Real-world treatment patterns and survival in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer in Canada

Background

Almost half of all patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) present with stage iv disease. The objective of the present study was to characterize treatment patterns and survival outcomes in patients with advanced nsclc.

Methods

We conducted a longitudinal population-level study in patients diagnosed with stage iv nsclc in Ontario between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015, with follow-up to 31 March 2017 for overall survival and treatment sequence. Patients were stratified as nonsquamous or squamous histology. A sub-analysis was conducted for patients with nonsquamous histology who received targeted therapies, on the assumption that their tumours were EGFR mutation-positive (EGFRm+). Treatment patterns were determined, and survival was calculated from date of diagnosis to death or censoring.

Results

Of 24,729 nsclc cases identified, stage iv disease was diagnosed in 49.2%, histology was nonsquamous in 10,103, and EGFRm+ was assumed in 508. Median patient age ranged from 69 to 72 years for the three cohorts. For patients with nonsquamous histology, palliative radiotherapy was the most frequently used first-line treatment (44.4%), followed by no treatment (26.7%) and chemotherapy (14.9%). In the EGFRm+ cohort, 75.6% received gefitinib as first- or second-line therapy, and almost half (47.4%) the 473 patients with squamous histology treated with first-line chemotherapy received cisplatin or carboplatin with gemcitabine. Median overall survival in the nonsquamous and squamous cohorts was 4.9 and 4.6 months respectively; it was 17.6 months for patients who were EGFRm+.

Conclusions

Survival of patients with stage iv nsclc remains poor, with the exception of patients who are EGFRm+. Only 14.9% of patients received first-line chemotherapy; the mainstay of treatment was palliative radiotherapy.

Retrospective cohort study of unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in Canada

Background

The management of unresectable stage iii non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) is complex and best determined through multidisciplinary consultation. A longitudinal, population-level study was carried out to describe the management approach and outcomes of treatment in the real-world setting in Ontario.

Methods

Individuals diagnosed with nsclc between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry. Unresectable disease was defined as no surgery reported within 3 months of diagnosis. Initial treatments included radiotherapy (rt, curative or palliative), chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and chemoradiation [crt, concurrent (ccrt) or sequential (scrt)]. Survival was calculated from diagnosis with stage iii disease to death or last follow-up.

Results

Of the 24,729 individuals diagnosed with nsclc, 5243 (21.2%) had stage iii disease, with most of the latter group (4542, 86.6%) having unresectable disease. Median age was 70 years, and 54.2% were men. The frequency of first-line treatment was ccrt, 22.1%; palliative rt, 21.0%; curative rt, 19.6%; no treatment, 19.6%; chemotherapy alone, 11.6%; scrt, 5.4%; and targeted therapy, 0.7%. Median overall survival (mos) was 14.2 months [95% confidence interval (ci): 13.6 months to 14.7 months], with the longest survival observed in patients who received targeted therapy (mos: 34.7 months; 95% ci: 21.4 months to 51.2 months), and the poorest, in those receiving no cancer treatment (mos: 5.9 months; 95% ci: 5.0 months to 6.4 months). The mos in patients receiving ccrt was 23.6 months (95% ci: 21.4 months to 25.6 months).

Conclusions

Guideline-recommended ccrt is undertaken in only a small proportion of patients with unresectable nsclc in Ontario. The reasons for low uptake of that recommendation are only partly understood.

The generation of two specific cancer costing algorithms using Ontario administrative databases

Cancer treatment and management have become increasingly economically burdensome. Consequently, to help with planning health service delivery, it is vital to understand the associated costs. Administrative databases can be used to help understand and generate real-world system-level costs. Using databases to generate costs can take one of two approaches: top-down or bottom-up. Top-down approaches disaggregate the total health care spending from a global health care budget by sector and provider. A bottom-up approach begins with individual-level health care use and its costs, which are then aggregated.

Cost-of-illness study for non-small-cell lung cancer using real-world data

Background

With recent advances in the treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) and current fiscal constraints within publicly funded health care systems, understanding the real-world economic effect of lung cancer management has become important. The objective of the present study was to determine the costs and resources used in the management of nsclc cohorts in Ontario.

Methods

Patients diagnosed between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2015 were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to provincial administrative databases, capturing resources such as hospitalizations, cancer clinic visits, physician services, and systemic therapies or radiotherapy. A cost-of-illness analysis using a bottom-up approach and the GETCOST macro available at ices determined the overall total and mean costs in 2017 Canadian dollars. Resource utilization results were analyzed according to the total number of encounters per resource, the number of patients using each resource, and the number of encounters per patient. A separate cost-and-resource analysis was conducted for radiotherapy.

Results

The 24,729 nsclc patients identified included 4542 with stage iii unresectable disease and 10,103 with stage iv nonsquamous disease. The overall total cost for all nsclc patients was $1.9 billion, with inpatient hospitalizations ($635.2 million), cancer clinic visits ($323.7 million), and physician services ($301.4 million) being the top cost contributors. The mean cost per patient was $76,816. The total cost of radiotherapy was $38.5 million.

Conclusions

Real-world costs for the management of nsclc during the 5-year period examined were substantial, despite the fact that median survival was poor and treatment information was limited.

The OncoSim model: development and use for better decision-making in Canadian cancer control

The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer was created in 2007 by the federal government to accelerate cancer control across Canada. Its OncoSim microsimulation model platform, which consists of a suite of specific cancer models, was conceived as a tool to augment conventional resources for population-level policy- and decision-making. The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer manages the OncoSim program, with funding from Health Canada and model development by Statistics Canada. Microsimulation modelling allows for the detailed capture of population heterogeneity and health and demographic history over time. Extensive data from multiple Canadian sources were used as inputs or to validate the model. OncoSim has been validated through expert consultation; assessments of face validity, internal validity, and external validity; and model fit against observed data. The platform comprises three in-depth cancer models (lung, colorectal, cervical), with another in-depth model (breast) and a generalized model (25 cancers) being in development. Unique among models of its class, OncoSim is available online for public sector use free of charge. Users can customize input values and output display, and extensive user support is provided. OncoSim has been used to support decision-making at the national and jurisdictional levels. Although simulation studies are generally not included in hierarchies of evidence, they are integral to informing cancer control policy when clinical studies are not feasible. OncoSim can evaluate complex intervention scenarios for multiple cancers. Canadian decision-makers thus have a powerful tool to assess the costs, benefits, cost-effectiveness, and budgetary effects of cancer control interventions when faced with difficult choices for improvements in population health and resource allocation.

Lessons learned implementing a province-wide smoking cessation initiative in Ontario's cancer centres

PURPOSE

A large body of evidence clearly shows that cancer patients experience significant health benefits with smoking cessation. Cancer Care Ontario, the provincial agency responsible for the quality of cancer services in Ontario, has undertaken a province-wide smoking cessation initiative. The strategies used, the results achieved, and the lessons learned are the subject of the present article.

METHODS

Evidence related to the health benefits of smoking cessation in cancer patients was reviewed. A steering committee developed a vision statement for the initiative, created a framework for implementation, and made recommendations for the key elements of the initiative and for smoking cessation best practices.

RESULTS

New ambulatory cancer patients are being screened for their smoking status in each of Ontario's 14 regional cancer centres. Current or recent smokers are advised of the benefits of cessation and are directed to smoking cessation resources as appropriate. Performance metrics are captured and used to drive improvement through quarterly performance reviews and provincial rankings of the regional cancer centres.

CONCLUSIONS

Regional smoking cessation champions, commitment from Cancer Care Ontario senior leadership, a provincial secretariat, and guidance from smoking cessation experts have been important enablers of early success. Data capture has been difficult because of the variety of information systems in use and non-standardized administrative and clinical processes. Numerous challenges remain, including increasing physician engagement; obtaining funding for key program elements, including in-house resources to support smoking cessation; and overcoming financial barriers to access nicotine replacement therapy. Future efforts will focus on standardizing processes to the extent possible, while tailoring the approaches to the populations served and the resources available within the individual regional cancer programs.

Implementing low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer in Canada: implications of alternative at-risk populations, screening frequency, and duration

BACKGROUND

Low-dose computed tomography (ldct) screening has been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer; however, the optimal screening duration and "at risk" population are not known.

METHODS

The Cancer Risk Management Model developed by Statistics Canada for the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer includes a lung screening module based on data from the U.S. National Lung Screening Trial (nlst). The base-case scenario reproduces nlst outcomes with high fidelity. The impact in Canada of annual screening on the number of incident cases and life-years gained, with a wider range of age and smoking history eligibility criteria and varied participation rates, was modelled to show the magnitude of clinical benefit nationally and by province. Life-years gained, costs (discounted and undiscounted), and resource requirements were also estimated.

RESULTS

In 2014, 1.4 million Canadians were eligible for screening according to nlst criteria. Over 10 years, screening would detect 12,500 more lung cancers than the expected 268,300 and would gain 9200 life-years. The computed tomography imaging requirement of 24,000-30,000 at program initiation would rise to between 87,000 and 113,000 by the 5th year of an annual nlst-like screening program. Costs would increase from approximately $75 million to $128 million at 10 years, and the cumulative cost nationally over 10 years would approach $1 billion, partially offset by a reduction in the costs of managing advanced lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Modelling various ways in which ldct might be implemented provides decision-makers with estimates of the effect on clinical benefit and on resource needs that clinical trial results are unable to provide.

A population-based study of the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer: a brief report

OBJECTIVE

Administrative data are used to describe the pancreatic cancer (pcc) population. The analysis examines demographic details, incidence, site, survival, and factors influencing mortality in a cohort of individuals diagnosed with pcc.

METHODS

Incident cases of pcc diagnosed in Ontario between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2011 were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry. They were linked by encrypted health card number to several administrative databases to obtain demographic and mortality information. Descriptive, bivariate, and survival analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

During the period of interest, 9221 new cases of pcc (4548 in men, 4673 in women) were diagnosed, for an age-adjusted standardized annual incidence in the range of 8.6-9.5 per 100,000 population. Mean age at diagnosis was 70.3 ± 12.5 years (standard deviation). Five-year survival was 7.2% (12.8% for those <60 years of age and 3.6% for those >80 years of age). Survival varied by sex, older age, rural residence, lower income, site of involvement in the pancreas, and presence of comorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality rate in pcc is exceptionally high. With an increasing incidence and a mortality positively associated with age, additional support will be needed for this highly fatal disease as demographics in Ontario continue to trend toward a higher proportion of older individuals.

Health system costs for stage-specific breast cancer: a population-based approach

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present analysis was to determine the publicly funded health care costs associated with the care of breast cancer (bca) patients by disease stage.

METHODS

Incident cases of female invasive bca (2005-2009) were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry and linked to administrative datasets from the publicly funded system. The type and use of health care services were stratified by disease stage over the first 2 years after diagnosis. Mean costs and costs by type of clinical resource used in the care of bca patients were compared with costs for a matched control group. The attributable cost for the 2-year time horizon was determined in 2008 Canadian dollars.

RESULTS

This cohort study involved 39,655 patients with bca and 190,520 control subjects. The average age in those groups was 61.1 and 60.9 years respectively. Most bca patients were classified as either stage i (34.4%) or stage ii (31.8%). Of the bca cohort, 8% died within the first 2 years after diagnosis. The overall mean cost per bca case from a public payer perspective in the first 2 years after diagnosis was $41,686. Over the 2-year time horizon, the mean cost increased by stage: i, $29,938; ii, $46,893; iii, $65,369; and iv, $66,627. The attributable cost of bca was $31,732. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs of care increased by stage of bca. Cost drivers were cancer clinic visits, physician billings, and hospitalizations. These data will assist planning and decision-making for the use of limited health care resources.

Population-based utilization of radiation therapy by a Canadian breast cancer cohort

We examined trends in radiation therapy (rt) utilization by a population-based breast cancer cohort in Ontario. The provincial cancer registry provided a breast cancer cohort based on diagnosis dates from April 1, 2005, to March 31, 2010. Staging information was also available. The cohort was then linked, by encrypted health card number, to linkable administrative datasets, including rt utilization. The average age in the identified female breast cancer cohort (n = 39,656) was 61.6 ± 14.0 years. Almost two thirds of the patients (n = 25,225) received rt, and staging information was available for 22,988 patients (9541 stage i, 8516 stage ii, 4050 stage iii, and 881 stage iv). The average number of rt courses received by the patients was 1.4 ± 0.7 for stage i, 1.8 ± 1.1 for stage ii, 2.5 ± 1.3 for stage iii, and 2.8 ± 2.4 for stage iv. The ratio of conventional rt to intensity-modulated rt was 70.9%:16.6% for stage i, 71.6%:11.3% for stage ii, 74.6%:4.6% for stage iii, and 89.6%:2.2% for stage iv. From 2005 to 2010, almost two thirds of a Canadian female breast cancer cohort received rt, and the average number of courses increased with disease severity. A similar trend was observed with the type of rt (use of conventional rt increased with disease severity). The next step is to apply unit costs to the number of fractions and to obtain rt planning and radiation therapist times.

Implementing a regional oncology information system: approach and lessons learned

RATIONALE

Paper-based medical record systems are known to have major problems of inaccuracy, incomplete data, poor accessibility, and challenges to patient confidentiality. They are also an inefficient mechanism of record-sharing for interdisciplinary patient assessment and management, and represent a major problem for keeping current and monitoring quality control to facilitate improvement. To address those concerns, national, regional, and local health care authorities have increased the pressure on oncology practices to upgrade from paper-based systems to electronic health records.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we describe and discuss the challenges to implementing a region-wide oncology information system across four independent health care organizations, and we describe the lessons learned from the initial phases that are now being applied in subsequent activities of this complex project.

RESULTS

The need for change must be shared across centres to increase buy-in, adoption, and implementation. It is essential to establish physician leadership, commitment, and engagement in the process. Work processes had to be revised to optimize use of the new system. Culture change must be included in the change management strategy. Furthermore, training and resource requirements must be thoroughly planned, implemented, monitored, and modified as required for effective adoption of new work processes and technology. Interfaces must be established with multiple existing electronic systems across the region to ensure appropriate patient flow. Periodic assessment of the existing project structure is necessary, and adjustments are often required to ensure that the project meets its objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of region-wide oncology information systems across different health practice locations has many challenges. Leadership is essential. A strong, collaborative information-sharing strategy across the region and with the supplier is essential to identify, discuss, and resolve implementation problems. A structure that supports project management and accountability contributes to success.

Population-based home care services in breast cancer: utilization and costs

OBJECTIVE

To determine utilization and costs of home care services (hcs) for individuals with a diagnosis of breast cancer (bc).

METHODS

Incident cases of invasive bc in women were extracted from the Ontario Cancer Registry (2005-2009) and linked with other Ontario health care administrative databases. Control patients were selected from the population of women never diagnosed with any type of cancer. The types and proportions of hcs used were determined and stratified by disease stage. Attributable home care utilization and costs for bc patients were determined. Factors associated with hcs costs were assessed using regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 39,656 bc and 198,280 control patients identified (median age: 61.6 years for both), 75.4% of bc patients used hcs (62.1% stage i; 85.7% stage ii; 94.6% stage iii; 79.1% stage iv) compared with 14.6% of control patients. The number of hcs used per patient-year were significantly higher for the bc patients than for the control patients (14.97 vs. 6.13, p < 0.01), resulting in higher costs per patient-year ($1,210 vs. $325; $885 attributable cost to bc, p < 0.01). The number of hcs utilized and the associated costs increased as the bc stage increased. In contrast, hcs costs decreased as income increased and as previous health care exposure decreased.

INTERPRETATION

Patients with bc used twice as many hcs, resulting in costs that were almost 4 times those observed in a matched control group. Less than an additional $1000 per bc patient per year were spent on hcs utilization in the study population.

Cancer diagnostic assessment programs: standards for the organization of care in Ontario

Background

Improving access to better, more efficient, and rapid cancer diagnosis is a necessary component of a high-quality cancer system. How diagnostic services ought to be organized, structured, and evaluated is less understood and studied. Our objective was to address this gap.

Methods

As a quality initiative of Cancer Care Ontario’s Program in Evidence-Based Care, the Diagnostic Assessment Standards Panel, with representation from clinical oncology experts, institutional and clinical administrative leaders, health service researchers, and methodologists, conducted a systematic review and a targeted environmental scan of the unpublished literature. Standards were developed based on expert consensus opinion informed by the identified evidence. Through external review, clinicians and administrators across Ontario were given the opportunity to provide feedback.

Results

The body of evidence consists of thirty-five published studies and fifteen unpublished guidance documents. The evidence and consensus opinion consistently favoured an organized, centralized system with multidisciplinary team membership as the optimal approach for the delivery of diagnostic cancer assessment services. Independent external stakeholders agreed (with higher mean values, maximum 5, indicating stronger agreement) that dap standards are needed (mean: 4.6), that standards should be formally approved (mean: 4.3), and importantly, that standards reflect an effective approach that will lead to quality improvements in the cancer system (mean: 4.5) and in patient care (mean: 4.3).

Interpretation

Based on the best available evidence, standards for the organization of daps are offered. There is clear need to integrate formal and comprehensive evaluation strategies with the implementation of the standards to advance this field.

Economic guidelines for oncology products: Adaptation of the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) technology assessment guidance document

e17572

Background: Economic evaluations (EE) are routinely used by decision-makers in Canada. CADTH's “Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada” Third edition, 2006, provide guidance on the conduct of EEs for all therapeutic products. The consistency and quality of oncology EEs are variable and therapeutics in the cancer care environment presented unique challenges in decision making. Several chapters of the CADTH document adequately defined methods for the conduct of an oncology EE. However, some chapters required more specific guidance to improve the quality of oncology EEs. The goal was to provide direction on methods for the conduct of high quality EEs in oncology. Methods: The Working Group on Economic Analysis, NCIC CTG and CADTH jointly initiated this project and formed a working group (WG) of oncologists, health economists, decision makers and economic analysts. The WG identified CADTH chapters where oncology-specific guidance would be required. In-person and teleconference meetings provided content and structure for the document. Formal reviews by external academic experts, cancer agencies, patient groups and the pharmaceutical industry were conducted. Feedback was reviewed by the WG and incorporated as appropriate. Results: Chapters requiring guidance included: target population, comparators, perspective, effectiveness, modeling, type of evaluation, valuing health, time horizon, costs and resources, sensitivity analysis and equity. Guidance included clarity around CADTH methodology and recommendations for oncology products. For example for the effectiveness chapter, there was guidance around the use of intermediate outcomes (progression free survival vs. overall survival) and type of evidence (phase II vs. phase III). Overall recommendations for chapters will be presented. Conclusions: The oncology adapted economic guidelines provide specific guidance on the conduct of EEs for oncology products and will be published as an addendum to CADTH's third edition document. Their use should lead to more consistent application of EE methodologies for anti-cancer drugs and higher quality information for decision-makers at a national and perhaps international level.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A prospective study of peri-diagnostic and surgical wait times for patients with presumptive colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer

The objective of this study was to prospectively measure peri-diagnostic and surgical time intervals for patients with suspected colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer. Prospective eligible patients were referred to a regional hospital in Ottawa, Canada between February 2004 and February 2005 for diagnostic assessment of presumptive colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer. Chart abstractions were used to measure nine time intervals; the primary interval was the date of referral for diagnostic assessment to the date the patient was informed of the diagnosis. Health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) was assessed 5 days following the patient being informed of their diagnosis. The median (IQR) time for the primary interval was 71 (30-110), 37 (29-49), and 81 (56-100) days for colorectal, lung, and prostate patients, respectively (Kruskal-Wallis P=0.0001). This interval was significantly less for colorectal patients diagnosed with cancer than for those without cancer (median difference=59.0 days; Wilcoxon P=0.003). No differences in HRQL existed for patients with cancer and those without. Colorectal and prostate patients wait longer between referral for suspected cancer and being informed of their diagnosis than current recommendations. The shorter diagnostic intervals for colorectal patients with cancer suggest clinicians have an effective process for triaging patients referred for diagnostic assessment.

Determining knowledge transfer gaps in the life cycle of evidence for chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through cumulative meta-analysis

6555

Background: The uptake of research findings into practice is often delayed (Antman et al. JAMA 1992). We investigated the relative role of evidence in determining clinical recommendations and practice for NSCLC. Novel chemotherapy agents (NCA) approved for use in Canada between 1992 and 2002 were eligible. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of evidence for vinorelbine (V), paclitaxel (P) and gemcitabine (G) in combination with a platinum agent for the treatment of advanced NSCLC. Primary endpoint of efficacy was median survival. For each included randomized controlled trial (RCT), the publications dates of abstracts and journal articles were considered. At each time point when new data was available, a new meta-analysis using the Follman methodology was performed. Bibliometric analyses were performed to identify key milestones for each drug (e.g. Health Canada Notice of Compliance, provincial drug funding, and clinical recommendations). Results: 3,399 references were obtained for NCA in advanced NSCLC. Eligibility review identified 20 references for V representing 6 RCTs (1994–2002), 16 for P representing 4 RCTs (1997–2000), and 10 for G representing 7 RCTs (1998–2003). All drugs trended towards median survival benefit throughout the time of analysis. However, over time the estimated effect for V became weaker, remained stable for P and became stronger for G. The 1997 ASCO guideline recommended V and P as standard therapy; G was only cited as a promising investigational agent. By 2003, the ASCO guideline recommended G as a standard. Only V received Ontario provincial funding in 1997, while G and P received funding in 2002 and 2003 respectively. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the relatively small pool of RCT evidence for NCAs. These three commonly used NCAs demonstrate different patterns of evolution of evidence. For advanced NSCLC, the time gap between evidence and clinical recommendations is short. Caution should be used for generating recommendations using early results, when the evidence base is not stable, which may either over or underestimate true effectiveness.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A 10-year history of lung cancer practice guideline development: Process, productivity and impact

17044

Background: CCO's Program in Evidence-based Care at McMaster University, has developed and disseminated clinical guidance documents through provincial DSGs for 10 years. The 37 member Lung DSG includes medical oncologists (17), radiation oncologists (11), thoracic surgeons (4), nurses (2), and a research coordinator. Pathologists (3), community/patient representatives (2), a medical resident and medical sociologist have previously been members. Methods: The LDSG has used the practice guideline (PG) development cycle described by Browman GP et al (JCO 1998; 16(3):1226–31). Results: 31 reports have been published in peer-reviewed journals, including 25 guidelines; all PGs are posted on the CCO website. Topics were initially selected on the basis of known practice variability (chemotherapy for Stage IV NSCLC) or clinical controversy (combined modality therapy for Stage III NSCLC); PGs for single chemotherapy drugs (6) or chemotherapy usage in specific situations (7) have dominated DSG activity; 5 PGs on radiotherapy alone and 3 on RT as part of CMT have been completed; recent PGs have been written for rare tumours (mesothelioma, thymoma) and diagnostic imaging (PET). Initially, PGs were based solely on published RCT evidence. Evidence from publicly accessible abstracts/meeting presentations, and Phase II trials (in the absence of higher quality evidence) is now considered. For rare tumours (thymoma), the DSG has used a Delphi consensus methodology. Knowledge transfer occurs through the DSG meeting process (twice yearly face-to-face; 2–4 teleconferences), practitioner feedback (PF), publications, presentations and web posting. PF using a standardized feedback questionnaire is generally high (59.9%) but varies by PG and discipline; PF is incorporated into final guideline documents. Guideline recommendations for the use of vinorelbine, gemcitabine, taxanes and erlotinib in NSCLC have been successful in securing government funding.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A phase III study of Æ-941 with induction chemotherapy (IC) and concomitant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for stage III non- small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (NCI T99–0046, RTOG 02–70, MDA 99–303)

7527

Background: Æ-941 is a shark cartilage extract with antiangiogenic properties. We conducted a placebo-controlled trial testing Æ-941, with IC and CRT, in unresectable stage III NSCLC. Methods: Eligibility criteria included performance status (PS) < 2, weight loss < 10%. Subjects received one of two treatment regimens depending on site of enrollment: carboplatin (C) (AUC 6) and paclitaxel (P) (200 mg/m2) × 2 cycles followed by CRT (60 Gy/30 fractions) with weekly C (AUC 2) and P (45 mg/m2) × 6 doses or cisplatin (CDDP) (75 mg/m2, d1) and vinorelbine (V) (30 mg/m2, d1 and 8) × 2 cycles followed by CRT (60 Gy/30 fractions) with CDDP (75 mg/m2, day 1) and V (15 mg/m2, d1 and 8) × 2 cycles. Subjects were randomized to receive Æ-941 (Arm A) or placebo (Arm B), 120 mL orally twice daily, at the start of IC and continuing after CRT as maintenance therapy. Randomization was stratified for stage, gender, and type of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), with a planned sample size of 756 subjects providing 80% power to detect a 25% difference in OS, assuming a control arm median survival time (MST) of 13 months, type I error 0.05. Results: Between 6/00 and 2/06, 384 subjects were enrolled onto the trial and randomized. In 2/06 the trial was closed to new patient entry due to insufficient accrual. This final analysis is based on 379 randomized and eligible subjects (188 arm A, 191 arm B). Subject characteristics: 60% male, median age 63 years (range 37–84), 56% stage IIIB, 58% C-based chemotherapy, median follow-up 3.7 years. There was no significant difference in OS between arms A and B, with MSTs of 14.4 (95% CI 12.6–17.9) and 15.6 (95% CI 13.8–18.1) months, respectively (log-rank p=0.73). OS by pre-specified stratification factors: stage IIIB vs IIIA (MST 13.9 vs. 17.4 months, p=0.25), C vs. CDDP chemotherapy (MST 14.4 vs. 16.7 months, p=0.13), and male vs. female (MST 15.7 vs. 15.1 months, p=0.74). The study drug was well tolerated. Fewer subjects in arm A experienced grade 3 or higher adverse events (66% vs. 77%, p=0.018). Conclusions: The addition of Æ−941 to IC and CRT does not improve OS in patients with unresectable stage III NSCLC.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Second-line or subsequent systemic therapy for recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and practice guideline

PURPOSE

This clinical practice guideline, based on a systematic review, evaluates second-line or subsequent therapy for patients with recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

Relevant randomized trials and meta-analyses were identified through a systematic search of the literature. External feedback was obtained from practitioners in Ontario, and the guideline was approved by the provincial Lung Cancer Disease Site Group.

RESULTS

Twenty-four randomized trials met the eligibility criteria. Two phase III trials demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival and quality of life (QOL) for single-agent docetaxel. A pooled analysis comparing docetaxel administered weekly versus three-weekly found similar survival between the schedules and a non-significant reduction in febrile neutropenia for the weekly regimen. One phase III trial found that single-agent pemetrexed provided similar survival and QOL, compared to docetaxel. Another phase III trial demonstrated that oral topotecan was non-inferior to docetaxel for one-year survival rate, although QOL significantly favored docetaxel over topotecan. Docetaxel-based and other combination chemotherapy regimens have not been shown to be superior to single-agent docetaxel. One phase III trial revealed a statistically significant survival and QOL benefit for erlotinib over placebo for patients who were not eligible for further chemotherapy. Modest tumor response rates and symptom control have been demonstrated for gefitinib; however, a statistically significant survival benefit has not been established for gefitinib over placebo.

CONCLUSION

Second-line or subsequent therapy with single-agent docetaxel, pemetrexed, or erlotinib offers patients a significant survival and QOL advantage.

Diagnostic assessment of suspected cancer: Prospective cohort study of diagnostic delay intervals across three disease sites

6029

Background: Diagnostic assessment of patients with suspected cancer can involve multiple points of delay. Methods: We conducted a cohort study of prospective eligible patients referred to a regional hospital in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada over a 12 month period (2004 to 2005) for diagnostic assessment of suspected colorectal (C), lung (L) or prostate (P) cancer. The study addressed three different disease sites, each with a different pre-existing model of care delivery, so that variability could be described. Measurement of diagnostic delay intervals included days to diagnosis (from referral to diagnosis communicated to the patient) and, for patients with cancer, to surgery and to oncology consultation. Differences between disease sites for diagnostic delay intervals, quality of life, and patient satisfaction were analyzed. Results: The proportion of patients who were diagnosed with cancer was: 6.8% (9/132) for C; 80.2% (81/101) for L; and 35% (41/116) for P. The mean [SD] days to diagnosis was significantly less for L (45 [32]) than for either C (81 [68]) for P (82 [43]), (p=.0001). It was also significantly less for patents diagnosed with cancer (57.8)[41.4]) than for those without cancer (79.3)[58.9]) (difference -21.5; 95% CI -33 to -9; p=.0003); a finding which held when C was analyzed separately (33.8 [48.9] vs 84.8 [67.7]; p=.04). L patients had worse physical and mental functioning as measured by the SF36 Physical and Mental Component Scores. Patient satisfaction did not differ across disease site or for patients with and without cancer. Conclusions: Most studies of diagnostic delay intervals use administrative data. This study is unique in prospectively measuring intervals that cannot be captured from administrative data and thus provides important benchmark measures. L patients were most likely to have cancer. Although C patients were unlikely to have cancer, the diagnostic interval was substantially shorter in those with cancer than in those without, suggesting that clinicians have an effective process for triaging patients referred for diagnostic assessment.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Who are the users of publicly reported cancer treatment wait times (WT)?

6043

Background: Greater participation by patients in health care decision-making and public concerns about WT led Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) to post radiation WT by cancer type and treatment centre on its website http://www.cancercare.on.ca anticipating patients and referring physicians (MDs) would use WT information to access facilities with shorter waits. The availability of more radiation treatment facilities in Southern Ontario provides patients and MDs with more options for location of treatment. Methods: The usefulness of this approach was evaluated by an on-line survey, patient focus groups, physician interviews and usability lab testing. Results: 1,043 on-line surveys were completed by patients/family members (35%), media (24%) and others, including health professionals (HP) and administrators (AD). HP found the information useful and clear but patients were less satisfied, wanting information on the effect of WT on their illness. 45 individuals (40 treated patients, 5 family) participated in 8 geographically dispersed focus groups. Facilitator-led conversations were recorded, transcribed verbatim and content grouped in themes by 4 researchers. Most patients were unaware of the CCO WT information. Patients indicated that MDs should have and use WT information and determine speed of access to care based on urgency of condition. Patients would accept MD advice to travel to a more distant treatment facility but patients questioned why WT existed and why health care system not managed more efficiently. 15 MD phone interviews indicated MDs were distrustful of WT data, did not use the web data for referral, preferring usual practice patterns. MDs were reluctant to share WT information with patients for fear of creating unnecessary anxiety. AD found data useful as a stimulus for performance improvement. Usability lab testing uncovered numerous user preferences for redesign of the site, including its content. Conclusions: Current Ontario patients and MDs are not ‘consumers’ of WT information but AD see value in this information for system improvement. As society increasingly uses the internet as an information resource, future patients and MDs will likely utilize WT information in the decision-making for location of care. Supported by Cancer Care Ontario and grant 03110 from the Change Foundation.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

First do no harm: extending the debate on the provision of preventive tamoxifen

The Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT-P-1) demonstrated that tamoxifen could reduce the risk of invasive breast cancer in high-risk women by 49%, but that it could also increase the risk of endometrial cancer, vascular events and cataracts. This paper provides an estimate of the net health impacts of tamoxifen administration on high-risk Canadian women with no prior history of breast cancer. The results of the BCPT-P-1 were incorporated into the breast cancer and other modules of Statistics Canada's microsimulation POpulation HEalth Model (POHEM). While the main intervention scenario conformed as closely as possible to the eligibility criteria for tamoxifen in the BCPT-P-1 protocol, 3 additional scenarios were simulated. Predicted absolute risks of breast cancer at 5 years of 1.66%, 3.32% and 4.15% were calculated for women 35 to 70 years of age. When the BCPT-P-1 results were incorporated into the simulation model, the analysis suggests no increase in life expectancy in this risk group. Tamoxifen appeared to be beneficial for women with a 5-year predicted risk of 3.32% or greater. The results of these simulations are particularly sensitive to the reduction in mortality observed in the BCPT-P-1, as well as being sensitive to other characteristics of the simulation model. Overall, the analysis raises questions about the use of tamoxifen in otherwise healthy women at high risk of breast cancer.

Canada's Population Health Model (POHEM): a tool for performing economic evaluations of cancer control interventions

This paper describes the Population Health Model (POHEM) developed by Statistics Canada and shows its usefulness in the evaluation of cancer control interventions and policy decision-making. Models of the costs of diagnosis and treatment of lung and breast cancer were developed and incorporated into POHEM. Then, POHEM was used to evaluate the economic impact of chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer; reduced length of hospital stay following breast cancer surgery; and the provision of preventive tamoxifen to women at high risk of breast cancer. A lung cancer chemotherapy treatment decision framework was developed to rank order currently available chemotherapy regimens according to relative cost-effectiveness and cost-utility. Reducing post-surgical breast cancer hospitalisation with optimal home care support could produce major healthcare savings. However, the provision of preventive tamoxifen was estimated to have no population health benefit. This paper demonstrates that POHEM is an effective tool for performing economic evaluations of cancer control interventions and to inform healthcare policy decisions.

Funding new cancer drugs in Ontario: closing the loop in the practice guidelines development cycle

PURPOSE

The previously described practice guidelines development cycle follows an iterative model in which recommendations are reached by a process that incorporates practitioners at all phases. A key feature is the separation of the evidence-based systematic review and the generation of recommendations from policy decisions surrounding implementation. This article describes how this implementation phase has evolved in Ontario and how implementation has affected the guidelines process.

METHODS

The development of the New Drug Funding Program in Ontario and the appointment of a policy advisory committee (PAC) to make funding recommendations were reviewed. The decision-making framework of the PAC is described in this article.

RESULTS

The PAC has had to address a number of issues in making funding recommendations. These issues have included dealing with evidence arising solely from phase II versus phase III trials, using economic information, and involving community representatives in its deliberations. Its activities have had a substantial impact on the practice guidelines initiative.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to integrate an evidence-based, practitioner-driven approach to clinical guideline development with a funding program that takes policy considerations into account. However, even though these two roles are conceptually separate, the needs of the funding program have inevitably had an impact on the guidelines process.

Practice guideline on prophylactic cranial irradiation in small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

To develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline that would address the following questions: (a) What is the role of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with limited or extensive stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) who have achieved complete remission in response to induction therapy (chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)? (b) What dose and fractionation schedules of PCI are optimal? (c) Does the use of PCI in patients with SCLC in complete remission affect quality of life? Survival, disease-free survival, quality of life, and adverse effects were the outcomes of interest.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the published literature was undertaken to provide the data for an evidence-based practice guideline.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials and one fully published individual patient data meta-analysis were included in the systematic review of the evidence. For patients who have achieved complete response after induction therapy, there is evidence of a disease-free survival benefit (4 of 6 trials) and an overall survival benefit (meta-analysis). There is insufficient evidence to make a definitive recommendation with respect to dose. There is some indication that 30-36 Gy in 2-3 Gy per fraction, or a biologically equivalent dose, may produce a better outcome than a lower dose or less aggressive fractionation regimen. The schedule commonly used in Canada is 25 Gy in 10 fractions over 2 weeks. Data from further research, including a trial currently ongoing that compares 25 Gy in 10 fractions with 36 Gy in 18 fractions, will be required to determine optimal dose of PCI. There is insufficient evidence to make recommendations concerning the optimal timing of PCI in relation to the administration of chemotherapy. Lung DSG members generally felt that it should be given as soon as possible after completion of chemotherapy. There is evidence from trials with data for up to 2 years of follow-up that prophylactic cranial irradiation does not produce significant late neurotoxicity. There is evidence from one trial that prophylactic cranial irradiation does not have a detrimental effect on quality of life in the first 12 months following the completion of therapy. There is insufficient evidence to comment on the long-term effects of prophylactic cranial irradiation on quality of life.

CONCLUSION

For adult patients with limited or extensive SCLC who achieve a complete remission with induction therapy, PCI is recommended.

Breast cancer: better care for less cost. Is it possible?

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the potential for cost reduction in the acute care setting and the required investment in the home care setting of implementing an outpatient/early discharge strategy for operable (stages I and II) breast cancer in Canada.

METHODS

Data from a community hospital were augmented by expert knowledge and incorporated into the breast cancer submodel of Statistics Canada's Population Health Model. For the estimated 90% of patients for whom this approach was assumed to be appropriate, the resource utilization for outpatient breast-conserving surgery and 2 days of hospitalization for those women undergoing mastectomy was quantified and costed, as were the appropriate home care services. A 5% readmission rate for complications was assumed. Cost per case, total cost burden, investment in home care, savings in acute care, and net savings were calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed around readmission rates and home care/surgical follow-up costs. All costs were determined in 1995 Canadian dollars.

RESULTS

The cost of initial treatment for the 15,399 women diagnosed with stages I and II breast cancer in 1995 in Canada was estimated to be $127.6 million. Hospitalization made up 53% of these costs. Under the outpatient/early discharge strategy, the acute care cost of initial breast cancer management could be reduced by $47.2 million, with an investment in home care of $14.5 million ($453 per patient), resulting in an overall net saving of $33 million. Under this strategy, hospitalization would contribute only 21% to the total care cost.

CONCLUSIONS

If Canadian surgeons and healthcare administrators were to work together to put in place processes to support ambulatory breast cancer surgery and if resources were redirected to the provision of home-based post-operative care, there would be potential for a large net healthcare saving and preservation of high-quality patient care.

Canadian oncologists and clinical practice guidelines: a national survey of attitudes and reported use. Provincial Lung Disease Site Group of Cancer Care Ontario

PURPOSE

To determine (1) Canadian oncologists' attitudes toward practice guidelines, (2) oncologists' self-reported use of practice guidelines and, (3) physicians' characteristics and attitudes associated with self-reported use of practice guidelines.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional, self-administered postal survey was administered to Canadian oncologists. Main outcome measures were level of agreement with 8 descriptive statements about guidelines, score on the attitudinal scale of the guideline of Tunis et al., and physicians' stated use of guideline. chi(2) and logistic regression procedures were used to explore the relationship between physician characteristics and use of guidelines.

RESULTS

Over 80% of respondents agreed that they were good educational tools, convenient sources of advice, intended to improve quality of care; over 40% agreed that they were unbiased syntheses of expert opinion. Conversely, 42, 26, 20 and 16% felt they were intended to cut costs, were oversimplified cookbook medicine, were too rigid to apply to individual patients, and a challenge to physicians' authority, respectively. Forty-one percent reported using practice guidelines routinely or most of the time. Use was associated with positive attitudes about guidelines, receiving medical school training abroad and being a radiation oncologist.

CONCLUSION

Canadian oncologists were quite positive about practice guidelines and reported using them frequently. Our results suggest that use of guidelines by oncologists may be related to attitudes about guidelines in general, specialty within oncology and country of medical school training.

Decision framework for chemotherapeutic interventions for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Best supportive care has long been considered to be the standard therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). There is now evidence from randomized trials that a number of chemotherapy regimens can palliate cancer-related symptoms and modestly improve survival. We show how cost-effectiveness analyses can be used to make choices between different (ambulatory) chemotherapy regimens.

METHODS

Clinical algorithms describing the diagnosis, staging, and treatment of metastatic NSCLC were incorporated into Statistics Canada's Population Health Model. Using consistent methodology, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of several chemotherapeutic interventions: a combination of vindesine (VDS) plus cisplatin, etoposide (VP-16) plus cisplatin, vinblastine (VLB) plus cisplatin, vinorelbine (Navelbine; NVB) plus cisplatin, paclitaxel (Taxol) plus cisplatin, and gemcitabine (GEM) and NVB alone. We calculated the total chemotherapy costs in 1995 Canadian dollars, the cost per case, the average life-years saved, and the cost per life-year saved. Using the Population Health Model, we then constructed an advanced decision framework that rank-ordered the various treatment regimens so as to optimize benefit below various cost-effectiveness thresholds.

RESULTS

One regimen (VLB plus cisplatin) appears to result in better survival and lower health care expenditures than best supportive care. By use of cost-effectiveness thresholds of $25,000 and $50,000 per life-year gained, NVB plus cisplatin is the preferred regimen. When quality of life is considered, however, GEM is preferred to NVB plus cisplatin at a threshold value of $50,000. At thresholds of $75 000 and $100,000, paclitaxel plus cisplatin at a dose of 135 mg/m(2) is the preferred regimen. At thresholds of $50,000 and above, best supportive care is the least preferred regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

This decision framework allows the comparison of different treatment regimens based on various cost-effectiveness thresholds. Our analysis also supports the use of chemotherapy regimens and the abandonment of best supportive care as the standard of care for patients with advanced NSCLC. [J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1321-9].

Cancer care workers in Ontario: prevalence of burnout, job stress and job satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Cancer Care Ontario's Systemic Therapy Task Force recently reviewed the medical oncology system in the province. There has been growing concern about anecdotal reports of burnout, high levels of stress and staff leaving or decreasing their work hours. However, no research has systematically determined whether there is evidence to support or refute these reports. To this end, a confidential survey was undertaken.

METHODS

A questionnaire was mailed to all 1016 personnel of the major providers of medical oncology services in Ontario. The questionnaire consisted of the Maslach Burnout Inventory, the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, a questionnaire to determine job satisfaction and stress, and questions to obtain demographic characteristics and to measure the staff's consideration of alternative work situations.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 70.9% (681 of 961 eligible subjects): by group it was 63.3% (131/207) for physicians, 80.9% (314/388) for allied health professionals and 64.5% (236/366) for support staff. The prevalence of emotional exhaustion were significantly higher among the physicians (53.3%) than among the allied health professionals (37.1%) and the support staff (30.5%) (p < or = 0.003); the same was true for feelings of depersonalization (22.1% v. 4.3% and 5.5% respectively) (p < or = 0.003). Feelings of low personal accomplishment were significantly higher among physicians (48.4%) and allied health professionals (54.0%) than among support staff (31.4%) (p < or = 0.002). About one-third of the respondents in each group reported that they have considered leaving for a job outside the cancer care system. Significantly more physicians (42.6%) than allied health professionals (7.6%) or support staff (4.5%) stated that they have considered leaving for a job outside the province.

INTERPRETATION

The findings support the concern that medical oncology personnel are experiencing burnout and high levels of stress and that large numbers are considering leaving or decreasing their work hours. This is an important finding for the cancer care system, where highly trained and experienced health care workers are already in short supply.

An estimate of the cost of conducting phase II trials in lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

Although it is commonly assumed that clinical trials are more costly than standard therapy, there have been no previous studies of the cost of conducting phase II trials in lung cancer. We retrospectively analyzed two National Cancer Institute of Canada phase II trials in previously untreated small cell lung cancer (SCLC) to determine the costs of conducting the trials in a cancer treatment centre. Both studies were clinical trials undertaken as part of the NCIC's Investigational New Drug program: IND 69 and IND 50 evaluated docetaxel (taxotere) and gemcitabine, respectively.

METHODS

data management costs in a Canadian cancer treatment centre were determined from the time estimates provided by data managers to complete various protocol related tasks. Nursing and pharmacy personnel measured the time and supplies necessary to prepare and administer the chemotherapy. Physician fees were determined from the type and number of care visits required by the clinical protocols. Laboratory tests and imaging studies were costed according to the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) Schedule of Fees and Benefits. To estimate whether phase II trials are more costly than standard treatment, we determined the cost of four cycles of VP-16-cisplatin, a standard treatment for SCLC.

RESULTS

The total cost of performing the docetaxel study was $18443 for an average cost per case of $1317 and an average cost per treatment cycle of $683. The gemcitabine study cost more, due to the fact that the drug proved to be active against SCLC and more cycles of therapy were administered to a larger number of patients. Laboratory and administration costs were also higher, because of the drug administration schedule. The total cost of this study was estimated to be $64670 and the average cost per patient entered was $2230 with an average cost per treatment cycle of $898. In comparison, the estimated cost of four cycles of VP-16-cisplatin chemotherapy was $3948 or $987 per treatment cycle. The major cost drivers in the clinical trials were laboratory and imaging tests which made up 17 and 39%, respectively, of the costs of the taxotere study, and 29 and 27%, respectively, for the gemcitabine study. Data management costs contributed 21 and 13% of the total costs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

As the main cost drivers in these phase II clinical trials are laboratory and imaging tests, the cost of clinical trials could potentially be reduced by ensuring that only essential tests are required by protocol. Not surprisingly, the cost of conducting a trial of an active agent is greater than for an inactive agent, because more patients are treated and each patient receives more treatment. The implications for the per-case funding of phase II clinical trials are discussed.

Estimates of the lifetime costs of breast cancer treatment in Canada

A comprehensive understanding of the cost components of common illnesses is a necessary first step towards ensuring optimal use of scarce healthcare resources. Since breast cancer is the commonest malignancy affecting Canadian women, we estimated the direct healthcare costs associated with the lifetime management of a cohort of 17700 women diagnosed in 1995. Using a multiplicity of data sources, treatment algorithms, follow-up and disease progression patterns were determined by age (<50; >/=50 years) for all four stages of breast cancer at diagnosis, as well as for the management of local and distant recurrence. Statistics Canada's Population Health Model (POHEM) was used to integrate the data from the different sources and to estimate the lifetime costs, discounted at 0, 3 and 5% rates. The average undiscounted lifetime cost per case of treating women diagnosed with breast cancer varied by stage, from $36,340 for stage IV or metastatic disease, to $23,275 for stage I patients. The total cost of treatment for the cohort diagnosed in 1995 was estimated to be over 454 million Canadian dollars. Hospitalisation (mainly for initial treatment and terminal care) represented 63% of the lifetime costs of care delivery. Disease costing models are valuable tools for optimising the use of scare resources without compromising the health status of individual patients. The breast cancer costing model has recently been used to assess the cost impact and cost-effectiveness of providing radiotherapy to all patients undergoing breast surgery, and of performing outpatient breast surgery.

Cost-effectiveness analysis in oncology

Economic evaluations in cancer have become increasingly important because of the rising incidence of the disease and the proliferation of effective therapies. The aging of the population and the increasing costs of care make it even more important to identify those treatments of greatest value from both an effectiveness and cost perspective. Economic research can be conducted at the "macro" level where estimates of cost are made at the population level or at the "micro" level where the costs of specific strategies are evaluated. This paper reviews the types of economic evaluations and the classification of costs in these evaluations. In all economic evaluations, several key elements need to be considered. These are discussed in the manuscript and include the alternatives being compared, the perspective of the analysis and the outcomes being measured. Because of the many variables included in an economic analysis, there is real potential for bias to be introduced. The importance of transparency in the presentation of data and the need for sensitivity analyses to determine the robustness of the conclusions are aspects of economic analyses that readers must understand in order to interpret the reported results. The application of the information in an economic evaluation to a specific clinical situation must be interpreted in the light of the health care costs and system of care delivery from which the study results were derived. Similarly, the cost-effectiveness of a particular treatment intervention may be considered in relation to the cost-effectiveness of other interventions in a league table, but such comparisons are often flawed. The reasons for this are discussed. Economic evaluations in oncology will be increasingly important in making choices between expensive new treatments, but great care must be exercised in the interpretation of individual reports.

Clinical Characteristics and the Impact of Surgery and Chemotherapy on Survival of Patients With Advanced and Metastatic Bronchioloalveolar Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study

We retrospectively analyzed data from the clinical charts of 126 patients with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) referred to the Ottawa Regional Cancer Center. The patient group consisted of 49 men (39%) and 77 women (61%). The mean age at diagnosis was 64 years. Most patients were smokers (85%). At diagnosis, 53% were stage Ia-IIIa and 47% were stage IIIb and IV. Forty-one percent of the patients with advanced and metastatic stages (IIIb, IV) underwent surgery. Multifocal disease was present at diagnosis in 41% of the patients, including 6% who had stage IIIb multifocal disease confined to a single lobe. Surgery was associated with prolonged survival in patients with multifocal unilobar or multilobar disease (P = 0.0001). While this apparent benefit of surgery may have been due to selection bias, it supports further exploration of surgery as therapy for multifocal disease. While patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced disease did not survive longer than patients not receiving chemotherapy, chemotherapy was used primarily in patients with more aggressive disease, suggesting that selection bias may have contributed to its apparent lack of benefit. Of the 30 patients treated with chemotherapy, only 3 (10%) achieved an objective response. One third of the patients (34%) developed distant metastases, with a predilection for the brain and bone.

Concurrent use of multiple low dose chemotherapy agents with differing mechanisms of action as a strategy vs passive resistance: A pilot study

Resistance may be classified as active (or competitive) (due to excess amount of a factor) vs passive (or non-competitive) (due to a deficiency of a factor). Passive resistance may be important in human solid tumors. In passive resistance, the dose-response curve may be shallow, or may flatten at a relatively low dose. We hypothesized that, if passive resistance were important, it might be advantageous to use low doses of multiple concurrent chemotherapy agents with differing mechanisms of action, rather than using high doses of 2 or 3 drugs. We combined single day cisplatin 60 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 250 mg/m2, epirubicin 40 mg/m2, paclitaxel 60 mg/m2, and vinblastine 2.5 mg/m2, with 5 days of 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2, folinic acid 20 mg/m2 and dexamethasone 4 mg orally q.i.d. every 3 weeks. In later cohorts, doses were escalated, and tamoxifen and verapamil were added. Twenty-three patients were entered. ECOG performance status was 1 in 15 patients and 2 in 8. Number of prior chemotherapy regimens was 0 in 4 patients, 1 in 4, 2 in 8, 3 in 4, 4 in 2, and 7 in 1. Sixteen patients had prior radiotherapy, and 3 had no prior therapy. Myelosuppression and febrile neutropenia were frequent, and 4 heavily pretreated patients died of pneumonia contracted while neutropenic. Diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, and fatigue were also prominent. Among 9 patients with non-small cell lung cancer, one had a partial remission, 4 had stable disease (including 3 with minor objective responses). Two additional non-small cell lung cancer patients also had objective tumor regression, but were coded as failures, since one had tumor progression in <6 weeks and the other died of respiratory failure (thought to be due to severe mucous plugging) one week after his first course of treatment. Among 14 patients with other tumor types, there was one partial response (esophageal carcinoma), 6 patients with stable disease for >6 weeks (including minor responses in one patient each with adenocarcinomas of kidney and breast), and 7 failures (including one patient with adenocarcinoma unknown primary who had minor tumor regression lasting 4 weeks). Despite the unacceptably high toxic death rate, median survival time was 24 weeks (range, 1 week to >104 weeks). This regimen is toxic, but survival duration is longer than would be expected in this heavily pre-treated population. Doses recommended for further study are those used in the first treatment cohort (as described above). Since myelosuppression is the major toxic effect, hemopoietic growth factors might prove helpful with this regimen.

Cost-effectivenes of paclitaxel plus cisplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of combination chemotherapy with paclitaxel/cisplatin, compared with standard etoposide/cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We obtained the primary survival and resource utilization data from a large three-arm randomized trial comparing: paclitaxel 135 mg m(-2) by 24-h intravenous (i.v.) infusion + cisplatin; paclitaxel 250 mg m(-2) by 24-h i.v. infusion + cisplatin + granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF); and standard etoposide/cisplatin in patients with stage IIIb or IV NSCLC. We also modelled the regimens with paclitaxel 135 mg m(-2) + cisplatin administered as an outpatient by 3-h infusion, as clinical data suggest that this is equivalent to 24-h infusion. We collected costing data from the Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre and applied it to the resources consumed in the randomized trial. We integrated these data into the Statistics Canada POpulation HEalth Model (POHEM), which generated hypothetical cohorts of patients treated with each regimen. The POHEM model assigned diagnostic work-up, treatment, disease progression and survival characteristics to each individual in these cohorts and tabulated the costs associated with each. We did sensitivity analyses around the costs of chemotherapy and its administration, and the survival differences between the two regimens. All costs are in 1997 Canadian dollars ($1.00 Canadian approximately Pound 0.39 sterling). The perspective is that of the Canadian health care system. In the trial, the two paclitaxel-containing arms had almost identical survival curves with a median survival of 9.7 months compared with 7.4 months for etoposide/cisplatin. As administered in the trial, paclitaxel/cisplatin cost $76,370 per life-year gained (LYG) and paclitaxel/cisplatin/G-CSF $138,578 per LYG relative to etoposide/cisplatin. However, when modelled as an outpatient 3-h infusion, paclitaxel/cisplatin was moderately cost-effective at $30,619 per LYG. When compared with historical controls treated with best supportive care, this regimen of paclitaxel/cisplatin cost $4539 per LYG. Assuming a 3-h paclitaxel infusion yields the same survival advantage as the 24-h infusion did in the randomized trial, paclitaxel/cisplatin is a cost-effective improvement over standard etoposide/cisplatin for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for nonmetastatic breast cancer in Canada, and their associated costs

In an era of fiscal restraint, it is important to evaluate the resources required to diagnose and treat serious illnesses. As breast cancer is the major malignancy affecting Canadian women, Statistics Canada has analysed the resources required to manage this disease in Canada, and the associated costs. Here we report the cost of initial diagnosis and treatment of nonmetastatic breast cancer, including adjuvant therapies. Treatment algorithms for Stages I, II, and III of the disease were derived by age group (< 50 or > or = 50 years old), principally from Canadian cancer registry data, supplemented, where necessary, by the results of surveys of Canadian oncologists. Data were obtained on breast cancer incidence by age, diagnostic work-up, stage at diagnosis, initial treatment, follow-up practice, duration of hospitalization and direct care costs. The direct health care costs associated with 'standard' diagnostic and therapeutic approaches were calculated for a cohort of 17,700 Canadian women diagnosed in 1995. Early stage (Stages I and II) breast cancer represented 87% of all incident cases, with 77% of cases occurring in women > or = 50 years. Variations were noted in the rate of partial vs total mastectomy, according to stage and age group. Direct costs for diagnosis and initial treatment ranged from $8014 for Stage II women > or = 50 years old, to $10,897 for Stage III women < 50 years old. Except for Stage III women < 50 years old, the largest expenditure was for hospitalization for surgery, followed by radiotherapy costs. Chemotherapy was the largest cost component for Stage III women < 50 years old. This report describes the cost of diagnosis and initial treatment of nonmetastatic breast cancer in Canada, assuming current practice patterns. A second report will describe the lifetime costs of treating all stages of breast cancer. These data will then be incorporated into Statistics Canada's Population Health Model (POHEM) to perform cost-effectiveness studies of new therapeutic interventions for breast cancer, such as the cost-effectiveness of day surgery, or of radiotherapy to all breast cancer patients undergoing breast surgery.

The use of gemcitabine in non-small-cell lung cancer. Provincial Lung Cancer Disease Site Group. Provincial Systemic Treatment Disease Site Group

GUIDELINE QUESTION

Is there a role for the use of gemcitabine in the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)?

OBJECTIVE

To make recommendations about the use of gemcitabine in the management of medically appropriate patients with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC.

OUTCOMES

The outcomes of interest were survival, response rate, symptomatic response, response duration and toxicity.

PERSPECTIVE (VALUES)

Evidence was selected and reviewed by 2 members of the Provincial Lung Cancer Disease Site Group (DSG) of the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative. The practice guideline report was reviewed by the Provincial Lung Cancer DSG and by the Systemic Treatment Disease Site Group. These committees comprise medical and radiation oncologists, surgeons, pathologists, nurses, a psychologist, a medical sociologist and administrators. One community representative participated in the development of this practice guideline.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

Five phase II studies of single-agent gemcitabine in advanced NSCLC were reviewed. Four of these are published as full reports. Two randomized phase II studies comparing single-agent gemcitabine with etoposide plus cisplatin were also reviewed. One of these studies is fully published. Seven phase II studies of gemcitabine in combination with cisplatin and I phase II study of gemcitabine in combination with ifosfamide were reviewed. Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 randomized phase II study, published in abstract form, compared gemcitabine combination chemotherapy with cisplatin combination chemotherapy. An additional phase II study, published in abstract form, of gemcitabine as salvage therapy in previously treated patients was also included.

BENEFITS

Four phase II studies of single-agent gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 or more showed a combined response rate of 19% (intention-to-treat analysis; 95% confidence interval [CI] 15% to 24%) or 21% (efficacy analysis; 95% CI 17% to 26%) in advanced NSCLC. Median survival ranged from 7 to 9 months. Improvement from baseline in cough, hemoptysis and dyspnea was comparable to what would be expected with radiation therapy and with standard combination chemotherapy regimens. Improvement from baseline in their performance status was reported in 52% of treated patients. The 2 randomized phase II studies reported equivalent response rates for gemcitabine compared with etoposide plus cisplatin; the response data were pooled, which resulted in a nonsignificant benefit for gemcitabine (common odds ratio [OR] 0.90; 95% CI 0.43 to 1.90; p = 0.78). Gemcitabine has most frequently been combined with cisplatin, yielding a combined response rate of 44% (intention-to-treat; 95% CI 36% to 47%) or 45% (efficacy; 95% CI 39% to 51%) from 7 phase II studies. Median survival times ranged from 10 to 14 months. One phase II randomized study compared gemcitabine-cisplatin-vinorelbine vs. cisplatin-epirubicin-vindesine plus lonidamine and demonstrated a higher response rate (62% vs. 35%) in favour of the gemcitabine combination. Three RCTs demonstrated increased response rates for the combination of gemcitabine-cisplatin over either cisplatin alone or other combination regimens [(gemcitabine-cisplatin 35% vs. etoposide-cisplatin 12%; p = 0.001), (gemcitabine-cisplatin 31% vs. cisplatin 9%; p = 0.0001), (gemcitabine-cisplatin 40% vs. mitomycin, ifosfamide, cisplatin 28%; p = 0.03)].

HARMS

The major dose-limiting toxicity is neutropenia. Despite this, infection rates are low. Significant adverse effects that have an impact on the patient's quality of life or require the discontinuance of treatment are reported to be less than with any other single agent or combination of agents. Grade 3 or 4 dyspnea has been reported to occur in fewer than 2% of cases and may be drug related. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

Costs of treating and preventing nausea and vomiting in patients receiving chemotherapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of ondansetron availability on the costs of managing nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed antiemetic costs (drug costs, nursing time, pharmacy time, physician's time, supplies, and facility "hotel" costs, in 1991 Canadian dollars) for all patients who received moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy from 6 months before to 6 months after ondansetron became commercially available in September 1991. We compared the costs for treating patients who received ondansetron versus those who received other antiemetic regimens, the costs for treating patients in the 6 months before versus the 6 months after ondansetron commercial availability, and the costs for treating patients in the first 4 months versus the last 4 months of the study period.

RESULTS

We found no cost differences for patients treated with ondansetron versus other antiemetic regimens. However, there was a significant reduction in emesis management costs for patients treated after versus before the availability of ondansetron: for patients treated in the last third versus first third of the study period, there was a decrease in cost per patient per month of treatment of $374 (95% confidence interval, $243 to $505). These savings were achieved through a reduction in hospital bed days and other costs associated with the prevention and more effective management of nausea and vomiting. At the same time, the number of patients who received emetogenic chemotherapy and their average age increased, presumably because of the better control of gastrointestinal toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Ondansetron availability has been associated with changes in the clinical management of cancer patients receiving chemotherapy and with overall cost savings compared with previously available antiemetic therapy.

Concurrent chemotherapy with hyperfractionated accelerated thoracic irradiation in stage III non-small cell lung cancer

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the effect of hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy combined with low dose radiosensitisers followed by standard dose chemotherapy in the treatment of unresectable stage III non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Forty-seven patients received thoracic radiotherapy (1.5 bid x 5 days x 4 weeks) in combination with low dose daily (3-6 mg/m2) cisplatin +/- weekly vinblastine chemotherapy (step I), followed by three cycles of standard dose chemotherapy alone consisting of cisplatin (75-80 mg/m2) and vinblastine (8-16 mg/m2) given at 3-4 week intervals (step II).

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 70% (21% CR). The progression free interval and the median survival duration were 10.4 months and 17.3 months, respectively. The 3 year survival rate was 21%. The site of first progression was local in 44%, distant in 41%, and simultaneous in 15% of patients. Levels of esophageal toxicity were significant but acceptable with the use of prophylactic therapy. Grade 3 or 4 esophageal toxicity was observed in 28 and 19% of patients during step I and II of the study, respectively. There were three deaths associated with esophageal toxicity. All occurred prior to the implementation of the prophylactic therapy for esophagitis. Acute pulmonary symptoms were reported in 25% of patients in step I, and pulmonary fibrosis, primarily asymptomatic, was observed in 51% of patients. Hematological toxicity was moderate. Two patients died of neutropenic sepsis/pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

Concurrent chemotherapy and hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy appears moderately effective in controlling tumour growth as measured by response rates and survival estimates. Toxicity is considerable but manageable and compatible with results from other combined modality studies.