Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
1.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(1): e2350067, 2024 Jan 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38170520

ABSTRACT

Importance: The OlympiA trial found that 1 year of adjuvant olaparib therapy can improve distant disease-free survival and overall survival from early-stage breast cancer in patients with a germline BRCA1/2 mutation. However, olaparib, an oral poly-adenosine diphosphate ribose polymerase inhibitor, is estimated to cost approximately $14 000 per month in the US. Objective: To estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of adjuvant olaparib compared with no olaparib in eligible patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: In an economic evaluation from a health care system perspective, the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant olaparib was analyzed using a Markov state-transition model. The model simulated costs and lifetime health outcomes of 42-year-old women with high-risk early-stage breast cancer and a known BRCA1/2 mutation who completed definitive primary therapy and neoadjuvant or adjuvant systemic therapy. The study was conducted from August 2021 to July 2023. The effectiveness of olaparib was based on the findings of the OlympiA randomized clinical trial, and other model parameters were identified from the literature. The model was calibrated to the 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-year distant disease-free and overall survival observed in the OlympiA trial, and olaparib was assumed to reduce the risk of distant recurrence only in the first 4 years. Exposure: One year of adjuvant olaparib or no adjuvant olaparib. Main Outcome and Measure: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in 2021 US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. All outcomes were discounted by 3% annually. Results: In the base case, adjuvant olaparib was associated with a 1.25-year increase in life expectancy and a 1.20-QALY increase at an incremental cost of $133 133 compared with no olaparib. The resulting ICER was approximately $111 000 per QALY gained. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY, olaparib was cost-effective at its 2021 price and in more than 92% of simulations in probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The results were sensitive to assumptions about the effectiveness of olaparib and quality of life for patients with no disease recurrence. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, from a US health care system perspective, adjuvant olaparib was a cost-effective option for patients with high-risk, early-stage breast cancer and a germline BRCA1/2 mutation.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Adult , Female , Humans , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/drug therapy , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Germ Cells , Mutation , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
2.
Med J Aust ; 218(8): 368-373, 2023 05 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37005005

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of universal genetic testing of women with newly diagnosed breast cancer, to estimate the incidence of pathogenic gene variants and their impact on patient management, and to evaluate patient and clinician acceptance of universal testing. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Prospective study of women with invasive or high grade in situ breast cancer and unknown germline status discussed at the Parkville Breast Service (Melbourne) multidisciplinary team meeting. Women were recruited to the pilot (12 June 2020 - 22 March 2021) and expansion phases (17 October 2021 - 8 November 2022) of the Mutational Assessment of newly diagnosed breast cancer using Germline and tumour genomICs (MAGIC) study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Germline testing by DNA sequencing, filtered for nineteen hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genes that could be classified as actionable; only pathogenic variants were reported. Surveys before and after genetic testing assessed pilot phase participants' perceptions of genetic testing, and psychological distress and cancer-specific worry. A separate survey assessed clinicians' views on universal testing. RESULTS: Pathogenic germline variants were identified in 31 of 474 expanded study phase participants (6.5%), including 28 of 429 women with invasive breast cancer (6.5%). Eighteen of the 31 did not meet current genetic testing eligibility guidelines (probability of a germline pathogenic variant ≥ 10%, based on CanRisk, or Manchester score ≥ 15). Clinical management was changed for 24 of 31 women after identification of a pathogenic variant. Including 68 further women who underwent genetic testing outside the study, 44 of 542 women carried pathogenic variants (8.1%). Acceptance of universal testing was high among both patients (90 of 103, 87%) and clinicians; no decision regret or adverse impact on psychological distress or cancer-specific worry were reported. CONCLUSION: Universal genetic testing following the diagnosis of breast cancer detects clinically significant germline pathogenic variants that might otherwise be missed because of testing guidelines. Routine testing and reporting of pathogenic variants is feasible and acceptable for both patients and clinicians.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Prospective Studies , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Genetic Testing , Patient Care Team
3.
J Thorac Oncol ; 17(12): 1428-1432, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36075530

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Primary pericardial mesothelioma (PPM) has no accepted standard-of-care treatment options with management and outcomes often extrapolated from diffuse pleural mesothelioma. Disease-specific research is needed to better define PPM. We report our institutional experience with PPM highlighting the potential role for multimodality therapy. METHODS: Patients with PPM diagnosed by a multidisciplinary team of medical oncologists, thoracic surgeons, thoracic pathologists, and radiologists between January 2011 and January 2022 were followed to February 2022. Clinicopathologic features and treatment outcomes were annotated. Overall survival (OS) was defined from the date of pathologic diagnosis. RESULTS: The median age at diagnosis of the 12 patients identified with having PPM was 51 (range: 21-71) years old. Most patients were of female sex (n = 8; 67%), 75% of the samples were epithelioid (n = 9), and 25% were nonepithelioid (two sarcomatoid and one biphasic). Most cases (92%, 11 of 12) had expression of at least two mesothelial markers on immunohistochemistry. The median OS of the cohort was 25.9 months. Five patients had an OS greater than 12 months; four of whom received pericardial radiation. Three of the patients who received radiation did so as part of a trimodality approach (surgical resection, adjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation); the OS for patients who received trimodality therapy was 70.3 months versus 8.2 months for those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: PPM represents a distinct disease with no universally accepted treatment options. Our findings suggest that trimodality therapy may improve outcomes in selected patients with PPM.


Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms , Mesothelioma, Malignant , Mesothelioma , Pleural Neoplasms , Thymus Neoplasms , Humans , Female , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Pleural Neoplasms/pathology , Mesothelioma/pathology , Combined Modality Therapy
5.
BMJ Case Rep ; 13(9)2020 Sep 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32900738

ABSTRACT

The CHEK2 gene is mostly considered as a moderate breast cancer gene with the result that many clinicians have a narrow focus. We present the 10-year journey of a man who had five different cancers and had iterative genetic testing including for Li-Fraumeni syndrome, eventually to discover a pathogenic variant in the CHEK2 gene, possibly explaining his numerous cancers. This diagnosis offered him closure which he had desperately sought for well over a decade. A pathogenic variant in the CHEK2 gene can potentially explain these cancers because of its function as a tumour suppressor gene. Consideration is warranted of what this means for individuals with CHEK2 variants who may develop multiple cancers, their prognosis and whether different treatment modalities such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy or target agents would need modification. We encourage more research into the many faces of the CHEK2 gene and the potential for predisposition to multiple cancers.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms, Male/genetics , Checkpoint Kinase 2/genetics , Li-Fraumeni Syndrome/genetics , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mutation , Risk Assessment
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...