Cost-effectiveness of weekly adaptive radiotherapy versus standard IMRT in head and neck cancer alongside the ARTIX trial.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comparing an adaptive radiotherapy (ART) strategy, based on weekly replanning, aiming to correct the parotid gland overdose during treatment and expecting therefore to decrease xerostomia, when compared to a standard IMRT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted the ARTIX trial, a randomized, parallel-group, multicentric study comparing a systematic weekly replanning ART to a standard IMRT. The primary endpoint was the frequency of xerostomia at 12 months, measured by stimulating salivary flow with paraffin. The CEA was designed alongside the ARTIX trial which was linked to the French national health data system (SNDS). For each patient, healthcare consumptions and costs were provided by the SNDS. The reference case analysis was based on the primary endpoint of the trial. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of the 129 patients randomly assigned between 2013 and 2018, only 2 records were not linked to the SNDS, which provides a linkage proportion of 98.4%. All of the other 127 records were linked with good to very good robustness. On the intent-to-treat population at 12 months, mean total costs per patient were €41,564 (SD 23,624) and €33,063 (SD 16,886) for ART and standard IMRT arms, respectively (p = 0.033). Incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €162,444 per xerostomia avoided. At 24 months, ICER was €194,521 per xerostomia avoided. For both progression-free and overall survival, ART was dominated by standard IMRT. CONCLUSION: The ART strategy was deemed to be not cost-effective compared with standard IMRT for patients with locally advanced oropharyngeal cancer.

Weekly Adaptive Radiotherapy vs Standard Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy for Improving Salivary Function in Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Xerostomia is a major toxic effect associated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for oropharyngeal cancers. Objective: To assess whether adaptive radiotherapy (ART) improves salivary function compared with IMRT in patients with head and neck cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This phase 3 randomized clinical trial was conducted in 11 French centers. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with stage III-IVB squamous cell oropharyngeal cancer treated with chemoradiotherapy were enrolled between July 5, 2013, and October 1, 2018. Data were analyzed from November 2021 to May 2022. Interventions: The patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive standard IMRT (without replanning) or ART (systematic weekly replanning). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the frequency of xerostomia, measured by stimulating salivary flow with paraffin. Secondary end points included salivary gland excretory function measured using technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy, patient-reported outcomes (Eisbruch xerostomia-specific questionnaire and the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory for Head and Neck Cancer questionnaire), early and late toxic effects, disease control, and overall and cancer-specific survival. Results: A total of 132 patients were randomized, and after 1 exclusion in the ART arm, 131 were analyzed: 66 in the ART arm (mean [SD] age at inclusion, 60 [8] years; 57 [86.4%] male) and 65 in the standard IMRT arm (mean [SD] age at inclusion, 60 [8] years; 57 [87.7%] male). The median follow-up was 26.4 months (IQR, 1.2-31.3 months). The mean (SD) salivary flow (paraffin) at 12 months was 630 (450) mg/min in the ART arm and 584 (464) mg/min in the standard arm (P = .64). The mean (SD) excretory function of the parotid gland at 12 months, measured by scintigraphy, improved in the ART arm (48% [17%]) compared with the standard arm (41% [17%]) (P = .02). The 2-year-overall survival was 76.9% (95% CI, 64.7%-85.4%) in both arms. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial did not demonstrate a benefit of ART in decreasing xerostomia compared with standard IMRT. No significant differences were found in secondary end points except for parotid gland excretory function, as assessed by scintigraphy, or in survival rates. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01874587.

How We Can Reap the Full Benefit of Teleconsultations: Economic Evaluation Combined With a Performance Evaluation Through a Discrete-Event Simulation.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the rapid development of information and communications technology enabled by innovations in videoconferencing solutions and the emergence of connected medical devices has contributed to expanding the scope of application and expediting the development of telemedicine. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the use of teleconsultations (TCs) for specialist consultations at hospitals in terms of costs, resource consumption, and patient travel time. The key feature of our evaluation framework is the combination of an economic evaluation through a cost analysis and a performance evaluation through a discrete-event simulation (DES) approach. METHODS: Three data sets were used to obtain detailed information on the characteristics of patients, characteristics of patients' residential locations, and usage of telehealth stations. A total of 532 patients who received at least one TC and 18,559 patients who received solely physical consultations (CSs) were included in the initial sample. The TC patients were recruited during a 7-month period (ie, 2020 data) versus 19 months for the CS patients (ie, 2019 and 2020 data). A propensity score matching procedure was applied in the economic evaluation. To identify the best scenarios for reaping the full benefits of TCs, various scenarios depicting different population types and deployment strategies were explored in the DES model. Associated break-even levels were calculated. RESULTS: The results of the cost evaluation reveal a higher cost for the TC group, mainly induced by higher volumes of (tele)consultations per patient and the substantial initial investment required for TC equipment. On average, the total cost per patient over 298 days of follow-up was €356.37 (US $392) per TC patient and €305.18 (US $336) per CS patient. However, the incremental cost of TCs was not statistically significant: €356.37 - €305.18 = €51.19 or US $392 - US $336 = US $56 (95% CI -35.99 to 114.25; P=.18). Sensitivity analysis suggested heterogeneous economic profitability levels within subpopulations and based on the intensity of use of TC solutions. In fact, the DES model results show that TCs could be a cost-saving strategy in some cases, depending on population characteristics, the amortization speed of telehealth equipment, and the locations of telehealth stations. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TCs has the potential to lead to a major organizational change in the health care system in the near future. Nevertheless, TC performance is strongly related to the context and deployment strategy involved.

What underlies the observed hospital volume-outcome relationship?

BACKGROUND: Studies of the hospital volume-outcome relationship have highlighted that a greater volume activity improves patient outcomes. While this finding has been known for years, most studies to date have failed to delve into what underlies this relationship. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to shed light on the basis of the hospital volume effect on patient outcomes by comparing treatment modalities for epithelial ovarian carcinoma patients. DATA: An exhaustive dataset of 355 patients in first-line treatment for Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma (EOC) in 2012 in three regions of France was used. These regions account for 15% of the metropolitan French population. METHODS: In the presence of endogeneity induced by a reverse causality between hospital volume and patient outcomes, we used an instrumental variable approach. Hospital volume of activity was instrumented by the distance from patients' homes to their hospital, the population density, and the median net income of patient municipalities. RESULTS: Based on our parameter estimates, we found that the rate of complete tumor resection would increase by 15.5 percentage points with centralized care, and by 8.3 percentage points if treatment decisions were coordinated by high-volume centers compared to decentralized care. CONCLUSION: As volume alone is an imperfect correlate of quality, policy-makers need to know what volume is a proxy for in order to devise volume-based policies.

Multicentre, randomised, economic evaluation of a web-based interactive education platform, simple or enhanced, for patients with end-stage renal disease: the PIC-R trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: End-stage renal disease (ESRD) affects 84 000 persons in France and costs an estimated €4.2 billion. Education about their disease empowers patients and allows improved management of their disease and better health outcomes. This study aims to explore whether the addition of an interactive web-based platform to patient education is effective and cost-effective and additionally whether complementing the platform with social functions and features improves its performance. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with severe, ESRD or post-transplant will be randomised 1:1:1 to either standard therapeutic education; or education using a specific application; or the enhanced interactive app with social features. The total follow-up duration is 18 months. Primary endpoint is the cost utility of using app-based therapeutic intervention; secondary endpoints are: compliance with treatment guidelines, app use (professionals and patients), patients' satisfaction, budget impact analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The findings will inform the deployment and reimbursement of the application. The study has ethical approval by the Ile de France ethics committee. Dissemination of the results will be presented at conferences and in peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03090828.

Challenges raised by the economic evaluation of CAR-T-cell therapies. The review by the French National Authority for Health.

Since 2013, the process of pricing of innovative drugs by the French National Health Insurance has considered both cost-effectiveness and budget impact. CAR-T cell therapies were first subject to economic evaluation from 2019 in France. We aim to describe the process and results of the economic evaluation of tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel as well as the challenges these evaluations raised. Evaluations submitted by the firms were reviewed by HAS and submitted to the Committee of Economic Evaluation and Public Health (CEESP). The CEESP issued opinions related to: (1) the methodological quality of economic evidence and, (2) the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the drugs. The CEESP invalidated the estimated incremental cost-utility ratios (ICUR) of tisagenlecleucel due to the insufficient clinical evidence and methodological quality to extrapolate the long-term progression of the disease after treatment and compare tisagenlecleucel with alternatives. The CEESP concluded that tisagenlecleucel was not proven cost-effective. The estimated ICUR of axicabtagene ciloleucel at €114,509/QALY vs. chemotherapies was associated with an acceptable level of methodological quality despite being based on a weak indirect comparison and limited data on quality of life. The CEESP considered axicabtagene ciloleucel ICUR to be "very high" and questioned the societal/community willingness-to-pay of the claimed price. The primary source of uncertainty surrounding the ICUR estimates of both drugs was the lack of hindsight on effectiveness. The economic evaluation of CAR-T cell therapies highlights the risk of inefficient resource allocation driven by limited clinical data. It calls for payment schemes accounting for this risk and effective collection of post-marketing data.

"Chronic fatigue, quality of life and long-term side-effects of chemotherapy in patients treated for non-epithelial ovarian cancer: national case-control protocol study of the GINECO-Vivrovaire rare tumors INCa French network for rare malignant ovarian tumors".

BACKGROUND: Germ cell tumors and sex cord stromal tumors are rare cancers of the ovary. They mainly affect young women and are associated with a high survival rate. The standard treatment mainly involves conservative surgery combined with chemotherapy [bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin (BEP)] depending on the stage and the prognostic factors, as for testicular cancers. As reported in testicular cancer survivors, chemotherapy may induce sequelae impacting quality of life, which has not yet been evaluated in survivors of germ cell tumors and sex cord stromal tumors. The GINECO-VIVROVAIRE-Rare tumor study is a two-step investigation aiming to assess i) chronic fatigue and quality of life and ii) long-term side-effects of chemotherapy with a focus on cardiovascular and pulmonary disorders. METHODS: Using self-reported questionnaires, chronic fatigue and quality of life are compared between 134 ovarian cancer survivors (cancer-free ≥2 years after treatment) treated with surgery and chemotherapy and 2 control groups (67 ovarian cancer survivors treated with surgery alone and 67 age-matched healthy women). Medical data are collected from patient records. In the second step evaluating the long-term side-effects of chemotherapy, a subgroup of 90 patients treated with chemotherapy and 45 controls undergo the following work-up: cardiovascular evaluation (clinical examination, non-invasive cardiovascular tests to explore heart disease, blood tests), pulmonary function testing, audiogram, metabolic and hormonal blood tests. Costs of sequelae will be also assessed. Patients are selected from the registry of the INCa French Network for Rare Malignant Ovarian Tumors, and healthy women by the 'Seintinelles' connected network (collaborative research platform). DISCUSSION: This study will provide important data on the potential long-term physical side-effects of chemotherapy in survivors of Germ Cell Tumors (GCT) and Sex Cord Stromal Tumors (SCST), especially cardiovascular and pulmonary disorders, and neurotoxicity. The identification of long-term side-effects can contribute to adjusting the treatment of ovarian GCT or SCST patients and to managing follow-up with adapted recommendations regarding practices and chemotherapy regimens, in order to reduce toxicity while maintaining efficacy. Based on the results, intervention strategies could be proposed to improve the management of these patients during their treatment and in the long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov : 03418844 , on 1 February 2018. This trial was registered on 25 October 2017 under the unique European identification number (ID-RCB): 2017-A03028-45. Recruitment Status: Recruiting. PROTOCOL VERSION: Version n° 4.2 dated from Feb 19, 2021. TRIAL SPONSOR: Centre François Baclesse, 3 avenue du Général Harris, F-14076 Caen cedex 05, France.

Connected device and therapeutic patient education to promote physical activity among women with localised breast cancer (DISCO trial): protocol for a multicentre 2×2 factorial randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Despite safety and benefits of physical activity during treatment of localised breast cancer, successful exercise strategies remain to be determined. The primary objective of the 'dispositif connecté', that is, connected device in English trial is to evaluate the efficacy of two 6-month exercise interventions, either single or combined, concomitant to adjuvant treatments, on the physical activity level of patients with breast cancer, compared with usual care: an exercise programme using a connected device (activity tracker, smartphone application, website) and a therapeutic patient education intervention. Secondary objectives are to evaluate adherence to interventions, their impact at 6 and 12 months, representations and acceptability of interventions, and to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions using quality-adjusted life-years. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a 2×2 factorial, multicentre, phase III randomised controlled trial. The study population (with written informed consent) will consist of 432 women diagnosed with primary localised invasive breast carcinoma and eligible for adjuvant chemotherapy, hormonotherapy and/or radiotherapy. They will be randomly allocated between one of four arms: (1) web-based connected device (evolving target number of daily steps and an individualised, semisupervised, adaptive programme of two walking and one muscle strengthening sessions per week in autonomy), (2) therapeutic patient education (one educational diagnosis, two collective educational sessions, one evaluation), (3) combination of both interventions and (4) control. All participants will receive the international physical activity recommendations. Assessments (baseline, 6 and 12 months) will include physical fitness tests, anthropometrics measures, body composition (CT scan, bioelectrical impedance), self-administered questionnaires (physical activity profile (Recent Physical Activity Questionnaire), quality of life (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-Of-Life Questionnaire-30, EQ-5D-5L), fatigue (Piper Fatigue Scale-12), social deprivation (Evaluation of Deprivation and Inequalities in Health Examination Centres), lifestyle, physical activity barriers, occupational status) and biological parameters (blood draw). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and approved by the French Ethics Committee. The findings will be disseminated to the scientific and medical community via publications in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03529383; Pre-results.

Determinants of the need for respite according to the characteristics of informal carers of elderly people at home: results from the 2015 French national survey.

BACKGROUND: The demographic and social changes associated with population aging and the increasing incidence of chronic diseases underscore the importance of the role of informal carers. The number of informal carers is increasing and negative consequences associated with providing care, such as burnout, are known. However the influence of socioeconomic and psychological factors on the need for respite have not been well characterized to date. Informal care represents an essential component of health care systems and long-term care. The purpose of this study was to shed light on how the characteristics of informal carers affect the need for respite. METHODS: We used data from a nationally representative survey, Capacités Aides et Resources des Seniors (CARE - ménage), collected in 2015 by the National Institute for Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) and the Directorate for Research, Studies, Assessment and Statistics (DREES). The determinants of the need for respite among the characteristics of informal caregivers were explored using a probit model. To handle missing data, sensitivity analyses were performed using multiple imputations. RESULTS: Our study included N = 4033 dyads of informal carers and care recipients. The mean age was 61 for carers. The majority of carers were female, married, the child of the care recipient. Almost 27% reported a need for respite. A worse health status, feeling of loneliness, having a lack of time for oneself and needing to provide more than 30 h of care per month very significantly increased the need for respite irrespective of whether or not the carer lived with the care recipient (p < 0.01). Providing care to other persons was likely to induce a greater need for respite (p < 0.01). Cohabitation of the informal carer and the care recipient was likely to increase the need for respite (p < 0.05). Conversely, however, being closely acquainted with the care recipient showed a reduced need for respite in comparison with that of carers who are married to their care recipient (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide useful information for policymakers, physicians and other health professionals for reducing carers' risk of exhaustion and burnout and for referring carers to the relevant service, e.g. psychological intervention, respite care support, training support and education support.

How much does the hospital stay for infusion of anti-CD19 CAR-T cells cost to the French National Health Insurance?

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cells (CAR-T cells) have the potential to be a major innovation as a new type of cancer treatment, but are associated with extremely high prices and a high level of uncertainty. This study aims to assess the cost of the hospital stay for the administration of anti-CD19 CAR-T cells in France. Data were collected from the French Medical Information Systems Program (PMSI) and all hospital stays associated with an administrated drug encoded 9439938 (tisagenlecleucel, Kymriah®) or 9440456 (axicabtagene ciloleucel, Yescarta®) between January 2019 and December 2020 were included. 485 hospital stays associated with an injection of anti-CD19 CAR-T cells were identified, of which 44 (9%), 139 (28.7%), and 302 (62.3%) were for tisagenlecleucel in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL), tisagenlecleucel in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and axicabtagene ciloleucel respectively. The lengths of the stays were 37.9, 23.8, and 25.9 days for tisagenlecleucel in ALL, tisagenlecleucel in DLBCL, and axicabtagene ciloleucel, respectively. The mean costs per hospital stay were € 372,400 for a tisagenlecleucel in ALL, € 342,903 for tisagenlecleucel in DLBCL, and € 366,562 for axicabtagene ciloleucel. CAR T-cells represented more than 80% of these costs. n=13 hospitals performed CAR-T cell injections, with two hospitals accounting for more than 50% of the total number of injections. This study provides original data in a context of limited information regarding the costs of hospitalization for patients undergoing CAR-T cell treatments. In addition to the financial burden, distance may also be an important barrier for accessing CAR T-cell treatment.

Efficacy of extracranial stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) added to standard treatment in patients with solid tumors (breast, prostate and non-small cell lung cancer) with up to 3 bone-only metastases: study protocol for a randomised phase III trial (STEREO-OS).

BACKGROUND: Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) is an innovative modality based on high precision planning and delivery. Cancer with bone metastases and oligometastases are associated with an intermediate or good prognosis. We assume that prolonged survival rates would be achieved if both the primary tumor and metastases are controlled by local treatment. Our purpose is to demonstrate, via a multicenter randomized phase III trial, that local treatment of metastatic sites with curative intent with SBRT associated of systemic standard of care treatment would improve the progression-free survival in patients with solid tumor (breast, prostate and non-small cell lung cancer) with up to 3 bone-only metastases compared to patients who received systemic standard of care treatment alone. METHODS: This is an open-labeled randomized superiority multicenter phase III trial. Patients with up to 3 bone-only metastases will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio.between Arm A (Experimental group): Standard care of treatment & SBRT to all bone metastases, and Arm B (Control group): standard care of treatment. For patients receiving SBRT, radiotherapy dose and fractionation depends on the site of the bone metastasis and the proximity to critical normal structures. This study aims to accrue a total of 196 patients within 4 years. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival at 1 year, and secondary endpoints include Bone progression-free survival; Local control; Cancer-specific survival; Overall survival; Toxicity; Quality of life; Pain score analysis, Cost-utility analysis; Cost-effectiveness analysis and Budget impact analysis. DISCUSSION: The expected benefit for the patient in the experimental arm is a longer expectancy of life without skeletal recurrence and the discomfort, pain and drastic reduction of mobility and handicap that the lack of local control of bone metastases eventually inflicts. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03143322 Registered on May 8th 2017. Ongoing study.

Interpretable Machine Learning Model for Locoregional Relapse Prediction in Oropharyngeal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence to support surgery or radiotherapy as the best treatment for resectable oropharyngeal cancers with a negative HPV status. Predictive algorithms may help to decide which strategy to choose, but they will only be accepted by caregivers and European authorities if they are interpretable. As a proof of concept, we developed a predictive and interpretable algorithm to predict locoregional relapse at 18 months for oropharyngeal cancers as a first step towards that goal. METHODS: The model was based on clinical and Pyradiomics features extracted from the dosimetric CT scan. Intraclass correlation was used to filter out features dependant on delineation. Correlated redundant features were also removed. An XGBoost model was cross-validated and optimised on the HN1 cohort (79 patients), and performances were assessed on the ART ORL cohort (45 patients). The Shapley Values were used to provide an overall and local explanation of the model. RESULTS: On the ART ORL cohort, the model trained on HN1 yielded a precision-or predictive positive value-of 0.92, a recall of 0.42, an area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic of 0.68 and an accuracy of 0.64. The most contributory features were shape Voxel Volume, grey level size zone matrix Small Area Emphasis (glszmSAE), gldm Dependence Non Uniformity Normalized (gldmDNUN), Sex and Age. CONCLUSIONS: We developed an interpretable and generalizable model that could yield a good precision-positive predictive value-for relapse at 18 months on a different test cohort.

[The cost of the therapeutic education program "Eat better, move more through nutrition education" in patients with breast cancer]. / Coût du programme d'éducation thérapeutique « Mieux manger, mieux bouger à l'aide de l'éducation nutritionnelle ¼ chez les patientes atteintes d'un cancer du sein.

INTRODUCTION: Since the life expectancy of women with breast cancer has increased, tertiary prevention, through the Therapeutic Patient Education (TPE), is now a part of patient support. The main objective of this pilot study is to evaluate the cost of a nutrition and physical activity TPE program intended to help women with breast cancer in the management of their weight. METHODS: This study is a description of costs, based on the micro-costing method, of the first two years of the program, conducted on an outpatient basis, at the Cancer Center Leon Berard, Lyon, France, with the involvement of a dietician and a physical activity trainer. Only the direct costs were taken into account, from the hospital's perspective, in Euro 2016. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were included in the study in 2014/2015. Their mean age was 52 years, the majority of them were in sick leave (65 %). In most cases, they had undergone surgery (95 %) and chemotherapy (71 %). The average cost per patient of the program was 541.04€ (SD 88.44€; 95 % IC [520.06-562.03]) excluding overhead costs, i.e. 687.13€ overhead costs included. The unit cost of the dietician was the most sensitive parameters. CONCLUSION: This cost study, an accurate estimate of the production costs, allows to inform the decision-maker in term of pricing of such a program and to make the necessary adjustments in order to optimize the organization of this activity.

A comparison of two modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy for peripheral early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a prospective French study.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective, observational, non-randomized multicentric study was conducted to compare efficiency and toxicity using different modalities of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in early-stage peripheral non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: From 9 April to 11 December, 106 patients were treated according to the local equipment availability for peripheral NSCLC with SBRT: 68 by linear accelerator equipped for SBRT and 38 by Cyberknife®. Multivariate analysis and propensity score analysis using Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW) were undertaken in an effort to adjust for potential bias due to non-randomization. RESULTS: 2-year local control rates were 97.0% (95% CI: [90.6%; 99.4%]) with SBRT by Linac vs 100% (95% CI: ([100%; 100%]) with Cyberknife® (p = 0.2839). 2-year PFS and 2-year OS rates were 52.7% (95% CI [39.9%;64.0%]) versus 54.1% (95% CI [36.8; 68.6%]) (p = 0.8582) and 65.1% (95% CI: [51.9%; 75.5%] versus 83.9% (95% CI: [67.5%; 92.4%] (p = 0.0831) using Linac and Cyberknife® respectively. Multivariate regression analysis indicates no significant effect of SBRT treatment type on PFS or OS. Local relapse could not be modeled due to the small number of events (n = 2). Acute and late toxicity rates were not significantly different. After IPTW adjustment, results were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficiency or toxicity was shown after SBRT of peripheral NSCLC treatment using Linac or Cyberknife®. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first large prospective non-randomized study focusing on peripheral localized NSCLC comparing SBRT using an appropriately equipped linac with Cyberknife®. No significant difference in efficiency or toxicity was shown in this situation.

Chronic Low-Dose Exposure to Xenoestrogen Ambient Air Pollutants and Breast Cancer Risk: XENAIR Protocol for a Case-Control Study Nested Within the French E3N Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women in industrialized countries. Lifestyle and environmental factors, particularly endocrine-disrupting pollutants, have been suggested to play a role in breast cancer risk. Current epidemiological studies, although not fully consistent, suggest a positive association of breast cancer risk with exposure to several International Agency for Research on Cancer Group 1 air-pollutant carcinogens, such as particulate matter, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), dioxins, Benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), and cadmium. However, epidemiological studies remain scarce and inconsistent. It has been proposed that the menopausal status could modify the relationship between pollutants and breast cancer and that the association varies with hormone receptor status. OBJECTIVE: The XENAIR project will investigate the association of breast cancer risk (overall and by hormone receptor status) with chronic exposure to selected air pollutants, including particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), BaP, dioxins, PCB-153, and cadmium. METHODS: Our research is based on a case-control study nested within the French national E3N cohort of 5222 invasive breast cancer cases identified during follow-up from 1990 to 2011, and 5222 matched controls. A questionnaire was sent to all participants to collect their lifetime residential addresses and information on indoor pollution. We will assess these exposures using complementary models of land-use regression, atmospheric dispersion, and regional chemistry-transport (CHIMERE) models, via a Geographic Information System. Associations with breast cancer risk will be modeled using conditional logistic regression models. We will also study the impact of exposure on DNA methylation and interactions with genetic polymorphisms. Appropriate statistical methods, including Bayesian modeling, principal component analysis, and cluster analysis, will be used to assess the impact of multipollutant exposure. The fraction of breast cancer cases attributable to air pollution will be estimated. RESULTS: The XENAIR project will contribute to current knowledge on the health effects of air pollution and identify and understand environmental modifiable risk factors related to breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: The results will provide relevant evidence to governments and policy-makers to improve effective public health prevention strategies on air pollution. The XENAIR dataset can be used in future efforts to study the effects of exposure to air pollution associated with other chronic conditions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/15167.

Impact of Next Generation Sequencing on Clinical Practice in Oncology in France: Better Genetic Profiles for Patients Improve Access to Experimental Treatments.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated how next generation sequencing (NGS) can modify care pathways in an observational impact study in France. METHODS: All patients with lung cancer, colorectal cancer, or melanoma who had NGS analyses of somatic genomic alterations done in 1 of 7 biomolecular platforms certified by the French National Cancer Institute (INCa) between 2013 and 2016 were eligible. We compared patients' pathways before and after their NGS results. Endpoints consisted of the turnaround time in obtaining results, the number of patients with at least 1 genomic alteration identified, the number of actionable alterations, the impact of the genomic multidisciplinary tumor board on care pathways, the number of changes in the treatment plan, and the survival outcome up to 1 year after NGS analyses. RESULTS: 1213 patients with a request for NGS analysis were included. NGS was performed for 1155 patients, identified at least 1 genomic alteration for 867 (75%), and provided an actionable alteration for 614 (53%). Turnaround time between analyses and results was on average 8 days (Min: 0; Max: 95) for all cancer types. Before NGS analysis, 33 of 614 patients (5%) were prescribed a targeted therapy compared with 54 of 614 patients (8%) after NGS analysis. Proposition of inclusion in clinical trials with experimental treatments increased from 5% (n = 31 of 614) before to 28% (n = 178 of 614) after NGS analysis. Patients who benefited from a genotype matched treatment after NGS analysis tended to have a better survival outcome at 1 year than patients with nonmatched treatment: 258 days (±107) compared with 234 days (±106), (P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: NGS analyses resulted in a change in patients' care pathways for 20% of patients (n = 232 of 1155).

Cost-Utility Analyses of Interventions for Informal Carers: A Systematic and Critical Review.

BACKGROUND: Demographic and epidemiological changes place an increasing reliance on informal carers. Some support programmes exist, but funding is often limited. There is a need for economic evaluation of interventions for carers to assist policymakers in prioritizing carer support. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to systematically review and critically appraise cost-utility analyses of interventions for informal carers, in order to assess the methods employed and the quality of the reporting. METHODS: A systematic review of databases was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and EconLit of items published between 1950 and February 2019. Published studies were selected if they involved a cost-utility analysis of an intervention mainly or jointly targeting informal carers. The reporting quality of economic analyses was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. RESULTS: An initial set of 1364 potentially relevant studies was identified. The titles and the abstracts were then screened, resulting in the identification of 62 full-text articles that warranted further assessment of their eligibility. Of these, 20 economic evaluations of informal carer interventions met the inclusion criteria. The main geographical area was the UK (n = 11). These studies were conducted in mental and/or behavioural (n = 15), cardiovascular (n = 3) or cancer (n = 2) clinical fields. These cost-utility analyses were based on randomized clinical trials (n = 16) and on observational studies (n = 4), of which only one presented a Markov model-based economic evaluation. Four of the six psychological interventions were deemed to be cost effective versus two of the four education/support interventions, and four of the nine training/support interventions. Two articles achieved a CHEERS score of 100% and nine of the economic evaluations achieved a score of 85% in terms of the CHEERS criteria for high-quality economic studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our critical review highlights the lack of cost-utility analyses of interventions to support informal carers. However, it also shows the relative prominence of good reporting practices in these analyses that other studies might be able to build on.

Cost-effectiveness of an exercise and nutritional intervention versus usual nutritional care during adjuvant treatment for localized breast cancer: the PASAPAS randomized controlled trial.

We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to compare an exercise and nutritional program with the usual nutritional care concomitant to adjuvant chemotherapy in localized breast cancer patients. The CEA was designed as part of the interventional, controlled, randomized, single-center, open-label PASAPAS study. Breast cancer patients receiving first-line adjuvant chemotherapy at a French Comprehensive Cancer Center were randomized 2:1 to a 6-month exercise program of supervised indoor and outdoor group sessions in addition to usual nutritional care (exercise arm) or a usual nutritional care group receiving dietary and physical activity counseling (control arm). Costs were assessed from the French national insurance perspective (in Euros, 2012). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for four criteria: body mass index, waist circumference, body fat percentage, and estimated aerobic capacity. Uncertainty around the ICERs was captured by a probabilistic analysis using a non-parametric bootstrap method. The analysis was based on 60 patients enrolled between 2011 and 2013. Average intervention costs per participant were €412 in the exercise arm (n = 41) and €117 (n = 19) in the control arm. Total mean costs were €17,344 (standard deviation 9,928) and €20,615 (standard deviation 14,904), respectively, did not differ significantly (p = 0.51). The 6-month exercise program was deemed to be cost-effective compared with usual care for the estimated aerobic capacity. Multicenter randomized studies with long-term costs and outcomes should be done to provide additional evidence. Clinical trial: The PASAPAS study is registered under ClinicalTrials.gov. Trial registration ID: NCT01331772.

Critical review and quality-assessment of cost analyses in radiotherapy: How reliable are the data?

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: Health economic evaluations (HEE) are increasingly having an impact on policymakers, although the results greatly depend on the quality of the methodology used and on transparent reporting. The two main objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of cost analyses of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and to assess the comprehensiveness and relevance of cost criteria defined in three validated quality-assessment instruments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The selection of articles was based on a previous systematic literature review of EBRT-costing studies retrieved from January 2004 to January 2015 (Period 1) in MEDLINE, Embase, and NHS-EED databases and completed in a second time period from January 2015 to November 2018 (Period 2). Three validated instruments to assess the methodology quality with the CHEC and the QHES, and the methodology with the CHEERS checklists were used. The quality was evaluated by both quantitative and qualitative analyses. The scoring robustness was examined with the Kendall coefficient of concordance and inter-class correlation coefficients. RESULTS: In total, twenty-three articles were selected. The main geographic areas of cost analyses were Canada (n = 5), France (n = 4), and the USA (n = 4). The most commonly studied pathologies and technologies were prostate (n = 7) and head and neck cancer (n = 5) and IMRT (n = 8) and IGRT (n = 2), respectively. The mean instrument scores demonstrated a fair degree of methodological quality, with 69.7% for the CHEC, 73.6% for the QHES, as well as for the reporting quality, with 59.4% for CHEERS for Period 1 (74.4%, 71.5%, and 66.1%, respectively, for Period 2). An additional qualitative analysis per criterion revealed that certain items, essential for understanding the costing methodology and the results (e.g., the time horizon, discount rate, sensitivity analysis) were often only partially completed. Statistical analysis confirmed that the reviewers' scoring was consistent. The instruments identified the same top three articles, albeit with a degree of variation in the ranking. CONCLUSION: Qualitative and quantitative assessment of cost analyses in EBRT exhibits a fair level of study quality in terms of the methodology and reporting transparency. The impact of cost calculations on the final HEE result appears to be underestimated, and increased transparency of the data sources and the methodologies is needed.

National costs and resource requirements of external beam radiotherapy: A time-driven activity-based costing model from the ESTRO-HERO project.

BACKGROUND: The Health Economics in Radiation Oncology (ESTRO-HERO) project aims to provide a knowledge base for health economics in European radiotherapy. A cost-accounting model, providing data on national resource requirements and costs of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), was developed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) was applied from the healthcare provider perspective at national level. TD-ABC allocates resource costs to treatment courses through the activities performed, based on time estimates. RESULTS: The model is structured in three layers. The central layer, EBRT-Core, accounts for EBRT care-pathway activities and follows TD-ABC allocation principles. Activities supporting radiation oncology (RO) (RO-Support) and multidisciplinary oncology (Beyond-EBRT) follow standard allocation principles. To demonstrate the model's capabilities, a dataset was constructed for the hypothetical country Europalia, based on published evidence on resources and treatments, whereas time estimates were expert opinions. Applying the TD-ABC model to this example, treatment delivery activities represent 68.4% of the costs; treatment preparation 31.6%. The cost per course shows large variation for different indications, techniques, and fractionation schedules, ranging between €838 and €7193. Resource utilization was estimated to be within the available capacity. Scenario analyses on changes in fractionation and treatment complexity are presented. The ESTRO-HERO TD-ABC tool can model EBRT costs and resource requirements. While the Europalia example illustrates its potential, the results cannot be generalized nor used as a proxy for national evidence. Only real-world data, tailored to the specificities of individual countries, will support National Radiation Oncology Societies with investment planning and access to innovative radiotherapy.