| 1. |
- Aapro, Matti, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying critical steps towards improved access to innovation in cancer care: a European CanCer Organisation position paper
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 82, s. 193-202
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- © 2017 In recent decades cancer care has seen improvements in the speed and accuracy of diagnostic procedures; the effectiveness of surgery, radiation therapy and medical treatments; the power of information technology; and the development of multidisciplinary, specialist-led approaches to care. Such innovations are essential if we are to continue improving the lives of cancer patients across Europe despite financial pressures on our healthcare systems. Investment in innovation must be balanced with the need to ensure the sustainability of healthcare budgets, and all health professionals have a responsibility to help achieve this balance. It requires scrutiny of the way care is delivered; we must be ready to discontinue practices or interventions that are inefficient, and prioritise innovations that may deliver the best outcomes possible for patients within the limits of available resources. Decisions on innovations should take into account their long-term impact on patient outcomes and costs, not just their immediate costs. Adopting a culture of innovation requires a multidisciplinary team approach, with the patient at the centre and an integral part of the team. It must take a whole-system and whole-patient perspective on cancer care and be guided by high-quality real-world data, including outcomes relevant to the patient and actual costs of care; this accurately reflects the impact of any innovation in clinical practice. The European CanCer Organisation is committed to working with its member societies, patient organisations and the cancer community at large to find sustainable ways to identify and integrate the most meaningful innovations into all aspects of cancer care.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ring, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Bridging The Age Gap: observational cohort study of effects of chemotherapy and trastuzumab on recurrence, survival and quality of life in older women with early breast cancer
- 2021
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 125, s. 209-219
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Chemotherapy improves outcomes for high risk early breast cancer (EBC) patients but is infrequently offered to older individuals. This study determined if there are fit older patients with high-risk disease who may benefit from chemotherapy. Methods: A multicentre, prospective, observational study was performed to determine chemotherapy (±trastuzumab) usage and survival and quality-of-life outcomes in EBC patients aged ≥70 years. Propensity score-matching adjusted for variation in baseline age, fitness and tumour stage. Results: Three thousands four hundred sixteen women were recruited from 56 UK centres between 2013 and 2018. Two thousands eight hundred eleven (82%) had surgery. 1520/2811 (54%) had high-risk EBC and 2059/2811 (73%) were fit. Chemotherapy was given to 306/1100 (27.8%) fit patients with high-risk EBC. Unmatched comparison of chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy demonstrated reduced metastatic recurrence risk in high-risk patients(hazard ratio [HR] 0.36 [95% CI 0.19–0.68]) and in 541 age, stage and fitness-matched patients(adjusted HR 0.43 [95% CI 0.20–0.92]) but no benefit to overall survival (OS) or breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in either group. Chemotherapy improved survival in women with oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative cancer (OS: HR 0.20 [95% CI 0.08–0.49];BCSS: HR 0.12 [95% CI 0.03–0.44]).Transient negative quality-of-life impacts were observed. Conclusions: Chemotherapy was associated with reduced risk of metastatic recurrence, but survival benefits were only seen in patients with ER-negative cancer. Quality-of-life impacts were significant but transient. Trial Registration: ISRCTN 46099296. © 2021, The Author(s).
|
|
| 3. |
- van der Hage, J., et al.
(författare)
-
The ESSO core curriculum committee update on surgical oncology
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ejso. - : Elsevier BV. - 0748-7983. ; 47:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: Surgical oncology is a defined specialty within the European Board of Surgery within the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Variation in training and specialization still occurs across Europe. There is a need to align the core knowledge needed to fulfil the criteria across subspecialities in surgical oncology. Material and methods: The core curriculum, established in 2013, was developed with contributions from expert advisors from within the European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO), European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO) and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) and related subspeciality experts. Results: The current version reiterates and updates the core curriculum structure needed for current and future candidates who plans to train for and eventually sit the European fellowship exam for the European Board of Surgery in Surgical Oncology. The content included is not intended to be exhaustive but, rather to give the candidate an idea of expectations and areas for in depth study, in addition to the practical requirements. The five elements included are: Basic principles of oncology; Disease site specific oncology; Generic clinical skills; Training recommendations, and, lastly; Eligibility for the EBSQ exam in Surgical Oncology. Conclusions: As evidence-based care for cancer patients evolves through research into basic science, translational research and clinical trials, the core curriculum will evolve, mature and adapt to deliver continual improvements in cancer outcomes for patients. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
|
|
| 4. |
- Battisti, N. M. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Adapting care for older cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Recommendations from the International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) COVID-19 Working Group
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Geriatric Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1879-4068. ; 11:8, s. 1190-1198
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The COVID-19 pandemic poses a barrier to equal and evidence-based management of cancer in older adults. The International Society of Geriatric Oncology (SIOG) formed a panel of experts to develop consensus recommendations on the implications of the pandemic on several aspects of cancer care in this age group including geriatric assessment (GA), surgery, radiotherapy, systemic treatment, palliative care and research. Age and cancer diagnosis are significant predictors of adverse outcomes of the COVID-19 infection. In this setting, GA is particularly valuable to drive decision-making. GA may aid estimating physiologic reserve and adaptive capability, assessing risk-benefits of either providing or temporarily withholding treatments, and determining patient preferences to help inform treatment decisions. In a resource-constrained setting, geriatric screening tools may be administered remotely to identify patients requiring comprehensive GA. Tele-health is also crucial to ensure adequate continuity of care and minimize the risk of infection exposure. In general, therapeutic decisions should favor the most effective and least invasive approach with the lowest risk of adverse outcomes. In selected cases, this might require deferring or omitting surgery, radiotherapy or systemic treatments especially where benefits are marginal and alternative safe therapeutic options are available. Ongoing research is necessary to expand knowledge of the management of cancer in older adults. However, the pandemic presents a significant barrier and efforts should be made to ensure equitable access to clinical trials and prospective data collection to elucidate the outcomes of COVID-19 in this population. © 2020 Elsevier Inc.
|
|
| 5. |
- Battisti, N. M. L., et al.
(författare)
-
Observational cohort study in older women with early breast cancer: Use of radiation therapy and impact on health-related quality of life and mortality
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Radiotherapy and Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-8140. ; 161, s. 166-176
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Radiotherapy reduces in-breast recurrence risk in early breast cancer (EBC) in older women. This benefit may be small and should be balanced against treatment effect and holistic patient assessment. This study described treatment patterns according to fitness and impact on health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL). Methods: A multicentre, observational study of EBC patients aged ≥ 70 years, undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy, was undertaken. Associations between radiotherapy use, surgery, clinico-pathological parameters, fitness based on geriatric parameters and treatment centre were determined. HRQoL was measured using the European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) questionnaires. Results: In 2013–2018 2811 women in 56 UK study centres underwent surgery with a median follow-up of 52 months. On multivariable analysis, age and tumour risk predicted radiotherapy use. Among healthier patients (based on geriatric assessments) with high-risk tumours, 534/613 (87.1%) having BCS and 185/341 (54.2%) having mastectomy received radiotherapy. In less fit individuals with low-risk tumours undergoing BCS, 149/207 (72.0%) received radiotherapy. Radiotherapy effects on HRQoL domains, including breast symptoms and fatigue were seen, resolving by 18 months. Conclusion: Radiotherapy use in EBC patients ≥ 70 years is affected by age and recurrence risk, whereas geriatric parameters have limited impact regardless of type of surgery. There was geographical variation in treatment, with some fit older women with high-risk tumours not receiving radiotherapy, and some older, low-risk, EBC patients receiving radiotherapy after BCS despite evidence of limited benefit. The impact on HRQoL is transient. © 2021 Elsevier B.V.
|
|
| 6. |
- Borras, J. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Radiotherapy and Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-8140. ; 169, s. 114-123
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose: Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews. Material and methods: A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models. Results: Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy. Conclusion: A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
|
|
| 7. |
- Borras, Josep M, et al.
(författare)
-
Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1532-2157. ; 48:5, s. 967-977
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews.A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models.Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy.A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.
|
|
| 8. |
- Holmes, G. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Cost-Effectiveness Modeling of Surgery Plus Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy Versus Primary Endocrine Therapy Alone in UK Women Aged 70 and Over With Early Breast Cancer
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Value in Health. - : Elsevier BV. - 1098-3015. ; 24:6, s. 770-779
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: Approximately 20% of UK women aged 70+ with early breast cancer receive primary endocrine therapy (PET) instead of surgery. PET reduces surgical morbidity but with some survival decrement. To complement and utilize a treatment dependent prognostic model, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of surgery plus adjuvant therapies versus PET for women with varying health and fitness, identifying subgroups for which each treatment is cost-effective. Methods: Survival outcomes from a statistical model, and published data on recurrence, were combined with data from a large, multicenter, prospective cohort study of over 3400 UK women aged 70+ with early breast cancer and median 52-month follow-up, to populate a probabilistic economic model. This model evaluated the cost-effectiveness of surgery plus adjuvant therapies relative to PET for 24 illustrative subgroups: Age {70, 80, 90} × Nodal status {FALSE (F), TRUE (T)} × Comorbidity score {0, 1, 2, 3+}. Results: For a 70-year-old with no lymph node involvement and no comorbidities (70, F, 0), surgery plus adjuvant therapies was cheaper and more effective than PET. For other subgroups, surgery plus adjuvant therapies was more effective but more expensive. Surgery plus adjuvant therapies was not cost-effective for 4 of the 24 subgroups: (90, F, 2), (90, F, 3), (90, T, 2), (90, T, 3). Conclusion: From a UK perspective, surgery plus adjuvant therapies is clinically effective and cost-effective for most women aged 70+ with early breast cancer. Cost-effectiveness reduces with age and comorbidities, and for women over 90 with multiple comorbidities, there is little cost benefit and a negative impact on quality of life. © 2021 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research
|
|
| 9. |
- Janeva, Slavica, et al.
(författare)
-
Adjuvant chemotherapy and survival in women aged 70 years and older with triple-negative breast cancer: a Swedish population-based propensity score-matched analysis
- 2020
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Healthy Longevity. - 2666-7568. ; 1:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive form of breast cancer associated with poor survival, in which adjuvant systemic treatments are limited to chemotherapy. Due to competing mortality risks and comorbidities, older patients with TNBC are often undertreated with adjuvant chemotherapy, and clinical trials on this problem are scarce, despite a growing patient population. This study aimed to assess outcomes for patients aged 70 years and older with TNBC with or without chemotherapy in a national population-based registry, to provide information that can assist in treatment decisions for these patients. Methods: In this population-based registry study, data on all patients aged 70 years and older diagnosed with primary early TNBC (larger than 5 mm in diameter and without distant metastasis) and surgically treated between Jan 1, 2009, and Dec 31, 2016, were retrieved from the Swedish National Breast Cancer Register, the Swedish Patient Register, and the Swedish Cause of Death Register. Patients with incomplete data (on oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status, surgical procedure in the breast, or information about chemotherapy) were excluded. A propensity score-matched (PSM) model was used to examine the outcomes of adjuvant chemotherapy on 5-year breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and 5-year overall survival (OS), adjusted for age, tumour size, tumour grade, nodal status, and comorbidities. Findings: Of 1130 women eligible for analysis, 368 (32·6%) received adjuvant chemotherapy, 45 (4·0%) received neoadjuvant treatment, and 717 (63·5%) did not receive chemotherapy. 5-year BCSS was significantly improved in patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (85% [95% CI 81–89]) compared with patients who did not receive chemotherapy (68% [64–72]; p<0·0001). A similar benefit was observed in 5-year OS (79% [95% CI 75–84] vs 49% [45–53]; p<0·0001). In our PSM analysis, 5-year BCSS in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy was 83% (95% CI 78–89), versus 73% (67–80; p=0·014) in patients not treated with chemotherapy. 5-year OS in patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy was 75% (95% CI 69–82), versus 63% (57–71; p=0·029) in patients who did not receive chemotherapy. Interpretation: In this PSM registry analysis of surgically treated female patients aged 70 years and older with TNBC without distant metastasis, we identified a significant benefit both in 5-year BCSS and 5-year OS with adjuvant chemotherapy versus no chemotherapy, which persisted when adjusting for age and comorbidities. These results underline the importance of considering adjuvant chemotherapy in older patients. Funding: Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, Assar Gabrielsson Foundation.
|
|
| 10. |
- Janeva, Slavica, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical evaluation of molecular surrogate subtypes in patients with ipsilateral multifocal primary breast cancer
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Breast Cancer Research. - 1465-5411. ; 25:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundWhen ipsilateral multifocal primary breast cancer (IMBC) is detected, standard routine is to evaluate the largest tumor with immunohistochemistry (IHC). As all foci are not routinely characterized, many patients may not receive optimal adjuvant treatment. Here, we assess the clinical relevance of examining at least two foci present in patients with IMBC.MethodsPatients diagnosed and treated for IMBC at Sahlgrenska University Hospital (Gothenburg, Sweden) between 2012 and 2017 were screened. In total, 180 patients with >= 2 invasive foci (183 specimens) were assessed with IHC and included in this study. Expression of the estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) receptors, Ki67, HER2, and tumor grade were used to determine the molecular surrogate subtypes and discordance among the foci was recorded. An additional multidisciplinary team board was then held to re-assess whether treatment recommendations changed due to discordances in molecular surrogate subtype between the different foci.ResultsDiscordance in ER, PR, HER2, and Ki67 was found in 2.7%, 19.1%, 7.7%, and 16.9% of invasive foci, respectively. Discordance in the molecular surrogate subtypes was found in 48 of 180 (26.7%) patients, which resulted in therapy changes for 11 patients (6.1%). These patients received additional endocrine therapy (n = 2), chemotherapy (n = 3), and combined chemotherapy and trastuzumab (n = 6).ConclusionTaken together, when assessing at least two tumor foci with IHC, regardless of shared morphology or tumor grade between the different foci, 6.1% of patients with IMBC were recommended additional adjuvant treatment. A pathologic assessment using IHC of all foci is therefore recommended to assist in individualized treatment decision making.
|
|
