Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 19(7): 516-522, 2023 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37084324

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Biosimilars offer increased patient choice and potential cost-savings, compared with originator biologics. We studied 3 years of prescribed biologics among US physician practices to determine the relationship of practice type and payment source to oncology biosimilar use. METHODS: We acquired biologic utilization data from 38 practices participating in PracticeNET. We focused on six biologics (bevacizumab, epoetin alfa, filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, rituximab, and trastuzumab) for the period from 2019 to 2021. We complemented our quantitative analysis with a survey of PracticeNET participants (prescribers and practice leaders) to reveal potential motivators and barriers to biosimilar use. We implemented logistic regression to evaluate the biosimilar use for each biologic, with covariates including time, practice type, and payment source, and accounted for clusters of practices. RESULTS: Use of biosimilars increased over the 3-year period, reaching between 51% and 80% of administered doses by the fourth quarter of 2021, depending on the biologic. Biosimilar use varied by practice, with independent physician practices having higher use of biosimilars for epoetin alfa, filgrastim, rituximab, and trastuzumab. Compared with commercial health plans, Medicaid plans had lower biosimilar use for four biologics; traditional Medicare had lower use for five biologics. The average cost per dose decreased between 24% and 41%, dependent on the biologic. CONCLUSION: Biosimilars have, through increased use, lowered the average cost per dose of the studied biologics. Biosimilar use differed by originator biologic, practice type, and payment source. There remains further opportunity for increases in biosimilar use among certain practices and payers.


Subject(s)
Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Aged , Humans , United States , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/pharmacology , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Filgrastim/pharmacology , Filgrastim/therapeutic use , Rituximab , Epoetin Alfa/pharmacology , Epoetin Alfa/therapeutic use , Medicare , Trastuzumab
2.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 20(10): 1099-1106.e2, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36240846

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Oral chemotherapy performance measures were first introduced into ASCO's Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) in 2013. This study examined performance on these measures among QOPI-participating practices and evaluated whether it differed among practices based on meeting QOPI Certification Program standards. METHODS: A total of 192 QOPI-participating practices (certified, n=50 [26%]; not certified, n=142 [74%]) reported performance on oral chemotherapy measures in 2017 and 2018. Inclusion was limited to practices reporting on ≥3 charts for ≥1 oral chemotherapy measure. Performance was defined as the percentage of charts examined that adhered to the measure. Descriptive analyses were used to characterize performance within and across practices, and mixed-effects logistic regression models were conducted to compare performance based on certification status. RESULTS: Median performance across practices for the 9 oral chemotherapy measures examined ranged from 44% (education before the start of treatment addressing missed doses, toxicities, and clinical contact instructions [composite measure]) to 100% (documented dose, documented plan, and education about toxicities). Certified practices were more likely to provide education about clinic contact instructions than noncertified practices (odds ratio, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.00-24.0). Performance on all other measures was not significantly associated with certification status. CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variability in quality related to performance on oral chemotherapy measures across all QOPI-participating practices, and several areas were identified in which administration of oral chemotherapy could be improved. Our findings highlight the need for the development and implementation of appropriate standards that apply to oral chemotherapy and address the complexities that set it apart from parenteral treatment.


Subject(s)
Certification , Medical Oncology , Administration, Oral , Humans
3.
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 148(10): 940-946, 2022 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36048465

ABSTRACT

Importance: Nasal valve collapse is a primary cause of nasal airway obstruction (NAO). Patients with NAO and nasal valve collapse experience a variety of symptoms that lower their quality of life, such as nasal congestion, headache, sleep disturbance, daytime sleepiness, and snoring. Objective: To determine if active treatment of the nasal valve with a temperature-controlled radiofrequency (TCRF) device, previously demonstrated superior to a sham procedure at 3 months, was safe and associated with sustained improvements in symptoms of NAO through 12 months. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, randomized clinical trial, patients in 16 centers in the US with index procedures between August and December 2020 were assigned to TCRF device treatment of the nasal valve or a sham control procedure (no RF energy). Patients had a baseline Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) Scale score of 55 or greater with nasal valve collapse as the primary or substantial contributor to NAO. After primary end point evaluation at 3 months, eligible patients in the sham control arm crossed over to active treatment. Data analysis was performed between April and May 2022. Interventions: Patients were treated bilaterally with the TCRF device at 4 or fewer nonoverlapping areas on the nasal mucosa at the junction of the upper and lower lateral cartilage on the lateral nasal wall. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point measure was responder rate, defined as 20% or greater reduction in NOSE Scale score or 1 or greater reduction in NOSE Scale clinical severity category. Results: A total of 108 patients received active treatment (77 as index active treatment, 31 after crossover). The mean (SD) age of patients was 48.5 (12.3) years; 66 (61.1%) were women. The combined group of patients receiving active treatment had a mean baseline NOSE Scale score of 76.3 (95% CI, 73.6-79.1). At 12 months (n = 88), the responder rate was 89.8% (95% CI, 81.7%-94.5%). The NOSE Scale score improved from baseline (mean change, -44.9 [95% CI, -52.1 to -37.7]). No device/procedure-related serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions and Relevance: In this follow-up of a cohort from a randomized clinical trial, the minimally invasive TCRF device, previously demonstrated to be superior to a sham procedure, was safe and associated with improvement in symptoms of NAO through 12 months postprocedure. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04549545.


Subject(s)
Nasal Obstruction , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasal Obstruction/complications , Nasal Obstruction/surgery , Prospective Studies , Quality of Life , Temperature , Treatment Outcome
4.
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol ; 11(12): 1676-1684, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34240571

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Nasal valve collapse is one of several causes of nasal obstruction. The safety and efficacy of a temperature-controlled radiofrequency (RF) device for the treatment of the nasal valve for nasal airway obstruction (NAO) has been established in single-arm studies. The objective of this trial was to compare active device treatment against a sham procedure (control). METHODS: In a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT), patients were assigned to bilateral temperature-controlled RF treatment of the nasal valve (n = 77) or a sham procedure (n = 41), in which no RF energy was transferred to the device/treatment area. The device was applied to the mucosa over the lower lateral cartilage on the lateral nasal wall. The primary endpoint was responder rate at 3 months, defined as a ≥20% reduction in Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE)-scale score or ≥1 reduction in clinical severity category. RESULTS: At baseline, patients had a mean NOSE-scale score of 76.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 73.8 to 79.5) and 78.8 (95% CI, 74.2 to 83.3) (p = 0.424) in the active treatment and sham-control arms, respectively. At 3 months, the responder rate was significantly higher in the active treatment arm (88.3% [95% CI, 79.2%-93.7%] vs 42.5% [95% CI, 28.5%-57.8%]; p < 0.001). The active treatment arm had a significantly greater decrease in NOSE-scale score (mean, -42.3 [95% CI, -47.6 to -37.1] vs -16.8 [95% CI, -26.3 to -7.2]; p < 0.001). Three adverse events at least possibly related to the device and/or procedure were reported, and all resolved. CONCLUSION: This RCT shows temperature-controlled RF treatment of the nasal valve is safe and effective in reducing symptoms of NAO in short-term follow-up.


Subject(s)
Nasal Obstruction , Humans , Nasal Obstruction/surgery , Nose , Prospective Studies , Temperature , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...