Using Health-Related Social Media to Understand the Experiences of Adults With Lung Cancer in the Era of Immuno-Oncology and Targeted Therapies: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved dramatically with the approval of immuno-oncology (IO) and targeted therapies (TTs). Insights on the patient experience with these therapies and their impacts are lacking. Health-related social media has been increasingly used by patients to share their disease and treatment experiences, thus representing a valuable source of real-world data to understand the patient's voice and uncover potential unmet needs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the experiences of patients with NSCLC as reported in discussions posted on lung cancer-specific social media with respect to their disease symptoms and associated impacts. METHODS: Publicly available posts (2010-2019) were extracted from selected lung cancer- or NSCLC-specific websites. Social media users (patients and caregivers posting on these websites) were stratified by metastatic- and adjuvant-eligible subgroups and treatment received using natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning methods. Automated identification of symptoms was conducted using NLP. Qualitative data analysis (QDA) was conducted on random samples of posts mentioning pain-related, fatigue-related, respiratory-related, or infection-related symptoms to capture the patient experience with these and associated impacts. RESULTS: Overall, 1724 users (50,390 posts) and 574 users (4531 posts) were included in the metastatic group and adjuvant group, respectively. Among users in the metastatic group, pain, discomfort, and fatigue were the most commonly mentioned symptoms (49.7% and 39.6%, respectively), and in the QDA (258 posts from 134 users), the most frequent impacts related to physical impairments, sleep, and eating habits. Among users in the adjuvant group, pain, discomfort, and respiratory symptoms were the most commonly mentioned (44.8% and 23.9%, respectively), and impacts identified in the QDA (154 posts from 92 users) were mostly related to physical functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this exploratory observational analysis of social media among patients and caregivers informed the lived experience of NSCLC in the era of novel therapies, shedding light on most reported symptoms and their impacts. These findings can be used to inform future research on NSCLC treatment development and patient management.

Treatment Patterns and Health Care Costs in Commercially Insured Patients with Follicular Lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have estimated the real-world economic burden such as all-cause and follicular lymphoma (FL)-related costs and health care resource utilization (HCRU) in patients with FL. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated outcomes in patients who were newly initiated with FL indicated regimens by line of therapy with real-world data. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted among patients with FL from MarketScan® databases between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2013. Patients were selected if they were ≥18 years old when initiated on a FL indicated therapy, had at least 1 FL-related diagnosis, ≥1 FL commonly prescribed systemic anti-cancer therapy after diagnosis, and did not use any FL indicated regimen in the 24 months prior to the first agent. These patients were followed up at least 48 months and the outcomes, including the distribution of regimens by line of therapy, the treatment duration by line of therapy, all-cause and FL-related costs, and HCRU by line of therapy were evaluated. RESULTS: This study identified 598 patients who initiated FL indicated treatment. The average follow-up time was approximately 5.7 years. Of these patients, 50.2% (n=300) were female, with a mean age of 60.7 years (SD=13.1 years) when initiating their treatment with FL indicated regimens. Overall, 598 (100%) patients received first-line therapy, 180 (43.6%) received second-line therapy, 51 received third-line therapy, 21 received fourth-line therapy, and 10 received fifth-line therapy. Duration of treatment by each line of therapy was 370 days, 392 days, 162 days, 148 days, and 88 days, respectively. The most common first-line regimens received by patients were rituximab (n=201, 33.6%), R-CHOP (combination of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin hydrochloride [hydroxydaunomycin]; n=143, 24.0%), BR (combination of bendamustine and rituximab; n=143, 24.0%), and R-CVP (combination of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone; n=71, 11.9%). The most common second-line treatment regimens were (N=180): rituximab (n=78, 43.3%) and BR (n=41, 22.8%). Annualized all-cause health care costs per patient ranged from US$97 141 (SD: US$144 730) for first-line to US$424 758 (SD: US$715 028) for fifth-line therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The primary regimens used across treatment lines conform to those recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines. The economic burden for patients with FL is high and grows with subsequent lines of therapy.

Patient-reported outcomes in patients with resected, high-risk melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations treated with adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib (COMBI-AD): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 COMBI-AD study, patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations received adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib or placebo. The primary analysis showed that dabrafenib plus trametinib significantly improved relapse-free survival at 3 years. These results led to US Food and Drug Administration approval of dabrafenib plus trametinib as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected stage III melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations. Here, we report the patient-reported outcomes from COMBI-AD. METHODS: COMBI-AD was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study done at 169 sites in 25 countries. Study participants were aged 18 years or older and had complete resection of stage IIIA (lymph node metastases >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC cutaneous melanoma as per American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition criteria, with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system, stratified by mutation type and disease stage, to receive oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once daily) or matching placebos for 12 months. Patients, physicians, and the investigators who analysed the data were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival, reported elsewhere. Health-related quality of life, reported here, was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, and was assessed with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire in the intention-to-treat population. We used a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis to assess differences in health-related quality of life between groups. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01682083. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer recruiting participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 870 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=438) or matching placebos (n=432). Data were collected until the data cutoff for analyses of the primary endpoint (June 30, 2017). The median follow-up was 34 months (IQR 28-39) in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group and 33 months (20·5-39) in the placebo group. During the 12-month treatment phase, there were no significant or clinically meaningful changes from baseline between groups in EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) or utility scores. During treatment, there were no clinically meaningful differences in VAS scores or utility scores in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group between patients who did and did not experience the most common adverse events. During long-term follow-up (range 15-48 months), VAS and utility scores were similar between groups and did not differ from baseline scores. At recurrence, there were significant decreases in VAS scores in both the dabrafenib plus trametinib group (mean change -6·02, SD 20·57; p=0·0032) and the placebo group (-6·84, 20·86; p<0·0001); the mean change in utility score also differed significantly at recurrence for both groups (dabrafenib plus trametinib -0·0626, 0·1911, p<0·0001; placebo -0·0748, 0·2182, p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: These findings show that dabrafenib plus trametinib did not affect patient-reported outcome scores during or after adjuvant treatment, and suggest that preventing or delaying relapse with adjuvant therapy could be beneficial in this setting. FUNDING: Novartis.

Treatment patterns and clinical outcomes with pazopanib in patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas in a compassionate use setting: results of the SPIRE study.

BACKGROUND: A named patient program (NPP) was designed to provide patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma (aSTS) access to pazopanib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor. The SPIRE study was a retrospective chart review of participating patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility criteria for the NPP and SPIRE mirrored those of the pivotal phase-III study, PALETTE, which compared pazopanib with placebo in patients ≥18 years with aSTS and whose disease had progressed during or following prior chemotherapy or were otherwise unsuitable for chemotherapy. Outcomes of interest included treatment patterns, treatment duration, relative dose intensity, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), clinical benefit rate, adverse events (AEs) and reasons for treatment discontinuation. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients were enrolled (median age 56 years; 60% female). Most patients received pazopanib in second- and third-line therapy (28.0% and 28.4%, respectively), followed by fourth line (19.0%) and ≥ fifth line (18.5%). The median duration of pazopanib treatment was 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.8-3.8), with a mean daily dose of 715 mg equating to 92% of recommended dose. Median OS was 11.1 months and clinical benefit rate was 46%. There was evidence of some clinical benefit across most histological subtypes. At study end, 40% of patients were alive and of these, 18% remained on pazopanib. Thirteen percent (13%) of patients discontinued pazopanib due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The SPIRE study demonstrated activity of pazopanib in heavily pretreated aSTS patients in a compassionate use setting. No new safety concerns were noted. Reassuringly, the relative dose intensity of pazopanib was 92%.

Treatment patterns and survival in an exhaustive French cohort of pazopanib-eligible patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

BACKGROUND: The French EMS study prospectively collected exhaustive data from STS patients diagnosed in the Rhone-Alpes region from 2005 to 07. METHODS: The database included diagnosis/histology, surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatments and treatment response. Treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with metastatic disease, excluding adipocytic sarcoma and GIST were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 888 total patients, 145 were included based on having metastatic disease and appropriate subtypes. All patients received treatment with systemic therapy being most common (74%, n = 107), followed by radiotherapy (30%, n = 44) and surgery (23%, n = 33). Doxorubicin, alone or in combination, was the most common first line systemic therapy (65%, n = 46). Drugs without license in sarcoma were used in 38-83% of treatments depending on treatment line. 24% of frontline patients demonstrated an objective response, decreasing to 11% objective responses in second line but no responses were documented beyond second line, with median PFS declining with each additional line. Median PFS also declined in patients receiving surgery compared to those receiving no surgery (8-15 m vs 5 m). Median OS from metastatic diagnosis for patients receiving systemic therapy was double that of patients without systemic treatment (24 m vs 12 m, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in this population were poor and declined with successive treatment. However, results suggest that further anticancer therapies in recurrent sarcoma might be beneficial.

Health-related quality of life and patient-reported outcomes of ofatumumab plus chlorambucil versus chlorambucil monotherapy in the COMPLEMENT 1 trial of patients with previously untreated CLL.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are usually elderly and frequently have a number of comorbidities. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for these patients is of utmost importance and should be taken into consideration when assessing new treatment options. The combination of ofatumumab with chlorambucil has shown longer progression-free survival compared with chlorambucil alone. In this study, we aim to assess how this treatment combination affects patients' health-related quality of life and patient-reported symptoms. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this open-label phase III trial, patients with previously untreated CLL for whom fludarabine-based treatment was contra-indicated, were randomized 1:1 to receive oral chlorambucil (10 mg/m2) on Days 1-7 of a 28-day treatment cycle or to receive chlorambucil by this schedule plus intravenous ofatumumab (Cycle 1: 300 mg on Day 1 and 1000 mg on Day 8; subsequent cycles: 1000 mg Day 1) for 3-12 cycles. The EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CLL16 questionnaires were administered to patients before and during treatment, in follow-up and at the time of disease progression. The primary specified patient-reported outcomes were HRQoL and fatigue. RESULTS: Patient-reported improvements from baseline in Global Health Status (GHS)/HRQoL scores and fatigue scores were recorded during treatment with both chlorambucil monotherapy and ofatumumab in combination with chlorambucil. There were no significant differences between the two treatment arms for GHS/HRQoL (p = 0.667) or fatigue (p = 0.103). Following treatment, numerical improvements to GHS/HRQoL and fatigue scores were reported, with no significant differences between the two treatment arms. CONCLUSION: Small but detectable improvements in patients' quality of life were reported as a result of treatment. The addition of ofatumumab to chlorambucil did not negatively impact HRQoL. Quality of life was maintained in the months following treatment.

Ofatumumab maintenance versus observation in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (PROLONG): an open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Ofatumumab is a human anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that has proven efficacy as monotherapy in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ofatumumab maintenance treatment versus observation for patients in remission after re-induction treatment for relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, randomised phase 3 study enrolled patients aged 18 years or older from 130 centres in 24 countries who had chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in complete or partial remission after second-line or third-line treatment. Eligible patients had a WHO performance status of 0-2, had a response assessment within the previous 3 months, did not have refractory disease, autoimmune haemolytic anaemia requiring treatment, chronic or active infection requiring treatment, and had not previously received maintenance treatment or autologous or allogeneic stem-cell transplant. Using a randomisation list generated by a central computerised system and an interactive voice recognition system, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients to receive ofatumumab (300 mg followed by 1000 mg 1 week later and every 8 weeks for up to 2 years) or undergo observation. Randomisation was stratified by number and type of previous treatment and remission status after induction treatment (block size of four). Treatment assignment was open label. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. We report the results of a prespecified interim analysis after two-thirds of the planned study events (disease progression or death) had happened. This trial is closed to accrual but follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00802737. FINDINGS: Between May 6, 2010, and June 19, 2014, we enrolled 474 patients: 238 patients were randomly assigned to receive ofatumumab maintenance treatment and 236 to undergo observation. One (<1%) patient in the ofatumumab group did not receive the allocated intervention (withdrawal of consent). The median follow-up was 19·1 months (IQR 10·3-28·8). Progression-free survival was improved in patients assigned to the ofatumumab group (29·4 months, 95% CI 26·2-34·2) compared with those assigned to observation (15·2 months, 11·8-18·8; hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events up to 60 days after last treatment were neutropenia (56 [24%] of 237 patients in the ofatumumab group vs 23 [10%] of 237 in the observation group) and infections (31 [13%] vs 20 [8%]). 20 (8%) of 237 patients in the ofatumumab group and three (1%) of 237 patients in the observation group had adverse events that led to permanent discontinuation of treatment. Up to 60 days after last treatment, two deaths related to adverse events occurred in the ofatumumab treatment group and five deaths related to adverse events occurred in the observation group; no deaths were attributed to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: These data are important for the development of optimum maintenance strategies in patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, notably in the present era of targeted drugs, many of which are to be used until progression.

Health-related quality-of-life results from PALETTE: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial of pazopanib versus placebo in patients with soft tissue sarcoma whose disease has progressed during or after prior chemotherapy-a European Organization for research and treatment of cancer soft tissue and bone sarcoma group global network study (EORTC 62072).

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was an exploratory endpoint in the PALETTE trial, a global, double-blind, randomized, phase 3 trial of pazopanib 800 mg versus placebo as second-line or later treatment for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (N = 369). In that trial, progression-free survival was significantly improved in the pazopanib arm (median, 4.6 vs 1.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; P < .001), and toxicity of pazopanib consisted mainly of fatigue, diarrhea, nausea, weight loss, and hypertension. METHODS: HRQoL was assessed using the 30-item core European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at baseline and at weeks 4, 8, and 12 in patients who received treatment on protocol. The primary HRQoL endpoint was the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status scale. RESULTS: Compliance with HRQoL assessments was good, ranging from 94% at baseline to 81% at week 12. Differences in scores on the EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status subscale between the 2 treatment arms were not statistically significant and did not exceed the predetermined, minimal clinically important difference of 10 points (P = .291; maximum difference, 3.8 points). Among the other subscales, the pazopanib arm reported significantly worse symptom scores for diarrhea (P < .001) loss of appetite (P < .001), nausea/vomiting (P < .001), and fatigue (P = .012). In general, HRQoL scores tended to decline over time in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL did not improve with the receipt of pazopanib. However, the observed improvement in progression-free survival without impairment of HRQoL was considered a meaningful result. The toxicity profile of pazopanib was reflected in the patients' self-reported symptoms but did not translate into significantly worse overall global health status during treatment.

Epidemiology and Treatment of New-Onset and Established Rheumatoid Arthritis in an Insured US Population.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the epidemiology and treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a population broadly representative of employed adults in the US, using a retrospective cohort design. METHODS: Incident and prevalent RA cohorts were defined from a sample of 4.66 million adults with complete followup data from the period of January 2005 through September 2008 in the Pharmetrics medical claims database. Demographics, comorbidity, and medical therapies were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Median duration in the database was 5.7 years. Age- and sex-adjusted incidence in 2006 was 0.71 per 1,000 persons at risk (n = 3,992) and prevalence in 2005 was 0.63% (n = 30,530). Within 12 months after diagnosis, 65%, 64%, and 20% of the incident cohort had been prescribed corticosteroids, nonbiologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, respectively. Median time to first anti-TNF prescription was 6 months; 31% switched to a second drug and 15% to a third. An aggressive subcohort (11% of incident patients) received more DMARDs (83%) and TNF inhibitors (43%), and was more likely to switch. Twenty-eight percent of incident patients received only symptomatic therapy over a minimum of 1.75 years of followup; these patients were older with more comorbidities and contraindications to methotrexate. CONCLUSION: In this insured population-based cohort, only two-thirds of newly diagnosed RA patients were prescribed a DMARD in year 1 and 28% received no antirheumatic therapy. Although limited by lack of clinical information and by left-censoring, administrative databases capture clinical practice and suggest that gaps exist in treatment options available to a significant number of patients.

A retrospective chart review of drug treatment patterns and clinical outcomes among patients with metastatic or recurrent soft tissue sarcoma refractory to one or more prior chemotherapy treatments.

BACKGROUND: Limited clinical data on real-world practice patterns are available for patients with metastatic/relapsed soft tissue sarcomas (STS). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate treatment patterns in patients with metastatic/relapsed STS following failure of prior chemotherapy by examining data collected from 2000 to 2011 from a major tertiary academic cancer center in the United States. METHODS: Medical records, including community-based referral records, from a tertiary cancer center for adult patients with metastatic/relapsed STS with confirmed disease progression who commenced second-line treatment between January 1, 2000 and February 4, 2011, and with at least 3 months of follow-up data following second-line treatment initiation, were retrospectively reviewed. Overall survival, time to progression, and clinician-reported tumor response were collected. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients (leiomyosarcoma, n = 48; synovial cell sarcoma, n = 7; liposarcoma, n = 5; or other histological subtypes, n = 39) received an average of four lines of treatment (maximum of 10). No consistent or dominant regimens were used in each treatment line beyond the second line. Median second-line treatment duration was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval, 3.0-5.0). Overall, 72 of 99 patients (73%) discontinued second-line treatment due to progressive disease. Median progression-free survival from initiation of second-line treatment varied across regimens from 2.0 to 6.6 months (overall median, 5.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Wide variations in treatment were evident, with no single standard of care for patients with metastatic/relapsed STS. Most patients discontinued second-line treatment due to progressive disease, often receiving additional systemic therapy with other drugs. These data suggest a high unmet need for more efficacious treatment options and improved data collection to guide practice among patients with relapsed/refractory STS.

Cost-effectiveness of pazopanib in advanced soft tissue sarcoma in the United kingdom.

In the phase III PALETTE trial, pazopanib improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo in patients with advanced/metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (mSTS) who had received prior chemotherapy. We used a multistate model to estimate expected PFS, overall survival (OS), lifetime STS treatment costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients receiving pazopanib, placebo, trabectedin, ifosfamide, or gemcitabine plus docetaxel as second-line mSTS therapies. The cost-effectiveness of pazopanib was expressed as the incremental costs per QALY gained. Estimates of PFS/OS, adverse events, and utilities for pazopanib and placebo were from the PALETTE trial. Estimates of relative effectiveness of the other comparators were from an unadjusted indirect comparison versus pazopanib. Costs were from published sources. Pazopanib is estimated to increase QALYs by 0.128 and costs by £7,976 versus placebo; cost per QALY gained with pazopanib versus placebo is estimated to be £62,000. Compared with the other chemotherapies, pazopanib provides similar QALYs at a lower cost. Pazopanib may not be cost-effective versus placebo but may be cost-effective versus the most commonly used active treatments, although this conclusion is uncertain. Given the unmet need for effective treatments for mSTS, pazopanib may be an appropriate alternative to some currently used medications in the United Kingdom.

Efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions in second- or later-line treatment of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend anthracycline-based chemotherapy primarily with doxorubicin either as monotherapy or in combination with ifosfamide as the first-line treatment for most advanced STS subtypes. Therapeutic options after failure of doxorubicin and/or ifosfamide are limited. This study aimed to comprehensively review available data on the activity and safety of interventions in second- or later-line treatment of advanced STS. METHODS: Electronic literature databases (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched from 1980 to 01 March 2012 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (both prospective and retrospective) evaluating pharmacological interventions in patients with advanced STS pre-treated with anthracycline- and/or ifosfamide-based therapy. RESULTS: The review identified six RCTs (one phase III and five phase II trials) and 94 non-randomised studies. Based on the primary trial endpoints, RCTs demonstrated favourable efficacy for pazopanib over placebo (PFS: 4.6 months vs. 1.6 months), gemcitabine plus dacarbazine over dacarbazine monotherapy (3-month PFS rate: 54.2% vs. 35.2%), and trabectedin 3-weekly schedule over weekly schedule (TTP: 3.7 months vs. 2.3 months. The non-randomised studies demonstrated heterogeneity in efficacy and safety results. CONCLUSIONS: Across the RCTs, pazopanib over placebo, gemcitabine-dacarbazine over dacarbazine, and trabectedin 3-weekly over weekly regimen clearly demonstrated a PFS advantage in the second- and later-line treatment of advanced STS. With only one phase III trial in this setting, there is a clear need for additional comparative trials to better understand the risk: benefit ratios of available agents and combinations.

Elicitation of health state utilities in soft tissue sarcoma.

PURPOSE: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) are uncommon tumours with varying histological subtypes. There is a paucity of available data concerning the quality-of-life (QoL) impact of STS which could be used to support economic evaluation of future treatments. This study aimed to elicit societal utility values for health states that depict the impact of STS and its treatment. METHODS: Following the development of eight health state vignettes, a sample of 100 members of the UK general public participated in a valuation exercise to elicit utility values using the time trade-off procedure. RESULTS: The treatment response state was valued as the least burdensome by participants followed by the prospect of stable disease (mean utility value: 0.736 SD 0.21). Serious adverse events were associated with a range of disutilities from -0.236 for grade III/IV pain to -0.357 for grade III/IV nausea/vomiting. Progressive disease was deemed the least desirable outcome and was associated with a substantial decline in utility (-0.473). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest advanced STS are associated with significant burden for individuals. Treatment-related adverse events were seen as debilitating, however, progression represents an enormous challenge to QoL. This illustrates the significant value to individuals of extending the progression free survival period.

Potential economic impact of increasing low dose aspirin usage on CVD in the US.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death in the US and Western Europe, but regular use of preventive low-dose aspirin has proven effective in preventing CVD events. The purpose of this study was to explore the potential economic impact in the US if preventive aspirin usage were to be increased in line with clinical guidelines for primary and secondary prevention. METHODS: The risk profile of the US population was characterized using NHANES data, and Framingham cardiovascular risk equations were applied to calculate risk for myocardial infarction, angina and ischemic stroke according to age and gender. Primary and secondary patients were considered separately. Using publicly available unit costs, a budget impact model calculated the annual impact of increased preventive aspirin usage considering gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke adverse events and diminishing aspirin adherence over a 10-year time horizon. RESULTS: In a base population of 1,000,000 patients, full implementation of clinical guidelines would potentially prevent an additional 1273 myocardial infarctions, 2184 angina episodes and 565 ischemic strokes in primary prevention patients and an additional 578 myocardial infarctions, and 607 ischemic strokes in secondary prevention patients. This represents a total savings of $79.6 million for primary prevention and $32.2 million for secondary and additional out-of-pocket expense to patients of $29.0 million for primary prevention and $2.6 million for secondary prevention for the cost of aspirin. CONCLUSIONS: This budgetary model suggests that there is a strong economic case, both for payers and society, to encourage aspirin use for patients at appropriate risk and per clinical guidelines. It also provides an example of how minimizing costs do not necessarily have to imply a rationing of care. Limitations include the exclusion of other CVD interventions in the analysis.

Cost-effectiveness of the Endeavor stent in de novo native coronary artery lesions updated with contemporary data.

AIMS: The Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent has been shown to reduce the restenosis rate compared to bare metal stents and has impacted other clinical measures such as mortality, acute myocardial infarctions (AMI) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: Using pooled efficacy data from the Endeavor clinical trial programme, a model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of the Endeavor drug eluting stent (DES) with the Driver bare meal stent (BMS) over a four year time period. Endeavor was more costly but had an improved clinical outcome compared to Driver BMS over four years with a 4% reduction in deaths, 33% reduction in AMI and a 45% reduction in TVR. Late stent thrombosis was the only event showing an increased incidence for Endeavor of 0.2% compared to 0% for Driver. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio was pound3,757/quality adjusted life years (QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Although much controversy has surrounded the appropriate way to assess the cost effectiveness of DES technology, a comprehensive analysis is presented and this suggests that by using extended clinical trial data out to four years, the Endeavor DES in particular, but DES technologies in general, are cost-effective approaches to percutaneous coronary intervention.

The cumulative burden of oral corticosteroid side effects and the economic implications of steroid use.

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) are a key part of therapy regimens for a diverse variety of conditions. Despite their efficacy, they are associated with a wide variety of adverse events. The purpose of this review was to identify the range of adverse events that have been reported to be related to oral corticosteroids, examine the factors that influence their incidence and estimate the economic burden caused by these adverse events. In 61 identified studies, 21 different categories of OCS related adverse events were reported with increased fracture risk being the category most frequently described. Most studies that examined factors linked to the incidence of OCS related adverse events found that dose, age, gender, duration of use, treatment history, smoking habits or cholesterol level were influential in determining risk. Additionally, a cumulative economic analysis of selected adverse events found the annual cost of treating these events in the UK to be at least 165 pounds per patient taking OCS. The clinical and economic burden of OCS related adverse events highlights the need for OCS sparing therapies to be developed.

Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms Experienced by Users of Low-Dose Aspirin (Acetylsalicylic Acid) [75-325 mg/day] for Primary and Secondary Coronary Artery Disease Prevention: Perspectives from Patient Focus Groups.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: : As upper gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are common with the use of low-dose aspirin (low-dose acetylsalicylic acid [LDASA]; 75-325 mg/day), this exploratory qualitative study evaluated the upper GI symptom experience and attribution of symptoms among patients taking LDASA for coronary artery disease (CAD) or known CAD risk factors. METHODS: : Focus groups were conducted among patients aged ≥40 years with CAD or known CAD risk factors currently taking daily LDASA. Patients were recruited from primary-care clinical sites, and all had experienced upper GI symptoms the week before inclusion (including heartburn, acid reflux, and stomach or abdominal pain). The focus group discussions were designed to explore the participants' experience with upper GI symptoms, LDASA use, potential adverse effects of treatment, and physician interactions. Content analysis and descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: : Thirty-three men and women participated in four focus group sessions in France and in the US. All participants recognized the cardioprotective benefits of LDASA and reported a high level of compliance with therapy. Although participants regarded LDASA as a necessary and valuable treatment, many participants had concerns about LDASA use, primarily because of the bleeding risk. Many participants were aware that LDASA may cause GI symptoms. Participants experienced a range of upper GI symptoms, including heartburn, regurgitation, and nausea. Almost half of the participants believed that their GI symptoms were solely due to lifestyle issues such as stress and eating spicy food rather than being caused by medication, where others reported that they were directly related to LDASA use. The GI symptoms experienced by LDASA users were cited as troublesome, causing the participants to change eating habits, avoid stress or employ stress-reduction techniques, change physical activities, and take more medication to treat the symptoms. CONCLUSION: : Participants were well aware of the potential adverse effects of LDASA use and reported that GI symptoms had a high impact on several areas of their lives. To maintain the cardioprotective benefits of LDASA, participants used several strategies to deal with their upper GI symptoms, including changing their eating habits, avoiding stress, changing their physical activities, and taking medication.

Loss of interhemispheric inhibition in patients with multiple sclerosis is related to corpus callosum atrophy.

Axonal injury and loss in the corpus callosum (CC) is characteristic of the pathology of multiple sclerosis (MS). Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) potentially allows neurophysiological consequences of this interhemispheric axonal loss to be defined quantitatively. Here we have used 3T fMRI to study the activation in the contralateral primary sensorimotor cortex and deactivation (mediated by transcallosal tracts) in the homologous ipsilateral region in 14 patients with MS and in 14 matched healthy controls during a simple hand-tapping task. Both healthy controls and MS patients showed similar activation in the motor cortex contralateral to the hand moved, but the patients showed a significantly smaller relative deactivation in the ipsilateral motor cortex (P = 0.002). The difference was accounted for by the sub-group of MS patients who previously had impairment of motor function of the hand tested (MS-phd). The CC of the whole patient group was significantly thinner than for the controls (P = 0.001). Atrophy of the CC was correlated with loss of deactivation for the whole patient group (r = -0.50, P = 0.035), but particularly for MS-phd (r = -0.914, P = 0.004). Interhemispheric physiological inhibition thus is impaired in patients with MS, potentially contributing to impairment of motor control. This work suggests one way in which FMRI monitoring of the transcallosal interactions in motor cortex could become a tool for evaluation of therapies that may enhance function in reversibly impaired pathways.