-positive NSCLC patients treated from 2012-2017, one of the largest such Thai datasets. Together with research by others, these findings contributed evidence supporting the decision to broaden erlotinib access on healthcare schemes in Thailand from 2021, demonstrating the value of local real-world outcome data for healthcare policy decision-making.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Rhabdomyolysis (RM) is a life-threatening adverse drug reaction in which statins are the one commonly related to RM. The study aimed to explore the association between statin used and RM or other muscular related adverse events. In addition, drug interaction with statins were also assessed. METHODS: All extracted prescriptions were grouped as lipophilic and hydrophilic statins. RM outcome was identified by electronically screening and later ascertaining by chart review. The study proposed 4 models, i.e., logistic regression (LR), Bayesian network (BN), random forests (RF), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost). Features were selected using multiple processes, i.e., bootstrapping, expert opinions, and univariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 939 patients who used statins were identified consisting 15, 9, and 19 per 10,000 persons for overall outcome prevalence, using statin alone, and co-administrations, respectively. Common statins were simvastatin, atorvastatin, and rosuvastatin. The proposed models had high sensitivity, i.e., 0.85, 0.90, 0.95 and 0.95 for LR, BN, RF, and XGBoost, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic was significantly higher in LR than BN, i.e., 0.80 (0.79, 0.81) and 0.73 (0.72, 0.74), but a little lower than the RF [0.817 (95% CI 0.811, 0.824)] and XGBoost [0.819 (95% CI 0.812, 0.825)]. The LR model indicated that a combination of high-dose lipophilic statin, clarithromycin, and antifungals was 16.22 (1.78, 148.23) times higher odds of RM than taking high-dose lipophilic statin alone. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggested that statin uses may have drug interactions with others including clarithromycin and antifungal drugs in inducing RM. A prospective evaluation of the model should be further assessed with well planned data monitoring. Applying LR in hospital system might be useful in warning drug interaction during prescribing.
