Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Med Econ ; 26(1): 1519-1531, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37964554

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To identify and synthesize evidence regarding how coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) interventions, including vaccines and outpatient treatments, have impacted healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs in the United States (US) during the Omicron era. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to identify articles published between 1 January 2021 and 10 March 2023 that assessed the impact of vaccination and outpatient treatment on costs and HCRU outcomes associated with COVID-19. Screening was performed by two independent researchers using predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Fifty-eight unique studies were included in the SLR, of which all reported HCRU outcomes, and one reported costs. Overall, there was a significant reduction in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization for patients who received an original monovalent primary series vaccine plus booster dose vs. no vaccination. Moreover, receipt of a booster vaccine was associated with a lower risk of hospitalization vs. primary series vaccination. Evidence also indicated a significantly reduced risk of hospitalizations among recipients of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (NMV/r), remdesivir, sotrovimab, and molnupiravir compared to non-recipients. Treated and/or vaccinated patients also experienced reductions in intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, length of stay, and emergency department (ED)/urgent care clinic encounters. LIMITATIONS: The identified studies may not represent unique patient populations as many utilized the same regional/national data sources. Synthesis of the evidence was also limited by differences in populations, outcome definitions, and varying duration of follow-up across studies. Additionally, significant gaps, including HCRU associated with long COVID and various high-risk populations and cost data, were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence gaps, findings from the SLR highlight the significant positive impact that vaccination and outpatient treatment have had on HCRU in the US, including periods of Omicron predominance. Continued research is needed to inform clinical and policy decision-making in the US as COVID-19 continues to evolve as an endemic disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , Financial Stress , Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome , Outpatients , Vaccination
2.
PLoS One ; 16(3): e0247620, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33684140

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The burden of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertion mutation (Exon 20ins) in non-small cell lung cancer is not well understood. A systematic review was conducted to identify evidence on mutation frequency, prognostic impact, clinical, patient-reported, and economic outcomes associated with Exon 20ins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Searches were conducted in Embase and Medline and supplemented with recent conference proceedings. Included studies were not limited by intervention, geography, or publication year. RESULTS: Seventy-eight unique studies were included; 53 reporting mutation frequency, 13 prognostic impact, 36 clinical outcomes, and one humanistic burden. No economic burden data were identified. The frequency of Exon 20ins mutation ranged from 0.1% to 4% of all NSCLC cases and 1% to 12% of all EGFR mutations. Data on the prognostic impact of Exon 20ins were heterogeneous but highlighted poorer outcomes in patients with Exon 20ins mutation compared with patients with other EGFR mutations and EGFR wildtype across a wide range of therapies and treatment lines. Comparative evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of currently available therapies were limited, as were sample sizes of studies reporting on real-world effectiveness. Nine single-arm trials and 27 observational studies reported clinical outcomes for patients with Exon 20ins. Trends towards better survival and response were observed for chemotherapy compared with TKIs as first-line treatments. For subsequent treatment lines, novel targeted therapies provided encouraging preliminary responses while results for chemotherapy were less favorable. Limited safety data were reported. One conference abstract described the symptom burden for Exon 20ins patients with fatigue and pain being most common. CONCLUSION: Findings of the systematic review show a high unmet need for safe and efficacious treatments for patients with Exon 20ins as well and need for further evidence generation to better understand the patient-level and economic impact for these patients.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/genetics , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Mutagenesis, Insertional , Americas/epidemiology , Asia/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/mortality , Cohort Studies , ErbB Receptors/genetics , Europe/epidemiology , Exons , Gene Expression , Humans , Incidence , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/mortality , Mutation Rate , Prognosis , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...