1
|
Gottschlich A, Hong Q, Gondara L, Alam MS, Cook DA, Martin RE, Lee M, Melinikow J, Peacock S, Proctor L, Stuart G, Franco EL, Krajden M, Smith LW, Ogilvie GS. Evidence of decreased long-term risk of cervical pre-cancer after negative primary HPV screens compared to negative cytology screens in a longitudinal cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024:745406. [PMID: 38773687 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-23-1587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2023] [Revised: 03/05/2024] [Accepted: 04/22/2024] [Indexed: 05/24/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Growing use of primary HPV cervical cancer screening requires determining appropriate screening intervals to avoid overtreatment of transient disease. This study examined the long-term risk of cervical precancer after HPV screening to inform screening interval recommendations. METHODS This longitudinal cohort study (British Columbia, Canada, 2008-2022) recruited women and individuals with a cervix (WIC) who received 1-2 negative HPV screen(s) (HPV1 cohort, N = 5,546, HPV2 cohort, N = 6,624) during a randomized trial and WIC with 1-2 normal cytology result(s) (BCS1 cohort, N = 782,297, BCS2 cohort, N = 673,778) extracted from the provincial screening registry. All participants were followed through the registry for 14 years. Long-term risk of cervical precancer or worse (CIN2+) was compared between HPV and cytology cohorts. RESULTS Cumulative risks of CIN2+ were 3.2/1000 (95% CI: 1.6 to 4.7) in HPV1 and 2.7/1000 (CI: 1.2 to 4.2) in HPV2 after eight years. This was comparable to the risk in the cytology cohorts after 3 years (BCS1: 3.3/1000, [CI: 3.1 to 3.4]; BCS2: 2.5, [CI: 2.4 to 2.6]). The cumulative risk of CIN2+ after 10 years was low in HPV cohorts (HPV1: 4.7/1000, [CI: 2.6 to 6.7]; HPV2: 3.9, [CI: 1.1 to 6.6]). CONCLUSIONS Risk of CIN2+ eight years after negative screen in HPV cohorts was comparable to risk after 3 years in cytology cohorts (the benchmark for acceptable risk). IMPACT These findings suggest that primary HPV screening intervals could be extended beyond the current five-year recommendation potentially reducing barriers to screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Quan Hong
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Lovedeep Gondara
- British Columbia Cervix Screening Program, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Darrel A Cook
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Marette Lee
- BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Joy Melinikow
- University of California, Davis, Sacramento, CA, United States
| | - Stuart Peacock
- British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lily Proctor
- British Columbia Cervix Screening Program, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Mel Krajden
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Gina S Ogilvie
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Steinberg J, Hughes S, Hui H, Allsop MJ, Egger S, David M, Caruana M, Coxeter P, Carle C, Onyeka T, Rewais I, Monroy Iglesias MJ, Vives N, Wei F, Abila DB, Carreras G, Santero M, O’Dowd EL, Lui G, Tolani MA, Mullooly M, Lee SF, Landy R, Hanley SJB, Binefa G, McShane CM, Gizaw M, Selvamuthu P, Boukheris H, Nakaganda A, Ergin I, Moraes FY, Timilshina N, Kumar A, Vale DB, Molina-Barceló A, Force LM, Campbell DJ, Wang Y, Wan F, Baker AL, Singh R, Salam RA, Yuill S, Shah R, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Yusuf A, Aggarwal A, Murillo R, Torode JS, Kliewer EV, Bray F, Chan KKW, Peacock S, Hanna TP, Ginsburg O, Hemelrijck MV, Sullivan R, Roitberg F, Ilbawi AM, Soerjomataram I, Canfell K. Risk of COVID-19 death for people with a pre-existing cancer diagnosis prior to COVID-19-vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 2024; 154:1394-1412. [PMID: 38083979 PMCID: PMC10922788 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34798] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2023] [Revised: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2024]
Abstract
While previous reviews found a positive association between pre-existing cancer diagnosis and COVID-19-related death, most early studies did not distinguish long-term cancer survivors from those recently diagnosed/treated, nor adjust for important confounders including age. We aimed to consolidate higher-quality evidence on risk of COVID-19-related death for people with recent/active cancer (compared to people without) in the pre-COVID-19-vaccination period. We searched the WHO COVID-19 Global Research Database (20 December 2021), and Medline and Embase (10 May 2023). We included studies adjusting for age and sex, and providing details of cancer status. Risk-of-bias assessment was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled adjusted odds or risk ratios (aORs, aRRs) or hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using generic inverse-variance random-effects models. Random-effects meta-regressions were used to assess associations between effect estimates and time since cancer diagnosis/treatment. Of 23 773 unique title/abstract records, 39 studies were eligible for inclusion (2 low, 17 moderate, 20 high risk of bias). Risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with active or recently diagnosed/treated cancer (general population: aOR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.36-1.61, I2 = 0; people with COVID-19: aOR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.41-1.77, I2 = 0.58; inpatients with COVID-19: aOR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.34-2.06, I2 = 0.98). Risks were more elevated for lung (general population: aOR = 3.4, 95% CI: 2.4-4.7) and hematological cancers (general population: aOR = 2.13, 95% CI: 1.68-2.68, I2 = 0.43), and for metastatic cancers. Meta-regression suggested risk of COVID-19-related death decreased with time since diagnosis/treatment, for example, for any/solid cancers, fitted aOR = 1.55 (95% CI: 1.37-1.75) at 1 year and aOR = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.80-1.20) at 5 years post-cancer diagnosis/treatment. In conclusion, before COVID-19-vaccination, risk of COVID-19-related death was higher for people with recent cancer, with risk depending on cancer type and time since diagnosis/treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Steinberg
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Suzanne Hughes
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Harriet Hui
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Matthew J Allsop
- Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Sam Egger
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael David
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
- School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
| | - Michael Caruana
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Peter Coxeter
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Chelsea Carle
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Tonia Onyeka
- Department of Anaesthesia/Pain & Palliative Care Unit, College of Medicine, University of Nigeria, Ituku-Ozalla Campus, Enugu, Nigeria
- IVAN Research Institute, Enugu, Enugu Stata, Nigeria
| | - Isabel Rewais
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Maria J Monroy Iglesias
- Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Centre for Cancer, Society, and Public Health, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Nuria Vives
- Cancer Screening Unit, Institut Català d’Oncologia (ICO), Early Detection of Cancer Group, Epidemiology, Public Health, Cancer Prevention and Palliative Care Program, Institut d’Investigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL), L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
- Ciber Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Instituto Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Feixue Wei
- Early Detection, Prevention and Infections Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | | | - Giulia Carreras
- Oncologic Network, Prevention and Research Institute (ISPRO), Florence, Italy
| | - Marilina Santero
- Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, IIB Sant Pau-Servei d’Epidemiologia Clínica i Salut Pública, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Emma L O’Dowd
- Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | - Gigi Lui
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Maeve Mullooly
- School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Shing Fung Lee
- Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute, National University Hospital, Singapore
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Tuen Mun Hospital, New Territories West Cluster, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong, China
| | - Rebecca Landy
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville MD, United States
| | - Sharon JB Hanley
- Department of Academic Primary Care, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
- Center for Environmental and Health Sciences, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | - Gemma Binefa
- Cancer Screening Unit,Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Early Detection of Cancer Research Group, EPIBELL Programme, Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute, Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Charlene M McShane
- Centre for Public Health, Queen’s University Belfast, Institute of Clinical Sciences Block B, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland
| | - Muluken Gizaw
- Department of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia
- Institute for Medical Epidemiology, Biometrics and Informatics, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
- NCD Working Group, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia
| | - Poongulali Selvamuthu
- Chennai Antiviral Research and Treatment Center and Clinical Research Site (CART CRS), Infectious Diseases Medical Center, Voluntary Health Services, Chennai, India
| | - Houda Boukheris
- University Abderrahmane Mira of Bejaia, School of Medicine, Algeria
- Departement of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University Hospital of Bejaia, Algeria
| | - Annet Nakaganda
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Clinical Trials, Uganda Cancer Institute, Uganda
| | - Isil Ergin
- Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Ege University, Turkey
| | - Fabio Ynoe Moraes
- Department of Oncology, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nahari Timilshina
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Canada
| | - Ashutosh Kumar
- Department of Anatomy, All India Institute of Medical Sciences-Patna, Patna, India
| | - Diama B Vale
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil
| | - Ana Molina-Barceló
- Cancer and Public Health Research Unit, Biomedical Research Foundation FISABIO, Valencia, Spain
| | - Lisa M Force
- Department of Health Metrics Sciences and Department of Pediatrics, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of Washington, United States
| | - Denise Joan Campbell
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Yuqing Wang
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Fang Wan
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Anna-Lisa Baker
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Ramnik Singh
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Rehana Abdus Salam
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Susan Yuill
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
- School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Richa Shah
- Cancer Surveillance Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Aasim Yusuf
- Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital & Research Centre, Lahore & Peshawar, Pakistan
| | - Ajay Aggarwal
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
- Department of Oncology, Guy’s & St Thomas NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Raul Murillo
- Centro Javeriano De Oncologia - Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogotá, Colombia
- Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Julie S Torode
- Institute of Cancer Policy, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
- Research Oncology, Bermondsey Wing, Guy’s Hospital, SE1 9RT, London, United Kingdom
| | - Erich V Kliewer
- Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Freddie Bray
- Cancer Surveillance Branch, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
| | - Kelvin KW Chan
- Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Timothy P Hanna
- Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Cancer Research Institute at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Oncology and Department of Public Health Sciences, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ophira Ginsburg
- Center for Global Health, National Cancer Institute, Maryland, United States
| | - Mieke Van Hemelrijck
- Translational Oncology and Urology Research (TOUR), Centre for Cancer, Society, and Public Health, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Richard Sullivan
- Institute of Cancer Policy, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Felipe Roitberg
- Department of Non-Communicable Diseases, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland
- Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil
- Rede Ebserh, Rede Brasileira de Serviços Hospitalares, Brasília, Brazil
| | | | | | - Karen Canfell
- The Daffodil Centre, The University of Sydney, a joint venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Worthington J, Sun Z, Fu R, Lew JB, Chan KKW, Li Q, Eskander A, Hui H, McLoughlin K, Caruana M, Peacock S, Yong JHE, Canfell K, Feletto E, Malagón T. COVID-related disruptions to colorectal cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment could increase cancer Burden in Australia and Canada: A modelling study. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0296945. [PMID: 38557758 PMCID: PMC10984523 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 12/20/2023] [Indexed: 04/04/2024] Open
Abstract
COVID-19 disrupted cancer control worldwide, impacting preventative screening, diagnoses, and treatment services. This modelling study estimates the impact of disruptions on colorectal cancer cases and deaths in Canada and Australia, informed by data on screening, diagnosis, and treatment procedures. Modelling was used to estimate short- and long-term effects on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality, including ongoing impact of patient backlogs. A hypothetical mitigation strategy was simulated, with diagnostic and treatment capacities increased by 5% from 2022 to address backlogs. Colorectal cancer screening dropped by 40% in Canada and 6.3% in Australia in 2020. Significant decreases to diagnostic and treatment procedures were also observed in Australia and Canada, which were estimated to lead to additional patient wait times. These changes would lead to an estimated increase of 255 colorectal cancer cases and 1,820 colorectal cancer deaths in Canada and 234 cases and 1,186 deaths in Australia over 2020-2030; a 1.9% and 2.4% increase in mortality, respectively, vs a scenario with no screening disruption or diagnostic/treatment delays. Diagnostic and treatment capacity mitigation would avert 789 and 350 deaths in Canada and Australia, respectively. COVID-related disruptions had a significant impact on colorectal cancer screening, diagnostic, and treatment procedures in Canada and Australia. Modelling demonstrates that downstream effects on disease burden could be substantial. However, backlogs can be managed and deaths averted with even small increases to diagnostic and treatment capacity. Careful management of resources can improve patient outcomes after any temporary disruption, and these results can inform targeted approaches early detection of cancers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Zhuolu Sun
- Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Rui Fu
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jie-Bin Lew
- The Daffodil Centre, Kings Cross, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kelvin K. W. Chan
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Canada
| | - Qing Li
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Antoine Eskander
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Harriet Hui
- The Daffodil Centre, Kings Cross, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Michael Caruana
- The Daffodil Centre, Kings Cross, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
- BC Cancer Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Karen Canfell
- The Daffodil Centre, Kings Cross, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Talía Malagón
- Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montréal, Canada
- St Mary’s Research Centre, Montréal West Island CIUSSS, Montréal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gauvreau CL, Schreyer L, Gibson PJ, Koo A, Ungar WJ, Regier D, Chan K, Hayeems R, Gibson J, Palmer A, Peacock S, Denburg AE. Development of a Value Assessment Framework for Pediatric Health Technologies Using Multicriteria Decision Analysis: Expanding the Value Lens for Funding Decision Making. Value Health 2024:S1098-3015(24)00127-X. [PMID: 38548179 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2023] [Revised: 03/07/2024] [Accepted: 03/19/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES A health technology assessment (HTA) does not systematically account for the circumstances and needs of children and youth. To supplement HTA processes, we aimed to develop a child-tailored value assessment framework using a multicriteria decision analysis approach. METHODS We constructed a multicriteria-decision-analysis-based model in multiple phases to create the Comprehensive Assessment of Technologies for Child Health (CATCH) framework. Using a modified Delphi process with stakeholders having broad disciplinary and geographic variation (N = 23), we refined previously generated criteria and developed rank-based weights. We established a criterion-pertinent scoring rubric for assessing incremental benefits of new drugs. Three clinicians independently assessed comprehension by pilotscoring 9 drugs. We then validated CATCH for 2 childhood cancer therapies through structured deliberation with an expert panel (N = 10), obtaining individual scores, consensus scores, and verbal feedback. Analyses included descriptive statistics, thematic analysis, exploratory disagreement indices, and sensitivity analysis. RESULTS The modified Delphi process yielded 10 criteria, based on absolute importance/relevance and agreed importance (median disagreement indices = 0.34): Effectiveness, Child-specific Health-related Quality of Life, Disease Severity, Unmet Need, Therapeutic Safety, Equity, Family Impacts, Life-course Development, Rarity, and Fair Share of Life. Pilot scoring resulted in adjusted criteria definitions and more precise score-scaling guidelines. Validation panelists endorsed the framework's key modifiers of value. Modes of their individual prescores aligned closely with deliberative consensus scores. CONCLUSIONS We iteratively developed a value assessment framework that captures dimensions of child-specific health and nonhealth gains. CATCH could improve the richness and relevance of HTA decision making for children in Canada and comparable health systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cindy L Gauvreau
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Leighton Schreyer
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Paul J Gibson
- McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada; Pediatric Oncology Group of Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Alicia Koo
- Department of Pharmacy, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Wendy J Ungar
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Dean Regier
- BC Cancer Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Kelvin Chan
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Robin Hayeems
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Jennifer Gibson
- Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Antonia Palmer
- Ac4orn: Advocacy for Canadian Childhood Cancer Research Network, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Avram E Denburg
- Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids) Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Oveisi N, Cheng V, Taylor D, Bechthold H, Barnes M, Jansen N, McTaggart-Cowan H, Brotto LA, Peacock S, Hanley GE, Gill S, Rayar M, Srikanthan A, De Vera MA. Meaningful Patient Engagement in Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Cancer Research: A Framework for Qualitative Studies. Curr Oncol 2024; 31:1689-1700. [PMID: 38668031 PMCID: PMC11049004 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31040128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/31/2023] [Revised: 03/01/2024] [Accepted: 03/13/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Over the last two decades, patient engagement in cancer research has evolved significantly, especially in addressing the unique challenges faced by adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer populations. This paper introduces a framework for meaningful engagement with AYA cancer patient research partners, drawing insights from the "FUTURE" Study, a qualitative study that utilizes focus groups to explore the impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment on the sexual and reproductive health of AYA cancer patients in Canada. The framework's development integrates insights from prior works and addresses challenges with patient engagement in research specific to AYA cancer populations. The framework is guided by overarching principles (safety, flexibility, and sensitivity) and includes considerations that apply across all phases of a research study (collaboration; iteration; communication; and equity, diversity, and inclusion) and tasks that apply to specific phases of a research study (developing, conducting, and translating the study). The proposed framework seeks to increase patient engagement in AYA cancer research beyond a supplementary aspect to an integral component for conducting research with impact on patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niki Oveisi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (N.O.); (V.C.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
| | - Vicki Cheng
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (N.O.); (V.C.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
| | | | | | - Mikaela Barnes
- Patient Research Partner
- Registered Physiotherapist, Pelvic Health Provider, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada; (H.M.-C.); (S.P.); (S.G.)
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
| | - Lori A. Brotto
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (L.A.B.); (G.E.H.); (M.R.)
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada; (H.M.-C.); (S.P.); (S.G.)
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
| | - Gillian E. Hanley
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (L.A.B.); (G.E.H.); (M.R.)
| | - Sharlene Gill
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada; (H.M.-C.); (S.P.); (S.G.)
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (L.A.B.); (G.E.H.); (M.R.)
| | - Meera Rayar
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (L.A.B.); (G.E.H.); (M.R.)
| | - Amirrtha Srikanthan
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1H 8M5, Canada;
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON K1H 8M5, Canada
- The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
| | - Mary A. De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (N.O.); (V.C.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC V6Z 1Y6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Garg R, Sayre EC, Pataky R, McTaggart-Cowan H, Peacock S, Loree JM, McKenzie M, Brown CJ, Yeung SS, De Vera MA. Direct Medical Spending on Young and Average-Age Onset Colorectal Cancer before and after Diagnosis: a Population-Based Costing Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024; 33:72-79. [PMID: 37878338 PMCID: PMC10774739 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-23-0498] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 07/31/2023] [Accepted: 10/23/2023] [Indexed: 10/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite a better understanding of the increasing incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yCRC; age at diagnosis <50 years), little is known about its economic burden. Therefore, we estimated direct medical spending on yCRC before and after diagnosis. METHODS We used linked administrative health databases in British Columbia, Canada, to create a study population of yCRC and average-age onset colorectal cancer (aCRC; age at diagnosis ≥50 years) cases, along with cancer-free controls. Over the 1-year period preceding a colorectal cancer diagnosis, we estimated direct medical spending on hospital visits, healthcare practitioners, and prescription medications. After diagnosis, we calculated cost attributable to yCRC and aCRC, which additionally included the cost of cancer treatments (e.g., chemotherapy and radiotherapy) across phases of care. RESULTS We included 1,058 yCRC (45.4% females; age at diagnosis 42.4 ± 6.2 years) and 12,619 aCRC (44.8% females; age at diagnosis of 68.1 ± 9.2 years) cases. Direct medical spending on the average yCRC and aCRC case during the year before diagnosis was $6,711 and $8,056, respectively. After diagnosis, the overall average annualized cost attributable to yCRC significantly differed in comparison with aCRC for the initial ($50,216 vs. $37,842; P < 0.001), continuing ($8,361 vs. $5,014; P < 0.001), and end-of-life cancer phase ($86,125 vs. $61,512; P < 0.001) but not end-of-life non-cancer phase ($77,273 vs. $23,316; P = 0.372). CONCLUSIONS Reported cost estimates may be used as inputs for future economic evaluations pertaining to yCRC. IMPACT We provided comprehensive cost estimates for healthcare spending on young-onset colorectal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ria Garg
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | | | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Simon Fraser University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Simon Fraser University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Jonathan M. Loree
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Carl J. Brown
- Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Mary A. De Vera
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Arthritis Research Canada, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pataky RE, Bryan S, Sadatsafavi M, Peacock S, Regier DA. Real-World Cost Effectiveness of a Policy of KRAS Testing to Inform Cetuximab or Panitumumab for Third-Line Therapy of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer in British Columbia, Canada. Pharmacoecon Open 2023; 7:997-1006. [PMID: 37819586 PMCID: PMC10721761 DOI: 10.1007/s41669-023-00444-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/14/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cetuximab and panitumumab, two anti-EGFR therapies, are widely used for third-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with wild-type KRAS, but there remains uncertainty around their cost effectiveness. The objective of this analysis was to conduct a real-world cost-effectiveness analysis of the policy change introducing KRAS testing and third-line anti-EGFR therapy mCRC in British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS We conducted secondary analysis of administrative data for a cohort of mCRC patients treated in BC in 2006-2015. Patients potentially eligible for KRAS testing and third-line therapy after the policy change (July 2009) were matched 2:1 to pre-policy patients using genetic matching on propensity score and baseline covariates. Costs and survival time were calculated over an 8-year time horizon, with bootstrapping to characterize uncertainty around endpoints. Cost effectiveness was expressed using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and the probability of cost effectiveness at a range of thresholds. RESULTS The cohort included 1757 mCRC patients (n = 456 pre-policy and n = 1304 post-policy; of those, n = 420 received cetuximab or panitumumab). There was a significant increase in survival and cost following the policy change. Adoption of KRAS testing and anti-EGFR therapy had an ICER of CA$73,759 per life-year gained (LYG) (95% CI 46,133-186,446). In scenario analysis, a reduction in cetuximab and panitumumab cost of at least 50% was required to make the policy change cost effective at a threshold of CA$50,000/LYG. CONCLUSION A policy of third-line anti-EGFR therapy informed by KRAS testing may be considered cost effective at thresholds above CA$70,000/LYG. Reduction in drug costs, through price discounts or potential future biosimilars, would make anti-EGFR therapy considerably more cost effective. By using real-world data for a large cohort with long follow-up we can assess the value of a policy of KRAS testing and anti-EGFR therapy achieved in practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reka E Pataky
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
- BC Cancer Research Centre, 675 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1L3, Canada.
| | - Stirling Bryan
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mohsen Sadatsafavi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Dean A Regier
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Oveisi N, Cheng V, Brotto LA, Peacock S, McTaggart-Cowan H, Hanley G, Gill S, Rayar M, Srikanthan A, Ellis U, De Vera MA. Sexual health outcomes among adolescent and young adult cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2023; 7:pkad087. [PMID: 37878813 PMCID: PMC10674049 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkad087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2023] [Revised: 09/08/2023] [Accepted: 09/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/27/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sexual health outcomes (SHO), which entail the physical, emotional, mental, and social impacts, are an important consideration for adolescent and young adults (AYA, ages 15-39) affected by cancer. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the current literature and evaluate AYA cancer impact on SHO. METHODS EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched from January 1, 2000 to September 28, 2022 to identify epidemiologic studies that used an analytic observational design, included individuals with AYA cancer and non-cancer control participants, and evaluated SHO. Odds ratios and prevalence ratios were calculated; random effects models were used to obtain pooled measures where possible. RESULTS Of 2621 articles, 8 were included that investigated 23 SHO in 9038 AYA cancer patients. Based on the sexual response cycle, outcomes were categorized as those occurring among males (desire = 1, arousal = 1, orgasm = 4, other = 3) and females (desire = 2, arousal = 1, orgasm = 2, pain = 6, other = 3). It was feasible to conduct meta-analysis for 3 female SHO and 5 male SHO. There were associations between AYA cancer and 3 SHO: vaginal dryness (pooled odds ratio = 3.94; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.02 to 7.70), ejaculatory dysfunction (pooled odds ratio = 3.66; 95% CI = 2.20 to 6.08), and testosterone level (pooled mean difference = -2.56 nmol/liter; 95% CI = -3.46 to -1.66; P = .00001). CONCLUSION This study found increased ejaculatory dysfunction and reduced testosterone levels in male AYA cancer patients and increased vaginal dryness in female AYA cancer patients, highlighting the need for sexual health resources in this population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Niki Oveisi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Vicki Cheng
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Lori A Brotto
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Gillian Hanley
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Sharlene Gill
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Meera Rayar
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Amirrtha Srikanthan
- Faculty of Medicine University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada
- The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Ursula Ellis
- University of British Columbia Library, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mary A De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Kalyta A, Ruan Y, Telford JJ, De Vera MA, Peacock S, Brown C, Donnellan F, Gill S, Brenner DR, Loree JM. Association of Reducing the Recommended Colorectal Cancer Screening Age With Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Costs in Canada Using OncoSim. JAMA Oncol 2023; 9:1432-1436. [PMID: 37471076 PMCID: PMC10360004 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.2312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2022] [Accepted: 04/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/21/2023]
Abstract
Importance Recent US guideline updates have advocated for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening to begin at age 45 years in average-risk adults, whereas Canadian screening programs continue to begin screening at age 50 years. Similarities in early-onset CRC rates in Canada and the US warrant discussion of earlier screening in Canada, but there is a lack of Canadian-specific modeling data to inform this. Objective To estimate the association of a lowered initiation age for CRC screening by biennial fecal immunochemical test (FIT) with CRC incidence, mortality, and health care system costs in Canada. Design, Setting, and Participants/Exposures This economic evaluation computational study used microsimulation modeling via the OncoSim platform. Main Outcomes and Measures Modeled rates of CRC incidence, mortality, and health care costs in Canadian dollars. Results This analysis included 4 birth cohorts (1973-1977, 1978-1982, 1983-1987, and 1988-1992) representative of the Canadian population accounting for previously documented effects of increasing CRC incidence in younger birth cohorts. Screening initiation at age 45 years resulted in a net 12 188 fewer CRC cases, 5261 fewer CRC deaths, and an added 92 112 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) to the cohort population over a 40-year period relative to screening from age 50 years. Screening initiation at age 40 years yielded 18 135 fewer CRC cases, 7988 fewer CRC deaths, and 150 373 QALYs. The cost per QALY decreased with younger birth cohorts to a cost of $762 per QALY when Canadians born in 1988 to 1992 began screening at age 45 years or $2622 per QALY with screening initiation at age 40 years. Although costs associated with screening and resulting therapeutic interventions increased with earlier screening, the overall health care system cost of managing CRC decreased. Conclusions and Relevance This economic evaluation study using microsimulation modeling found that earlier screening may reduce CRC disease burden and add life-years to the Canadian population at a modest cost. Guideline changes suggesting earlier CRC screening in Canada may be justified, but evaluation of the resulting effects on colonoscopy capacity is necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Yibing Ruan
- Department of Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Research, Alberta Health Services, Calgary, Canada
| | - Jennifer J. Telford
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Mary A. De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Carl Brown
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Division of General Surgery, St. Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Fergal Donnellan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Darren R. Brenner
- Departments of Oncology and Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gottschlich A, Gondara L, Smith LW, Anderson JJ, Cook D, Krajden M, Lee M, Martin RE, Melnikow J, Peacock S, Proctor L, Stuart G, Franco EL, van Niekerk D, Ogilvie GS. Colposcopy referral rates post-introduction of primary screening with human papillomavirus testing: evidence from a large British Columbia cohort study. Lancet Reg Health Am 2023; 26:100598. [PMID: 37786399 PMCID: PMC10542010 DOI: 10.1016/j.lana.2023.100598] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Revised: 09/01/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 10/04/2023]
Abstract
Background Shifting from cytology to human papillomavirus (HPV)-based cervical cancer screening will initially increase colposcopy referrals. The anticipated impact on health systems has been raised as a concern for implementation. It is unclear if the higher rate of colposcopy referrals is sustained after initial HPV-based screens or reverts to new lower baselines due to earlier detection and treatment of precancer. This study aimed to investigate long-term rates of colposcopy referrals after participation in HPV-based screening. Methods Participants of HPV for Cervical Cancer Screening trial (HPV FOCAL) received one (HPV1, N = 6204) or two (HPV2, N = 9540) HPV-based screens. After exit, they returned to British Columbia's (BC) cytology screening program. A comparison cohort from the BC screening population (BCS, N = 1,140,745) was identified, mirroring trial inclusion criteria. All participants were followed for 10-14 years through the provincial screening registry. Colposcopy referral rates per 1000 screens were calculated for each group. Trial colposcopy referrals for HPV1 and HPV2 were calculated under two referral scenarios: (1) all HPV positive referred to colposcopy; (2) cytology triage with ASCUS or greater referred to colposcopy. Colposcopy referrals from post-trial screens in HPV1 an HPV2 and all screens in BCS were based on actual recommendations from the screening program. A multivariable flexible survival regression model compared hazard ratios (HR) throughout follow-up. Findings Scenario 2 referral rates were higher during initial HPV screen(s) vs cytology screen (HPV1: 28 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 24, 33), HPV2: 32 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 29, 36), BCS: 8 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 8.9)). However, post-trial rates in HPV1 and HPV2 were significantly lower than in BCS. Cumulative rates in HPV1 and HPV2 approached the cumulative rate in BCS 11-12 years after HPV-based screening (HPV1: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 12), HPV2: 16 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 15-17), BCS: 11 per 1000 screens (95% CI: 10, 11)). Adjusted models demonstrated reductions in referral rates in HPV1 (HR = 0.6, 95% CI: 0.5, 0.7) and HPV2 (HR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6, 0.8) relative to BCS by 54 and 72 months post-final HPV screen respectively. Interpretation Reduced colposcopy referral rates were observed after initial rounds of HPV-based screening. After initial HPV screening, referral rates to colposcopy after cytology triage were below the current rates seen in a centralized cytology program after approximately four years. Any expected increase in referrals at initiation of HPV-based screening could be countered by staged program implementation. Funding This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R01 CA221918), Michael Smith Health Research BC (RT-2021-1595), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MCT82072).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Gottschlich
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Wayne State University, School of Medicine Departments of Oncology, Detroit, MI, USA
- Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Lovedeep Gondara
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Laurie W. Smith
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Cancer Control Research, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Jennifer Joy Anderson
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Darrel Cook
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mel Krajden
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Lower Mainland Laboratories, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Marette Lee
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ruth Elwood Martin
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Joy Melnikow
- Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Lily Proctor
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Cancer Control Research, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Eduardo L. Franco
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Gina S. Ogilvie
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Zeitouny S, Cheung DC, Bremner KE, Pataky RE, Pequeno P, Matelski J, Peacock S, Del Giudice ME, Lapointe-Shaw L, Tomlinson G, Mendlowitz AB, Mulder C, Tsui TCO, Perlis N, Walker JD, Sander B, Wong WWL, Krahn MD, Kulkarni GS. The impact of the early COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare system resource use and costs in two provinces in Canada: An interrupted time series analysis. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0290646. [PMID: 37682823 PMCID: PMC10490868 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290646] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2023] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 09/10/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The aim of our study was to assess the initial impact of COVID-19 on total publicly-funded direct healthcare costs and health services use in two Canadian provinces, Ontario and British Columbia (BC). METHODS This retrospective repeated cross-sectional study used population-based administrative datasets, linked within each province, from January 1, 2018 to December 27, 2020. Interrupted time series analysis was used to estimate changes in the level and trends of weekly resource use and costs, with March 16-22, 2020 as the first pandemic week. Also, in each week of 2020, we identified cases with their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test and estimated their healthcare costs until death or December 27, 2020. RESULTS The resources with the largest level declines (95% confidence interval) in use in the first pandemic week compared to the previous week were physician services [Ontario: -43% (-49%,-37%); BC: -24% (-30%,-19%) (both p<0.001)] and emergency department visits [Ontario: -41% (-47%,-35%); BC: -29% (-35%,-23%) (both p<0.001)]. Hospital admissions declined by 27% (-32%,-23%) in Ontario and 21% (-26%,-16%) in BC (both p<0.001). Resource use subsequently rose but did not return to pre-pandemic levels. Only home care and dialysis clinic visits did not significantly decrease compared to pre-pandemic. Costs for COVID-19 cases represented 1.3% and 0.7% of total direct healthcare costs in 2020 in Ontario and BC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Reduced utilization of healthcare services in the overall population outweighed utilization by COVID-19 patients in 2020. Meeting the needs of all patients across all services is essential to maintain resilient healthcare systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seraphine Zeitouny
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Douglas C. Cheung
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Divisions of Urology and Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Karen E. Bremner
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Reka E. Pataky
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - John Matelski
- Biostatistics Research Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - M. Elisabeth Del Giudice
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lauren Lapointe-Shaw
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of General Internal Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - George Tomlinson
- Biostatistics Research Unit, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrew B. Mendlowitz
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Toronto Centre for Liver Disease/Viral Hepatitis Care Network (VIRCAN), University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Carol Mulder
- Chiefs of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Teresa C. O. Tsui
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Child Health and Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nathan Perlis
- Divisions of Urology and Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Urology, Sprott Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jennifer D. Walker
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Beate Sander
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - William W. L. Wong
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
| | - Murray D. Krahn
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Girish S. Kulkarni
- Divisions of Urology and Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Urology, Sprott Department of Surgery, University Health Network, Cancer Clinical Research Unit, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Parmar A, Dai WF, Dionne F, Geirnaert M, Denburg A, Ahuja T, Beca J, Bouchard S, Chambers C, Hunt MJ, Husereau D, Lungu E, McDonald V, Mercer RE, Mitera G, Muñoz C, Naipaul R, Peacock S, Potashnik T, Tadrous M, Takhar P, Taylor M, Trudeau M, Wasney D, Gavura S, Chan KKW. Development of a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Rating Tool to Prioritize Real-World Evidence Questions for the Canadian Real-World Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) Collaboration. Curr Oncol 2023; 30:3776-3786. [PMID: 37185399 PMCID: PMC10137247 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30040286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Revised: 03/17/2023] [Accepted: 03/26/2023] [Indexed: 03/30/2023] Open
Abstract
The Canadian Real-world Evidence for Value of Cancer Drugs (CanREValue) collaboration developed an MCDA rating tool to assess and prioritize potential post-market real-world evidence (RWE) questions/uncertainties emerging from public drug funding decisions in Canada. In collaboration with a group of multidisciplinary stakeholders from across Canada, the rating tool was developed following a three-step process: (1) selection of criteria to assess the importance and feasibility of an RWE question; (2) development of rating scales, application of weights and calculating aggregate scores; and (3) validation testing. An initial MCDA rating tool was developed, composed of seven criteria, divided into two groups. Group A criteria assess the importance of an RWE question by examining the (1) drug’s perceived clinical benefit, (2) magnitude of uncertainty identified, and (3) relevance of the uncertainty to decision-makers. Group B criteria assess the feasibility of conducting an RWE analysis including the (1) feasibility of identifying a comparator, (2) ability to identify cases, (3) availability of comprehensive data, and (4) availability of necessary expertise and methodology. Future directions include partnering with the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health’s Provincial Advisory Group for further tool refinement and to gain insight into incorporating the tool into drug funding deliberations.
Collapse
|
13
|
Pataky RE, Bryan S, Sadatsafavi M, Peacock S, Regier DA. Tools for the Economic Evaluation of Precision Medicine: A Scoping Review of Frameworks for Valuing Heterogeneity-Informed Decisions. Pharmacoeconomics 2022; 40:931-941. [PMID: 35895254 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01176-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/26/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Precision medicine highlights the importance of exploring heterogeneity in the effectiveness and costs of interventions. Our objective was to identify and compare frameworks for valuing heterogeneity-informed decisions, and consider their strengths and weaknesses for application to precision medicine. METHODS We conducted a scoping review to identify papers that proposed an analytical framework to place a value, in terms of costs and health benefits, on using heterogeneity to inform treatment selection. The search included English-language papers indexed in MEDLINE, Embase or EconLit, and a manual review of references and citations. We compared the frameworks qualitatively considering: the purpose and setting of the analysis; the types of precision medicine interventions where the framework could be applied; and the framework's ability to address the methodological challenges of evaluating precision medicine. RESULTS Four analytical frameworks were identified: value of stratification, value of heterogeneity, expected value of individualised care and loss with respect to efficient diffusion. Each framework is suited to slightly different settings and research questions. All focus on maximising net benefit, and quantify the opportunity cost of ignoring heterogeneity by comparing individualised or stratified decisions to a means-based population-wide decision. Where the frameworks differ is in their approaches to uncertainty, and in the additional metrics they consider. CONCLUSIONS Identifying and utilising heterogeneity is at the core of precision medicine, and the ability to quantify the value of heterogeneity-informed decisions is critical. Using an analytical framework to value heterogeneity will help provide evidence to inform investment in precision medicine interventions, appropriately capturing the value of targeted health interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reka E Pataky
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Research Centre, 675 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1L3, Canada.
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
| | - Stirling Bryan
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mohsen Sadatsafavi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Research Centre, 675 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1L3, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Dean A Regier
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Research Centre, 675 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1L3, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bentley C, Teckle P, McQuarrie L, Peacock S, El Adam S. Impact of cancer on income, wealth and economic outcomes of adult cancer survivors: a scoping review. BMJ Open 2022; 12:e064714. [PMID: 36691144 PMCID: PMC9445784 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064714] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/11/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To summarise peer-reviewed evidence on the effect of a cancer diagnosis on the different sources of income of individuals diagnosed with cancer during adulthood (age ≥18 years). DESIGN A scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute's methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews and reporting results following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. DATA SOURCES Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE, Econ-Lit and Evidence-based Medicine Reviews, and reference lists of evidence syntheses. Published literature of any study type in English was searched from January 2000 to December 2020. ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA Study participants were individuals diagnosed with cancer during adulthood (age ≥18 years). Studies from any country and/or healthcare system were included. Primary outcomes were employment income (eg, individual or household); investment income (eg, stocks/bonds, properties, savings); government transfer payments (eg, disability income/pension); debt and bankruptcy. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Findings are summarised descriptively and in tabular form. RESULTS From 6297 citations retrieved, 63 studies (67 articles) met our inclusion criteria. Most (51%) were published in 2016-2020; 65% were published in the USA or Scandinavia. Survivors incurred debt (24 studies), depleted savings (13 studies) and liquidated stocks/bonds (7 studies) in response to a cancer diagnosis. 41 studies reported changes to employment income; of these, 12 case-control studies reported varying results: 5 reported survivors earned less than controls, 4 reported no significant differences, 2 reported mixed results and 1 reported income increased. Initial declines in income tended to lessen over time. CONCLUSIONS Cancer's impact on survivors' income is complex and time-varying. Longitudinal studies are needed to document the trend of initial declines in income, with declines lessening over time, and its variations. Study designs using standardised income measures and capturing treatment type and follow-up time will improve our understanding of cancer's impact on survivors' income.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Colene Bentley
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Paulos Teckle
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lisa McQuarrie
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Shiraz El Adam
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Garg R, Cheng V, Ellis U, Verma V, McTaggart-Cowan H, Peacock S, Loree JM, Sadatsafavi M, De Vera MA. Direct medical costs of young-onset colorectal cancer: a worldwide systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2022; 22:1100. [PMID: 36042470 PMCID: PMC9426038 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-022-08481-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Accepted: 08/16/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Given the rising incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yCRC) among individuals younger than 50 years old, understanding the economic burden of yCRC is required to inform the delivery of healthcare services. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of studies assessing the direct medical costs of yCRC, and where relevant average-age onset CRC (aCRC). Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to May 2022 for original, peer-reviewed studies, that reported direct medical costs (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy, outpatient visits, inpatient care, prescription medications) for yCRC and aCRC. We used a modified version of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist to appraise the studies. Costs were inflation-adjusted to 2020 US dollars. Results We included 14 studies from 10 countries, including the USA, England, France, Korea, Vietnam, China, Italy, Australia, Canada and Japan. Five studies focused on prevalent disease and reported annualized per-capita cost of prevalent yCRC, ranging from $2,263 to $16,801 and $1,412 to $14,997 among yCRC and aCRC cases, respectively. Nine studies estimated the cost of incident disease. Synthesis of per-capita costs incurred 12 months following colorectal cancer diagnosis ranged from $23,368 to $89,945 for yCRC and $19,929 to $67,195 for aCRC. Five studies used multivariable approaches to compare costs associated with yCRC and aCRC, four showed no differences and one suggested greater costs with yCRC. Conclusion Our synthesis of direct medical costs of yCRC across multiple jurisdictions provide relevant information for healthcare decisions, including on-going considerations for expanding CRC screening strategies to younger adults. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08481-6.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ria Garg
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Vicki Cheng
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ursula Ellis
- University of British Columbia Library, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Vanay Verma
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Jonathan M Loree
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.,Faculty of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mohsen Sadatsafavi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.,Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mary A De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. .,Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC, Canada. .,Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mah S, Seow H, Schnarr K, Reade C, Gayowsky A, Chan K, Peacock S, Sinnarajah A. Quality of end-of-life care for women with gynecologic malignancies in Ontario, Canada: A 14-year population-based retrospective analysis (132). Gynecol Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/s0090-8258(22)01357-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
|
17
|
Habbous S, Tai X, Beca JM, Arias J, Raphael MJ, Parmar A, Crespo A, Cheung MC, Eisen A, Eskander A, Singh S, Trudeau M, Gavura S, Dai WF, Irish J, Krzyzanowska M, Lapointe-Shaw L, Naipaul R, Peacock S, Yeung L, Forbes L, Chan KKW. Comparison of Use of Neoadjuvant Systemic Treatment for Breast Cancer and Short-term Outcomes Before vs During the COVID-19 Era in Ontario, Canada. JAMA Netw Open 2022; 5:e2225118. [PMID: 35917122 PMCID: PMC9346546 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.25118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
IMPORTANCE In response to an increase in COVID-19 infection rates in Ontario, several systemic treatment (ST) regimens delivered in the adjuvant setting for breast cancer were temporarily permitted for neoadjuvant-intent to defer nonurgent breast cancer surgical procedures. OBJECTIVE To examine the use and compare short-term outcomes of neoadjuvant-intent vs adjuvant ST in the COVID-19 era compared with the pre-COVID-19 era. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a retrospective population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Patients with cancer starting selected ST regimens in the COVID-19 era (March 11, 2020, to September 30, 2020) were compared to those in the pre-COVID-19 era (March 11, 2019, to March 10, 2020). Patients were diagnosed with breast cancer within 6 months of starting systemic therapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Estimates were calculated for the use of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant ST, the likelihood of receiving a surgical procedure, the rate of emergency department visits, hospital admissions, COVID-19 infections, and all-cause mortality between treatment groups over time. RESULTS Among a total of 10 920 patients included, 7990 (73.2%) started treatment in the pre-COVID-19 era and 7344 (67.3%) received adjuvant ST; the mean (SD) age was 61.6 (13.1) years. Neoadjuvant-intent ST was more common in the COVID-19 era (1404 of 2930 patients [47.9%]) than the pre-COVID-19 era (2172 of 7990 patients [27.2%]), with an odds ratio of 2.46 (95% CI, 2.26-2.69; P < .001). This trend was consistent across a range of ST regimens, but differed according to patient age and geography. The likelihood of receiving surgery following neoadjuvant-intent chemotherapy was similar in the COVID-19 era compared with the pre-COVID-19 era (log-rank P = .06). However, patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant-intent hormonal therapy were significantly more likely to receive surgery in the COVID-19 era (log-rank P < .001). After adjustment, there were no significant changes in the rate of emergency department visits over time between patients receiving neoadjuvant ST, adjuvant ST, or ST only during the ST treatment period or postoperative period. Hospital admissions decreased in the COVID-19 era for patients who received neoadjuvant ST compared with adjuvant ST or ST alone (P for interaction = .01 for both) in either setting. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this cohort study, patients were more likely to start neoadjuvant ST in the COVID-19 era, which varied across the province and by indication. There was limited evidence to suggest any substantial impact on short-term outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven Habbous
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Xiaochen Tai
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jaclyn M Beca
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jessica Arias
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michael J. Raphael
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Ambica Parmar
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrea Crespo
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Matthew C Cheung
- Hematology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrea Eisen
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Antoine Eskander
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Simron Singh
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - Maureen Trudeau
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Scott Gavura
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Wei Fang Dai
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jonathan Irish
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Monika Krzyzanowska
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Department of Medical Oncology & Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lauren Lapointe-Shaw
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
- Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rohini Naipaul
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lyndee Yeung
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Leta Forbes
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, RS McLaughlin Durham Regional Cancer Centre Lakeridge Health, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelvin K. W. Chan
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Cheung DC, Bremner KE, Tsui TCO, Croxford R, Lapointe-Shaw L, Giudice LD, Mendlowitz A, Perlis N, Pataky RE, Teckle P, Zeitouny S, Wong WWL, Sander B, Peacock S, Krahn MD, Kulkarni GS, Mulder C. "Bring the Hoses to Where the Fire Is!": Differential Impacts of Marginalization and Socioeconomic Status on COVID-19 Case Counts and Healthcare Costs. Value Health 2022; 25:1307-1316. [PMID: 35527165 PMCID: PMC9072854 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2021] [Revised: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 03/24/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Local health leaders and the Director General of the World Health Organization alike have observed that COVID-19 "does not discriminate." Nevertheless, the disproportionate representation of people of low socioeconomic status among those infected resembles discrimination. This population-based retrospective cohort study examined COVID-19 case counts and publicly funded healthcare costs in Ontario, Canada, with a focus on marginalization. METHODS Individuals with their first positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 test from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020, were linked to administrative databases and matched to negative/untested controls. Mean net (COVID-19-attributable) costs were estimated for 30 days before and after diagnosis, and differences among strata of age, sex, comorbidity, and measures of marginalization were assessed using analysis of variance tests. RESULTS We included 28 893 COVID-19 cases (mean age 54 years, 56% female). Most cases remained in the community (20 545, 71.1%) or in long-term care facilities (4478, 15.5%), whereas 944 (3.3%) and 2926 (10.1%) were hospitalized, with and without intensive care unit, respectively. Case counts were skewed across marginalization strata with 2 to 7 times more cases in neighborhoods with low income, high material deprivation, and highest ethnic concentration. Mean net costs after diagnosis were higher for males ($4752 vs $2520 for females) and for cases with higher comorbidity ($1394-$7751) (both P < .001) but were similar across levels of most marginalization dimensions (range $3232-$3737, all P ≥ .19). CONCLUSIONS This study suggests that allocating resources unequally to marginalized individuals may improve equality in outcomes. It highlights the importance of reducing risk of COVID-19 infection among marginalized individuals to reduce overall costs and increase system capacity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Douglas C Cheung
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Karen E Bremner
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Teresa C O Tsui
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Lauren Lapointe-Shaw
- Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; General Internal Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lisa Del Giudice
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Department of Family and Community Medicine, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Andrew Mendlowitz
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Nathan Perlis
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Reka E Pataky
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Paulos Teckle
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Seraphine Zeitouny
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - William W L Wong
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
| | - Beate Sander
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Murray D Krahn
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; General Internal Medicine, Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Girish S Kulkarni
- Division of Urology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; ICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Carol Mulder
- Chiefs of Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Tsui TCO, Zeitouny S, Bremner KE, Cheung DC, Mulder C, Croxford R, Del Giudice L, Lapointe-Shaw L, Mendlowitz A, Wong WWL, Perlis N, Sander B, Teckle P, Tomlinson G, Walker JD, Malikov K, McGrail KM, Peacock S, Kulkarni GS, Pataky RE, Krahn MD. Initial health care costs for COVID-19 in British Columbia and Ontario, Canada: an interprovincial population-based cohort study. CMAJ Open 2022; 10:E818-E830. [PMID: 36126976 PMCID: PMC9497846 DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20210328] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND COVID-19 imposed substantial health and economic burdens. Comprehensive population-based estimates of health care costs for COVID-19 are essential for planning and policy evaluation. We estimated publicly funded health care costs in 2 Canadian provinces during the pandemic's first wave. METHODS In this historical cohort study, we linked patients with their first positive SARS-CoV-2 test result by June 30, 2020, in 2 Canadian provinces (British Columbia and Ontario) to health care administrative databases and matched to negative or untested controls. We stratified patients by highest level of initial care: community, long-term care, hospital (without admission to the intensive care unit [ICU]) and ICU. Mean publicly funded health care costs for patients and controls, mean net (attributable to COVID-19) costs and total costs were estimated from 30 days before to 120 days after the index date, or to July 31, 2020, in 30-day periods for patients still being followed by the start of each period. RESULTS We identified 2465 matched people with a positive test result for SARS-CoV-2 in BC and 28 893 in Ontario. Mean age was 53.4 (standard deviation [SD] 21.8) years (BC) and 53.7 (SD 22.7) years (Ontario); 55.7% (BC) and 56.1% (Ontario) were female. Net costs in the first 30 days after the index date were $22 010 (95% confidence interval [CI] 19 512 to 24 509) and $15 750 (95% CI 15 354 to 16 147) for patients admitted to hospital, and $65 828 (95% CI 58 535 to 73 122) and $56 088 (95% CI 53 721 to 58 455) for ICU patients in BC and Ontario, respectively. In the community and long-term care settings, net costs were near 0. Total costs for all people, from 30 days before to 30 days after the index date, were $22 128 330 (BC) and $175 778 210 (Ontario). INTERPRETATION During the first wave, we found that mean costs attributable to COVID-19 were highest for patients with ICU admission and higher in BC than Ontario. Reducing the number of people who acquire COVID-19 and severity of illness are required to mitigate the economic impact of COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Teresa C O Tsui
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Seraphine Zeitouny
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Karen E Bremner
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Douglas C Cheung
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Carol Mulder
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Ruth Croxford
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Lisa Del Giudice
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Lauren Lapointe-Shaw
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Andrew Mendlowitz
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - William W L Wong
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Nathan Perlis
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Beate Sander
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Paulos Teckle
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - George Tomlinson
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Jennifer D Walker
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Kamil Malikov
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Kimberlyn M McGrail
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Girish S Kulkarni
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Reka E Pataky
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| | - Murray D Krahn
- Toronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment (THETA) Collaborative (Bremner, Cheung, Krahn, Mendlowitz, Sander, Tsui); Toronto General Hospital Research Institute (Lapointe-Shaw); General Internal Medicine (Lapointe-Shaw), Toronto General Hospital; Biostatistics Research Unit (Tomlinson), University Health Network; Hospital for Sick Children (Tsui); Chiefs of Ontario (Mulder); Ontario Ministry of Health and Ontario Ministry of Long-Term Care (Malikov); ICES Central (Croxford, Lapointe-Shaw, Wong, Sander, Walker, Kulkarni, Krahn); Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre (Del Giudice); Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Tsui); Divisions of Urology (Cheung, Kulkarni, Perlis) and Surgical Oncology (Cheung, Kulkarni), Department of Surgery, and Department of Family and Community Medicine (Del Giudice), Temerty Faculty of Medicine, and Institute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation (Mendlowitz), University of Toronto; Toronto, Ont.; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (Zeitouny, Teckle, Peacock, Pataky), BC Cancer Agency; Centre for Health Services and Policy Research (Zeitouny), School of Population and Public Health (McGrail, Pataky), University of British Columbia; University Canada West (Teckle), Vancouver, BC; Queens University (Mulder), Kingston, Ont.; School of Pharmacy, University of Waterloo (Wong), Kitchener, Ont.; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact (Walker), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.; Faculty of Health Sciences (Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Gottschlich A, Anderson JJ, Gondara L, Lee M, van Niekerk D, Smith LW, Cook D, Proctor L, Melnikow J, Stuart G, Martin RE, Peacock S, Franco EL, Krajden M, Ogilvie G. Abstract 6239: Colposcopy referral rates in an organized cytology-based cervix screening program after receipt of multiple rounds of HPV-based screening in the FOCAL trial. Cancer Res 2022. [DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.am2022-6239] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose: Due to the increased sensitivity but reduced specificity of HPV testing compared to cytology to detect cervical lesions, a shift from cytology to HPV-based screening will initially raise population colposcopy referrals rates, which could put a strain on the healthcare system. However, it is unclear if this increase persists past the initial round of HPV screening or if rates will subsequently decrease due to earlier detection of precancer using HPV screening, which once treated may not reoccur.
Methods: Participants of the HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (FOCAL) randomized controlled trial (N = 25,223; 2008-2016) received up to two rounds of HPV-based cervix screening during the trial before returning to the cytology-based screening program in British Columbia, Canada (BC). After trial exit, participants were followed through the provincial screening program, which collects results from all screens received in BC, to detect any referral to colposcopy. A comparison cohort from the BC general screening population was created by selecting individuals who were eligible for FOCAL but not invited to participate and pulling their screening data from the provincial registry over the same time period. Post-trial colposcopy rates, calculated per-screen (not per participant), were calculated for the FOCAL population and comparison cohort overall and for those who received one round of HPV testing, those who received two rounds, those who received a negative result on their one round of testing, and those who received two negative results on their two rounds of testing.
Results: The post-trial colposcopy referral rate in the overall FOCAL population was lower than in the comparison cohort. FOCAL had 180 referrals out of 30654 screens (5.9 per 1000 screens, 95%CI: 5.1-6.8), whereas the comparison cohort had 1765/177880 (9.9/1000, 95%CI: 9.5-10.4). The rates between those who had one versus two HPV tests were similar: one test: 99/17599 (5.6/1000, 95%CI: 4.6-6.8); two tests: 100/16945 (5.9/1000, 95%CI: 4.9-7.2). Rates were much lower among those who received negative results: one negative result: 55/15551 (3.5/1000, 95%CI: 2.7-4.6); two negative results: 40/12438 (3.2/1000, 95%CI: 2.4-4.4).
Conclusions: After the first round of HPV-based cervix screening, colposcopy rates may decrease potentially below that seen in a cytology-based program. To avoid a surge in colposcopy referrals that could exceed health system capacity, the introduction of HPV-based screening should be done in waves, for example by inviting a new age group each year to HPV-based screening.
Citation Format: Anna Gottschlich, Jennifer J. Anderson, Lovedeep Gondara, Marette Lee, Dirk van Niekerk, Laurie W. Smith, Darrel Cook, Lily Proctor, Joy Melnikow, Gavin Stuart, Ruth E. Martin, Stuart Peacock, Eduardo L. Franco, Mel Krajden, Gina Ogilvie. Colposcopy referral rates in an organized cytology-based cervix screening program after receipt of multiple rounds of HPV-based screening in the FOCAL trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 6239.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Gottschlich
- 1University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Lovedeep Gondara
- 2British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Marette Lee
- 2British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- 2British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Laurie W. Smith
- 3BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Darrel Cook
- 4British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lily Proctor
- 2British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Gavin Stuart
- 1University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Ruth E. Martin
- 1University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- 6Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Mel Krajden
- 4British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gina Ogilvie
- 1University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kalyta A, Loree JM, De Vera MA, Peacock S, Telford JJ, Brown CJ, Donnellan F, Gill S. Estimating the impact of reducing the age of colorectal cancer screening on cancer incidence, mortality, and costs in Canada using OncoSim. J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.3526] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
3526 Background: Organized colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs currently cover Canadians aged ≥50 at average-risk of developing CRC and have contributed to declining CRC incidence. Rising incidence of early-onset CRC in individuals < 50 has led to lowering of the recommended screening start age to 45 rather than 50 in some jurisdictions. We used OncoSim, a publicly-available simulation tool, to model the effects of earlier screening initiation on Canadian CRC incidence, mortality and healthcare costs. Methods: OncoSim uses Canadian population and cancer registry data to simulate a representative sample of individuals from birth to death. We modeled four scenarios: no screening in average-risk individuals, screening initiation at age 50, initiation age lowered to 45 in 2022, and initiation age lowered to 40 in 2022. Each includes 32 million simulated participants. In the model, average-risk screening involves biennial FIT, available to all simulated participants regardless of family history with participation of 60% at the first recruitment attempt and 80% for repeat screening. Participants with a family history in all 4 scenarios were eligible for additional screening by colonoscopy every 5 years. Results: In our model, earlier screening yields reduced CRC incidence and mortality with increasing benefit over time. By 2051, screening initiation at age 45 or 40 reduces age-standardized incidence by 3.4% and 4.8% respectively, and age-standardized mortality by 3.3% and 4.6% respectively, compared to initiation at age 50. Screening initiation at age 45 yields 3,848 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in 2051 at a cost of $9,350 per QALY gained and a 5% increase in colonoscopies performed. Initiation at age 40 yields 6,255 additional QALYs at $16,350 per QALY gained and a 9% increase in colonoscopies. The difference in screening costs compared to screening from age 50 is consistent year-to-year after 2024. In 2051 screening costs increase by $75mil and $155mil per year with initiation at ages 45 and 40 respectively, while costs of cancer management (including diagnosis, treatment, recurrence, palliative and end of life care) decrease by $42mil and $57mil respectively. Conclusions: Our model predicts that lowering the CRC screening initiation age for average-risk Canadians to 45 or 40 could reduce CRC incidence and mortality. Costs per QALY gained are high in the first few decades but decrease over time. Costs are modest after 30 years of screening compared to other life-preserving interventions such as dialysis. Our results suggest that lowering the screening age in Canada may be warranted, but further investigation is needed to assess capacity for increased colonoscopy demand.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anastasia Kalyta
- University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | - Carl J Brown
- Providence Health-St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Chi KN, Saad F, Parulekar WR, Emmenegger U, Hotte SJ, Pouliot F, Bauman G, Zukotynski KA, Peacock S, Wyatt AW, Beauregard JM, Lee J, Uribe C, Dellar C, Ding K, Benard F. CCTG PR21: A randomized phase II study of [ 177lu]lu-PSMA-617 verus docetaxel in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and PSMA-positive disease (NCT04663997). J Clin Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2022.40.16_suppl.tps5110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
TPS5110 Background: [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 improves outcome in men with metastatic, PSMA positive CRPC post androgen pathway inhibitor therapy and taxane chemotherapy compared to standard care (excluding chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radium-223 and investigational drugs; Sartor et al, NEJM 2021). The relative efficacy, adverse event experience and impact on QOL of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 compared to docetaxel chemotherapy in this patient population is unknown. We hypothesize that [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 will improve radiographic PFS (rPFS) compared to docetaxel chemotherapy with a favourable safety and tolerability profile. Methods: CCTG PR21 is a Canadian Cancer Trials Group randomized phase II trial with a primary objective to compare rPFS between [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 7.4 GBq (+/- 10%) IV q 6 weekly (maximum 6 cycles) versus docetaxel 75 mg/m2 q 3 weekly (maximum 12 cycles). Secondary objectives are to compare the two arms with respect to: 6-month PFS rate (PCWG3 and RECIST 1.1), second rPFS after crossover to the alternate therapy, time to commencement of 3rd line systemic therapy, OS, PSA decline from baseline, clinical benefit rate and adverse events. Tertiary objectives include evaluation of QOL (FACT-P and EQ5D-5L), cost effectiveness, ctDNA and radiographic based prognostic and predictive biomarkers, dosimetry based approach to measurement of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 activity and creation of tissue and image biobanks. Key eligibility criteria include: mCRPC with PSMA positive disease using 18F or 68Ga radionuclide label, progression on ADT + ARPI therapy (using PSA, RECIST 1.1 or PCWG3 criteria) and adequate organ function. Statistical Design: Patients are allocated in 1:1 ratio to [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 or docetaxel balanced for stratification factors of ECOG PS, LDH, visceral metastases, previous docetaxel in the castration sensitive setting > 1 year prior to enrollment as well as centre. Assuming a 6-month median rPFS for the control group, the detection of a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.67 with 80% power using a 1-sided 5% level test will require accrual of 200 participants in 24 months with 12-month follow-up to trigger the primary analysis. Conduct to Date: Study activation Dec 17 2020. Enrollment as of January 31 2022: 25. The DSMC last reviewed and recommended continuation of the trial in December 2021. Clinical trial information: NCT04663997.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kim N. Chi
- BC Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Fred Saad
- University of Montréal Health Center, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | | | | | | | - Frederic Pouliot
- Cancer Research Center, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Québec-Université Laval, Québec City, QC, Canada
| | - Glenn Bauman
- Western University, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Alexander William Wyatt
- Vancouver Prostate Centre, Department of Urologic Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Justin Lee
- Lions Gate Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Carlos Uribe
- BCCA - Vancouver Cancer Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Conor Dellar
- Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | - Keyue Ding
- Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Kingston, ON, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Howren A, Sayre EC, Cheng V, Oveisi N, McTaggart-Cowan H, Peacock S, De Vera MA. Risk of Anxiety and Depression after Diagnosis of Young-Onset Colorectal Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Curr Oncol 2022; 29:3072-3081. [PMID: 35621639 PMCID: PMC9140150 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29050249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/24/2022] [Revised: 04/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/20/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Given the increasing incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer (yCRC; <50 years), we aimed to evaluate the risk of depression and anxiety in individuals with yCRC in comparison to average-age-onset CRC (aCRC; ≥50 years) and to cancer-free controls, with stratification by sex. Our cohort study identified individuals (≥18 years) with CRC and cancer-free controls (10:1) matched on age and sex using population-based linked administrative health databases in British Columbia, Canada. We assessed depression and anxiety using validated algorithms. We evaluated the risk of depression and anxiety using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. The cohort included 54,634 individuals with CRC (46.5% female, mean age 67.9 years) and 546,340 controls (46.5% female, mean age 67.9 years). Those with yCRC as compared to aCRC had an increased risk for depression (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25 to 1.60), and when stratified by sex, the risk was only significant among males (aHR 1.76; 95% CI 1.48 to 2.10). When comparing individuals with yCRC to cancer-free controls, the overall risk of depression (aHR 1.00; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.10) and anxiety (aHR 1.10; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.27) was non-significant; however, males had a significantly higher risk for mental health disorders, specifically depression (aHR 1.17; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.33). Altogether, our findings that individuals with yCRC experience higher risk of depression compared to those with aCRC as well as cancer-free controls, particularly among males, suggest effects of age and sex on mental health outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alyssa Howren
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (A.H.); (V.C.); (N.O.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
- Arthritis Research Canada, Vancouver, BC V5Y 3P2, Canada;
| | - Eric C. Sayre
- Arthritis Research Canada, Vancouver, BC V5Y 3P2, Canada;
| | - Vicki Cheng
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (A.H.); (V.C.); (N.O.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
| | - Niki Oveisi
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (A.H.); (V.C.); (N.O.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
| | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada; (H.M.-C.); (S.P.)
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada; (H.M.-C.); (S.P.)
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
| | - Mary A. De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (A.H.); (V.C.); (N.O.)
- Collaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
- Arthritis Research Canada, Vancouver, BC V5Y 3P2, Canada;
- Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC V6Z IY6, Canada
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-604-827-2138
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Gottschlich A, Gondara L, Smith LW, Cook D, Martin RE, Lee M, Peacock S, Proctor L, Stuart G, Krajden M, Franco EL, van Niekerk D, Ogilvie G. HPV-based screening at extended intervals missed fewer cervical precancers than cytology in the HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial. Int J Cancer 2022; 151:897-905. [PMID: 35460070 PMCID: PMC9336650 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.34039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2022] [Revised: 03/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
While cervix screening using cytology is recommended at 2-3-year intervals, given the increased sensitivity of human papillomavirus (HPV)-based screening to detect precancer, HPV-based screening is recommended every 4-5-year. As organized cervix screening programs transition from cytology to HPV-based screening with extended intervals, there is some concern that cancers will be missed between screens. Participants in HPV FOr CervicAL Cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial received cytology (Cytology Arm) at 24-month intervals or HPV-based screening (HPV Arm) at 48-month intervals, and co-testing (cytology and HPV testing) at exit. We investigated the results of the co-test to identify participants with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) who would not have had their precancer detected if they had only their arm's respective primary screen. In the Cytology Arm, 25/62 (40.3%) identified CIN2+s were missed by primary screen (i.e., normal cytology/positive HPV test) and all 25 had normal cytology at the prior 24-month screen. In the HPV arm, three CIN2+s (3/49, 6.1%) were missed by primary screen (i.e., negative HPV test/abnormal cytology). One of these three misses had low-grade cytology findings and would also not have been referred to colposcopy outside of the trial. Multiple rounds of cytology did not detect some precancerous lesions detected with one round of HPV-based screening. In our population, cytology missed more CIN2+, even at shorter screening intervals, than HPV-based screening. This assuages concerns about missed detection post-implementation of an extended interval HPV-based screening program. We recommend that policymakers consider a shift from cytology to HPV-based cervix screening. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Gottschlich
- BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.,University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Lovedeep Gondara
- Department of Data and Analytics, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Laurie W Smith
- BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.,BC Cancer Agency, Cancer Control Research, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Darrel Cook
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, Canada
| | | | - Marette Lee
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada.,BC Cancer Agency, Cervix Screening Program, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- BC Cancer Agency, Cancer Control Research, Vancouver, Canada.,Simon Fraser University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Lily Proctor
- BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.,University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada.,BC Cancer Agency, Cervix Screening Program, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Mel Krajden
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada.,BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Eduardo L Franco
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada.,BC Cancer Agency, Cervix Screening Program, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Gina Ogilvie
- BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, Canada.,University of British Columbia, Faculty of Medicine, Vancouver, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Mohan P, Lemoine J, Trotter C, Rakova I, Billings P, Peacock S, Kao C, Wang Y, Xia F, Eng CM, Benn P. Clinical experience with non-invasive prenatal screening for single-gene disorders. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2022; 59:33-39. [PMID: 34358384 PMCID: PMC9302116 DOI: 10.1002/uog.23756] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/02/2021] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess the performance of a non-invasive prenatal screening test (NIPT) for a panel of dominant single-gene disorders (SGD) with a combined population incidence of 1 in 600. METHODS Cell-free fetal DNA isolated from maternal plasma samples accessioned from 14 April 2017 to 27 November 2019 was analyzed by next-generation sequencing, targeting 30 genes, to look for pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants implicated in 25 dominant conditions. The conditions included Noonan spectrum disorders, skeletal disorders, craniosynostosis syndromes, Cornelia de Lange syndrome, Alagille syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, epileptic encephalopathy, SYNGAP1-related intellectual disability, CHARGE syndrome, Sotos syndrome and Rett syndrome. NIPT-SGD was made available as a clinical service to women with a singleton pregnancy at ≥ 9 weeks' gestation, with testing on maternal and paternal genomic DNA to assist in interpretation. A minimum of 4.5% fetal fraction was required for test interpretation. Variants identified in the mother were deemed inconclusive with respect to fetal carrier status. Confirmatory prenatal or postnatal diagnostic testing was recommended for all screen-positive patients and follow-up information was requested. The screen-positive rates with respect to the clinical indication for testing were evaluated. RESULTS A NIPT-SGD result was available for 2208 women, of which 125 (5.7%) were positive. Elevated test-positive rates were observed for referrals with a family history of a disorder on the panel (20/132 (15.2%)) or a primary indication of fetal long-bone abnormality (60/178 (33.7%)), fetal craniofacial abnormality (6/21 (28.6%)), fetal lymphatic abnormality (20/150 (13.3%)) or major fetal cardiac defect (4/31 (12.9%)). For paternal age ≥ 40 years as a sole risk factor, the test-positive rate was 2/912 (0.2%). Of the 125 positive cases, follow-up information was available for 67 (53.6%), with none classified as false-positive. No false-negative cases were identified. CONCLUSIONS NIPT can assist in the early detection of a set of SGD, particularly when either abnormal ultrasound findings or a family history is present. Additional clinical studies are needed to evaluate the optimal design of the gene panel, define target populations and assess patient acceptability. NIPT-SGD offers a safe and early prenatal screening option. © 2021 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Y. Wang
- Baylor GeneticsHoustonTXUSA
- Baylor College of MedicineHoustonTXUSA
| | - F. Xia
- Baylor GeneticsHoustonTXUSA
- Baylor College of MedicineHoustonTXUSA
| | - C. M. Eng
- Baylor GeneticsHoustonTXUSA
- Baylor College of MedicineHoustonTXUSA
| | - P. Benn
- Department of Genetics and Genome SciencesUniversity of Connecticut Health CenterFarmingtonCTUSA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Jenei K, Burgess M, Peacock S, Raymakers AJ. Experiences and perspectives of individuals accessing CAR-T cell therapy: A qualitative analysis of online Reddit discussions. J Cancer Policy 2021; 30:100303. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2021.100303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2021] [Revised: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
|
27
|
Smith LW, Racey CS, Gondara L, Krajden M, Lee M, Martin RE, Stuart G, Peacock S, Coldman AJ, Franco EL, van Niekerk D, Ogilvie GS. Women's acceptability of and experience with primary human papillomavirus testing for cervix screening: HPV FOCAL trial cross-sectional online survey results. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e052084. [PMID: 34620663 PMCID: PMC8499254 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To study participant's acceptability of and attitudes towards human papillomavirus (HPV) testing compared with cytology for cervical cancer screening and what impact having an HPV positive result may have in future acceptability of screening. DESIGN Cross-sectional online survey of clinical trial participants. SETTING Primary care, population-based Cervix Screening Program, British Columbia, Canada. PARTICIPANTS A total of 5532 participants from the HPV FOCAL trial, in which women received HPV and cytology testing at study exit, were included in the analysis. Median age was 54 years. The median time of survey completion was 3 years after trial exit. OUTCOME MEASURES Acceptability of HPV testing for primary cervical cancer screening (primary); attitudes and patient perceptions towards HPV testing and receipt of HPV positive screen results (secondary). RESULTS Most respondents (63%) were accepting of HPV testing, with the majority (69%) accepting screening to begin at age 30 years with HPV testing. Only half of participants (54%) were accepting of an extended screening interval of 4-5 years. In multivariable logistic regression, women who received an HPV positive screen test result during the trial (OR=1.41 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80) or were older (OR=1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02) were more likely to report HPV testing as acceptable. CONCLUSIONS In this evaluation of acceptability and attitudes regarding HPV testing for cervix screening, most are accepting of HPV testing for screening; however, findings indicate heterogeneity in concerns and experiences surrounding HPV testing and receipt of HPV positive results. These findings provide insights for the development of education, information and communication strategies during implementation of HPV-based cervical cancer screening. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS ISRCTN79347302 and NCT00461760.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laurie W Smith
- Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - C Sarai Racey
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lovedeep Gondara
- Department of Data and Analytics, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Mel Krajden
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Public Health Laboratory, BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Marette Lee
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Cervix Screening Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Ruth Elwood Martin
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Andrew J Coldman
- Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Eduardo L Franco
- Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Québec, Canada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Cervix Screening Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gina S Ogilvie
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Khan A, Seow H, Sutradhar R, Peacock S, Chan K, Burge F, McGrail K, Lawson B, Raymakers A, Barbera L. 42: Understanding End-of-Life Cancer Care in Canada: an Updated 12-Year Retrospective Analysis of Three Provinces’ Administrative Health Care Data. Radiother Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(21)08920-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|
29
|
Peacock S, Briggs D, Barnardo M, Battle R, Brookes P, Callaghan C, Clark B, Collins C, Day S, Diaz Burlinson N, Dunn P, Fernando R, Fuggle S, Harmer A, Kallon D, Keegan D, Key T, Lawson E, Lloyd S, Martin J, McCaughan J, Middleton D, Partheniou F, Poles A, Rees T, Sage D, Santos-Nunez E, Shaw O, Willicombe M, Worthington J. BSHI/BTS guidance on crossmatching before deceased donor kidney transplantation. Int J Immunogenet 2021; 49:22-29. [PMID: 34555264 PMCID: PMC9292213 DOI: 10.1111/iji.12558] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/30/2021] [Revised: 08/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/31/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
All UK H&I laboratories and transplant units operate under a single national kidney offering policy, but there have been variations in approach regarding when to undertake the pre‐transplant crossmatch test. In order to minimize cold ischaemia times for deceased donor kidney transplantation we sought to find ways to be able to report a crossmatch result as early as possible in the donation process. A panel of experts in transplant surgery, nephrology, specialist nursing in organ donation and H&I (all relevant UK laboratories represented) assessed evidence and opinion concerning five factors that relate to the effectiveness of the crossmatch process, as follows: when the result should be ready for reporting; what level of donor HLA typing is needed; crossmatch sample type and availability; fairness and equity; risks and patient safety. Guidelines aimed at improving practice based on these issues are presented, and we expect that following these will allow H&I laboratories to contribute to reducing CIT in deceased donor kidney transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Peacock
- Tissue Typing Laboratory, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - D Briggs
- H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Birmingham Vincent Drive, Birmingham, UK
| | - M Barnardo
- Clinical Transplant Immunology, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - R Battle
- H&I Laboratory, SNBTS, Edinburgh, UK
| | - P Brookes
- H&I Laboratory, Harefield Hospital, Harefield, UK
| | - C Callaghan
- Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, Guy's Hospital, London, UK
| | - B Clark
- H&I Laboratory, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, UK
| | - C Collins
- H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Birmingham Vincent Drive, Birmingham, UK
| | - S Day
- H&I Laboratory, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK
| | - N Diaz Burlinson
- Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK
| | - P Dunn
- Transplant Laboratory, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK
| | - R Fernando
- H&I Laboratory, The Anthony Nolan Laboratories, Royal Free Hospital, UK
| | - S Fuggle
- Organ Donation & Transplantation, NHSBT, Stoke Gifford, Bristol, UK
| | - A Harmer
- H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Barnsley Centre, Barnsley, UK
| | - D Kallon
- H & I Laboratory, Royal London Hospital, London, UK
| | - D Keegan
- Department of H&I, Beaumont Hospital, Dublin, UK
| | - T Key
- H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Barnsley Centre, Barnsley, UK
| | - E Lawson
- Organ Donation and Transplantation, NHSBT, Birmingham, UK
| | - S Lloyd
- Welsh Transplantation & Immunogenetics Laboratory, Cardiff, UK
| | - J Martin
- H&I Laboratory, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | - J McCaughan
- H&I Laboratory, Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast, UK
| | - D Middleton
- H&I Laboratory, Liverpool Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - F Partheniou
- H&I Laboratory, Liverpool Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - A Poles
- H&I Laboratory, University Hospitals Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.,H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Filton, Bristol, UK
| | - T Rees
- Welsh Transplantation & Immunogenetics Laboratory, Cardiff, UK
| | - D Sage
- H&I Laboratory, NHSBT Tooting Centre, London, UK
| | - E Santos-Nunez
- H&I Laboratory, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - O Shaw
- H&I Laboratory, Viapath, Guys & St Thomas, London, UK
| | - M Willicombe
- Department of Immunology and Inflammation, Imperial College London, UK
| | - J Worthington
- Transplantation Laboratory, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
El Adam S, Bentley C, McQuarrie L, Teckle P, Peacock S. Impact of a cancer diagnosis on the income of adult cancer survivors: a scoping review protocol. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e047315. [PMID: 34531208 PMCID: PMC8451281 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION While the socioeconomic impact of a cancer diagnosis on cancer survivors has gained some attention in the literature, to our knowledge, a review of the evidence on changes in income due to cancer has yet to be undertaken. In this paper, we describe a scoping review protocol to review the evidence on the effect of a cancer diagnosis on the income of individuals diagnosed with cancer during adulthood (≥18 years). The purpose is to summarise existing evidence, identify gaps in current research and highlight priority areas for future research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS This study will follow the methodological framework for conducting scoping reviews by the Joanna Briggs Institute In collaboration with a health science librarian, we developed a search strategy to be performed in Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Econ-Literature and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews. This scoping review will search the scientific literature published in English from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2020. Studies that measured the impact of cancer on income of adults will be eligible for inclusion. Studies exclusively focused on employment outcomes (eg, return to work, unemployment, productivity loss), financial expenditures, childhood cancer survivors and/or the caregivers of cancer survivors will be excluded. Three independent reviewers will conduct screening and extract data. Descriptive information will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This scoping review will analyse data from publicly available materials and thus does not require ethics approval. Results from this review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and/or conference presentation with the potential to identify gaps in the literature, suggest strategies for standardised terminology and provide directions for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shiraz El Adam
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Colene Bentley
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lisa McQuarrie
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Paulos Teckle
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Beca JM, Dai WF, Pataky RE, Tran D, Dvorani E, Isaranuwatchai W, Peacock S, Alvi R, Cheung WY, Earle CC, Gavura S, Chan KKW. Real-world Safety of Bevacizumab with First-line Combination Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Population-based Retrospective Cohort Studies in Three Canadian Provinces. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2021; 34:e7-e17. [PMID: 34456106 DOI: 10.1016/j.clon.2021.08.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/08/2020] [Revised: 07/16/2021] [Accepted: 08/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To examine the real-world safety of adding bevacizumab to first-line irinotecan-based chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients diagnosed with CRC in three Canadian provinces (Ontario, Saskatchewan and British Columbia) who received publicly funded bevacizumab and/or irinotecan from 2000 to 2016 were identified from cancer registries. Propensity score 1:1 matching (PSM) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were performed to contemporaneous and historical controls, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Safety end points evaluated during first-line treatment plus 30 days included mortality within 30 days and all-cause-, chemotherapy- and bevacizumab-related hospitalisations. Chemotherapy- and bevacizumab-related visits were defined as hospitalisations for specific conditions commonly associated with chemotherapy (e.g. infections) or bevacizumab (e.g. arteriovenous thromboembolism) using most responsible diagnosis codes. In PSM and IPTW-weighted cohorts, we assessed event frequencies using odds ratios from logistic regressions and event rate ratios using negative binomial regression models. The results from each province and comparison were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS We identified 16 250 mCRC patients who received first-line irinotecan-based treatment. In PSM cohorts, bevacizumab was associated with fewer deaths within 30 days of treatment compared with contemporaneous (pooled odds ratio = 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.75) and historical controls (pooled odds ratio = 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.93). Hospitalisations were more frequent among patients treated with bevacizumab compared with historical controls but similar to contemporaneous controls. As patients receiving bevacizumab were exposed to a longer average treatment duration, across their full treatment duration, patients receiving bevacizumab had significantly lower rates of hospitalisations (contemporaneous pooled rate ratio = 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.67; historical pooled rate ratio = 0.73; 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.95). Similar trends were observed for chemotherapy- and bevacizumab-related hospitalisations and in IPTW-weighted cohorts. DISCUSSION We did not observe any increase in rates of hospitalisation or death within 30 days of treatment among mCRC patients treated with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone; these findings should be interpreted with caution due to the risk of residual confounding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J M Beca
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
| | - W F Dai
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - R E Pataky
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - D Tran
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | - E Dvorani
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - W Isaranuwatchai
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - S Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada
| | - R Alvi
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | - W Y Cheung
- Cancer Control Alberta, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - C C Earle
- Canadian Partnership Against Cancer, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - S Gavura
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - K K W Chan
- Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Lo AC, James LP, Prica A, Raymakers A, Peacock S, Qu M, Louie AV, Savage KJ, Sehn L, Hodgson D, Yang JC, Eich HTT, Wirth A, Hunink MGM. Positron-emission tomography-based staging is cost-effective in early-stage follicular lymphoma. J Nucl Med 2021; 63:543-548. [PMID: 34413148 PMCID: PMC8973292 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.262324] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2021] [Revised: 07/15/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
The objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of staging PET/CT in early-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) from the Canadian health-care system perspective. Methods: The study population was FL patients staged as early-stage using conventional CT imaging and planned for curative-intent radiation therapy (RT). A decision analytic model simulated the management after adding staging PET/CT versus using staging CT alone. In the no-PET/CT strategy, all patients proceeded to curative-intent RT as planned. In the PET/CT strategy, PET/CT information could result in an increased RT volume, switching to a noncurative approach, or no change in RT treatment as planned. The subsequent disease course was described using a state-transition cohort model over a 30-y time horizon. Diagnostic characteristics, probabilities, utilities, and costs were derived from the literature. Baseline analysis was performed using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs (2019 Canadian dollars), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted, evaluating net monetary benefit at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 10,000 simulations was performed. Costs and QALYs were discounted at a rate of 1.5%. Results: In the reference case scenario, staging PET/CT was the dominant strategy, resulting in an average lifetime cost saving of $3,165 and a gain of 0.32 QALYs. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, the PET/CT strategy remained the preferred strategy for all scenarios supported by available data. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the PET/CT strategy was strongly dominant in 77% of simulations (i.e., reduced cost and increased QALYs) and was cost-effective in 89% of simulations (i.e., either saved costs or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below $100,000/QALY). Conclusion: Our analysis showed that the use of PET/CT to stage early-stage FL patients reduces cost and improves QALYs. Patients with early-stage FL should undergo PET/CT before curative-intent RT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Melody Qu
- London Health Sciences Centre, Canada
| | | | | | | | | | - Joanna C Yang
- University of California, San Francisco, United States
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Hoheneder R, Fitz E, Bischof RH, Russmayer H, Ferrero P, Peacock S, Sauer M. Efficient conversion of hemicellulose sugars from spent sulfite liquor into optically pure L-lactic acid by Enterococcus mundtii. Bioresour Technol 2021; 333:125215. [PMID: 33964599 DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2021] [Revised: 04/19/2021] [Accepted: 04/20/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
Spent sulfite liquor (SSL), a waste stream from wood pulp production, has great potential as carbon source for future industrial fermentations. In the present study, SSL was separated into a hemicellulose derived sugar syrup (HDSS) and a lignosulfonic fraction by simulated moving bed chromatography. The recovery of SSL sugars in the HDSS was 89% and the fermentation inhibitors furfural, 5-hydroxymethylfurfural and acetic acid were removed by 98.7%, 60.5% and 75.5%, respectively. The obtained sugars have been converted to L-lactic acid, a building block for bioplastics, by fermentation with the lactic acid bacterium Enterococcus mundtii DSM4838. Batch fermentations on HDSS produced up to 56.3 g/L L-lactic acid. Simultaneous conversion of pentose and hexose sugars during fed-batch fermentation of wildtype E. mundtii led to 87.9 g/L optically pure (>99%) L-lactic acid, with maximum productivities of 3.25 g/L.h and yields approaching 1.00 g/g during feeding phase from HDSS as carbon source.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Hoheneder
- Department of Wood Chemistry & Biotechnology, Wood Kplus - Kompetenzzentrum Holz GmbH, c/o Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria; Institute of Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology, Department of Biotechnology, BOKU-University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria
| | - E Fitz
- Department of Wood Chemistry & Biotechnology, Wood Kplus - Kompetenzzentrum Holz, c/o Werkstraße 2, 4860 Lenzing, Austria
| | - R H Bischof
- Lenzing Aktiengesellschaft, Werkstraße 2, 4860 Lenzing, Austria
| | - H Russmayer
- Institute of Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology, Department of Biotechnology, BOKU-University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria
| | - P Ferrero
- Amalgamated Research LLC, 2531 Orchard Drive East, Twin Falls, ID 83301, United States
| | - S Peacock
- Amalgamated Research LLC, 2531 Orchard Drive East, Twin Falls, ID 83301, United States
| | - M Sauer
- Institute of Microbiology and Microbial Biotechnology, Department of Biotechnology, BOKU-University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria.
| |
Collapse
|
34
|
Jenei K, Peacock S, Burgess M, Mitton C. Describing Sources of Uncertainty in Cancer Drug Formulary Priority Setting across Canada. Curr Oncol 2021; 28:2708-2719. [PMID: 34287280 PMCID: PMC8293120 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28040236] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2021] [Revised: 07/05/2021] [Accepted: 07/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Over the years, there have been significant advances in oncology. However, the rate that therapeutics come to market has increased, while the strength of evidence has decreased. Currently, there is limited understanding about how these uncertainties are managed in provincial funding decisions for cancer therapeutics. We conducted qualitative interviews with six senior officials from four different Canadian provinces (British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and Ontario) and a document review of the uncertainties found in submissions to the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR). Participants reported considerable uncertainty related to a lack of solid clinical evidence (early-phase clinical trials: generalizability, immature data, and the use of unvalidated surrogate outcomes). Proposed strategies to deal with the uncertainty included risk-sharing agreements, collection of real-world evidence (RWE), and ongoing collaboration between federal groups and provinces. The document review added to the reported uncertainties by classifying them into five main categories: trial validity, population, comparators, outcomes, and intervention. This study highlights how decision makers must deal with significant amounts of uncertainty in funding decisions for cancer drugs, most of which stems from methodological limitations in clinical trials. There is a critical need for transparent priority-setting processes and mechanisms to reevaluate drugs to ensure benefit given the high level of uncertainty of novel therapeutics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kristina Jenei
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (M.B.); (C.M.)
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Control Research, BC Cancer, Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada;
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
| | - Michael Burgess
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (M.B.); (C.M.)
- W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada
| | - Craig Mitton
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada; (M.B.); (C.M.)
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Castanon A, Rebolj M, Burger EA, de Kok IMCM, Smith MA, Hanley SJB, Carozzi FM, Peacock S, O'Mahony JF. Cervical screening during the COVID-19 pandemic: optimising recovery strategies. Lancet Public Health 2021; 6:e522-e527. [PMID: 33939965 PMCID: PMC8087290 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-2667(21)00078-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2021] [Revised: 04/01/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2021] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
Disruptions to cancer screening services have been experienced in most settings as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideally, programmes would resolve backlogs by temporarily expanding capacity; however, in practice, this is often not possible. We aim to inform the deliberations of decision makers in high-income settings regarding their cervical cancer screening policy response. We caution against performance measures that rely solely on restoring testing volumes to pre-pandemic levels because they will be less effective at mitigating excess cancer diagnoses than will targeted measures. These measures might exacerbate pre-existing inequalities in accessing cervical screening by disregarding the risk profile of the individuals attending. Modelling of cervical screening outcomes before and during the pandemic supports risk-based strategies as the most effective way for screening services to recover. The degree to which screening is organised will determine the feasibility of deploying some risk-based strategies, but implementation of age-based risk stratification should be universally feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alejandra Castanon
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
| | - Matejka Rebolj
- Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, School of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Emily Annika Burger
- Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health, Center for Health Decision Science, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Health Management and Health Economics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Inge M C M de Kok
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Megan A Smith
- Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney-Cancer Council, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sharon J B Hanley
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
| | | | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - James F O'Mahony
- Centre for Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Pataky RE, Beca J, Tran D, Dai WF, Dvorani E, Isaranuwatchai W, Peacock S, Alvi R, Cheung WY, Earle CC, Gavura S, Chan KKW. Real-World Cost-Effectiveness of Bevacizumab With First-Line Combination Chemotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Studies in Three Canadian Provinces. MDM Policy Pract 2021; 6:23814683211021060. [PMID: 34212111 PMCID: PMC8216386 DOI: 10.1177/23814683211021060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/13/2020] [Accepted: 05/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background. Real-world evidence can be a valuable tool when clinical trial data are incomplete or uncertain. Bevacizumab was adopted as first-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on significant survival improvements in initial clinical trials; however, survival benefit diminished in subsequent analyses. Consequently, there is uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab therapy achieved in practice. Objective. To assess real-world cost-effectiveness of first-line bevacizumab with irinotecan-based chemotherapy versus irinotecan-based chemotherapy alone for mCRC in British Columbia (BC), Saskatchewan, and Ontario, Canada. Methods. Using provincial cancer registries and linked administrative databases, we identified mCRC patients who initiated publicly funded irinotecan-based chemotherapy, with or without bevacizumab, in 2000 to 2015. We compared bevacizumab-treated patients to historical controls (treated before bevacizumab funding) and contemporaneous controls (receiving chemotherapy without bevacizumab), using inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting with propensity scores to balance baseline covariates. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) using 5-year cost and survival adjusted for censoring, with bootstrapping to characterize uncertainty. We also conducted one-way sensitivity analysis for key drivers of cost-effectiveness. Results. The cohorts included 12,112 (Ontario), 1,161 (Saskatchewan), and 2,977 (BC) patients. Bevacizumab significantly increased treatment costs, with mean ICERs between $78,000 and $84,000/LYG (life-year gained) in the contemporaneous comparisons and $75,000 and $101,000/LYG in the historical comparisons. Reducing the cost of bevacizumab by 50% brought ICERs in all comparisons below $61,000/LYG. Limitations. Residual confounding in observational data may bias results, while the use of original list prices overestimates current bevacizumab cost. Conclusion. The addition of bevacizumab to irinotecan-based chemotherapy extended survival for mCRC patients but at significant cost. At original list prices bevacizumab can only be considered cost-effective with certainty at a willingness-to-pay threshold over $100,000/LYG, but price reductions or discounts have a significant impact on cost-effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jaclyn Beca
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia and Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - David Tran
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | - Wei Fang Dai
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia and Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia and Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Riaz Alvi
- Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | | | | | | | - Kelvin K W Chan
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, British Columbia and Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
King MT, Norman R, Mercieca-Bebber R, Costa DSJ, McTaggart-Cowan H, Peacock S, Janda M, Müller F, Viney R, Pickard AS, Cella D. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Eight Dimension (FACT-8D), a Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument Derived From the Cancer-Specific FACT-General (FACT-G) Quality of Life Questionnaire: Development and Australian Value Set. Value Health 2021; 24:862-873. [PMID: 34119085 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2020] [Revised: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 01/04/2021] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To develop a cancer-specific multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) health-related quality of life (HRQL) questionnaire. METHODS We derived a descriptive system based on a subset of the 27-item FACT-G. Item selection was informed by psychometric analyses of existing FACT-G data (n = 6912) and by patient input (n = 82). We then conducted an online valuation survey, with participants recruited via an Australian general population online panel. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used, with attributes being the HRQL dimensions of the descriptive system and survival duration, and 16 choice-pairs per participant. Utility decrements were estimated with conditional logit and mixed logit modeling. RESULTS Eight HRQL dimensions were included in the descriptive system: pain, fatigue, nausea, sleep, work, social support, sadness, and future health worry; each with 5 levels. Of 1737 panel members who accessed the valuation survey, 1644 (95%) completed 1 or more DCE choice-pairs and were included in analyses. Utility decrements were generally monotonic; within each dimension, poorer HRQL levels generally had larger utility decrements. The largest utility decrements were for the highest levels of pain (-0.40) and nausea (-0.28). The worst health state had a utility of -0.54, considerably worse than dead. CONCLUSIONS A descriptive system and preference-based scoring approach were developed for the FACT-8D, a new cancer-specific multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the FACT-G. The Australian value set is the first of a series of country-specific value sets planned that can facilitate cost-utility analyses based on items from the FACT-G and related FACIT questionnaires containing FACT-G items.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Madeleine T King
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Richard Norman
- Curtin University - Perth City Campus, and Department of Health Policy and Management, Bentley Campus, Perth, ACT, Australia
| | - Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Sydney, NSW, Australia; The University of Sydney, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Daniel S J Costa
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Pain Management Research Institute, Saint Leonards, NSW, Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney Medical School, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada and British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Simon Fraser University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Burnaby, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada and British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Monika Janda
- Queensland University of Technology, School of Public Health, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Fabiola Müller
- The University of Sydney, Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Amsterdam University Medical Centres, Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, NL
| | - Rosalie Viney
- University of Technology Sydney, Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Alan Simon Pickard
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - David Cella
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Department of Medical Social Sciences, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Seow H, Sutradhar R, Barbera LC, Guthrie D, McGrail K, Burge F, Peacock S, Chan KK. Does early palliative care reduce end-of-life hospital costs? A propensity-score matched, population-based, cohort study. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.15_suppl.12006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
12006 Background: Few studies describe how early versus late palliative care affects end-of-life health services costs. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of early vs not-early palliative care among cancer decedents on the combined costs of receiving aggressive care (ED/hospitalization) and supportive care (home care/physician home visit). Methods: Using linked administrative databases, we created a retrospective cohort of cancer decedents between 2004 -2014 in Ontario, Canada. We identified those who received “early” palliative care (palliative care service used in the hospital or community 12 to 6 months before death [exposure]). We used propensity score matching to identify a control group of “not-early” palliative care, hard matched on age, sex, cancer type and stage. The propensity score included region, year, treatment, etc. We examined differences in median costs (including hospital, ED, physician, and home care costs) between pairs in the last month of life. Results: We identified 144,306 cancer decedents, of which 37% received early palliative care in the exposure period. After propensity score matching, we created 36,238 pairs of decedents who received early and not-early palliative care. After matching the early and not-early groups had equal distributions of age, sex, cancer type (24% lung cancer) and stage (25% stage 3 or 4). Among those who received early palliative care, 56.3% used hospital in-patient care in the last month, whereas 66.7% of the control group (not-early palliative care) used in-patient care; considering only inpatient hospital costs, those receiving early palliative care used a median of $2,894 in the last month of life compared to the control group of $5,311 (p < 0.001). Overall median costs in the last month of life for patients in the early palliative care vs the control group was $11,129 vs. $10,598 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In our population-based, propensity-score matched, cohort study of cancer decedents, receiving early palliative care reduced the median overall health system costs, especially via avoiding hospitalizations in the last month of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hsien Seow
- McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
| | | | | | - Dawn Guthrie
- Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, Canada
| | - Kim McGrail
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Fred Burge
- Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
| | | | - Kelvin K. Chan
- Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Cromwell I, Smith LW, van der Hoek K, Hedden L, Coldman AJ, Cook D, Franco EL, Krajden M, Martin R, Lee MH, Stuart G, van Niekerk D, Ogilvie G, Peacock S. Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening: Results from the HPV FOCAL Trial. Cancer Med 2021; 10:2996-3003. [PMID: 33811457 PMCID: PMC8085916 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2020] [Revised: 02/11/2021] [Accepted: 02/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
The Human Papillomavirus FOr CervicAL cancer (HPV FOCAL) trial is a large randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of primary HPV testing to cytology among women in the population-based Cervix Screening Program in British Columbia, Canada. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis based on the HPV FOCAL trial to estimate the incremental cost per detected high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia of grade 2 or worse lesions (CIN2+). A total of 19,009 women aged 25 to 65 were randomized to one of two study groups. Women in the intervention group received primary HPV testing with reflex liquid-based cytology (LBC) upon a positive finding with a screening interval of 48 months. Women in the control group received primary LBC testing, and those negative returned at 24 months for LBC and again at 48 months for exit screening. Both groups received HPV and LBC co-testing at the 48-month exit. Incremental costs during the course of the trial were comparable between the intervention and control groups. The intervention group had lower overall costs and detected a larger number of CIN2+ lesions, resulting in a lower mean cost per CIN2+ detected ($7551) than the control group ($8325), a difference of -$773 [all costs in 2018 USD]. Cost per detected lesion was sensitive to the costs of sample collection, HPV testing, and LBC testing. The HPV FOCAL Trial results suggest that primary HPV testing every 4 years produces similar outcomes to LBC-based testing every 2 years for cervical cancer screening at a lower cost.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ian Cromwell
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCancer Control ResearchBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
- Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in HealthOttawaONCanada
| | - Laurie W. Smith
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCancer Control ResearchBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
| | - Kim van der Hoek
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCancer Control ResearchBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
| | - Lindsay Hedden
- Faculty of Health SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyBCCanada
- BC Academic Health Sciences NetworkVancouverBCCanada
| | - Andrew J. Coldman
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCancer Control ResearchBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
| | - Darrel Cook
- British Columbia Centre for Disease ControlVancouverBCCanada
| | | | - Mel Krajden
- British Columbia Centre for Disease ControlVancouverBCCanada
| | - Ruth Martin
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCervical Cancer Screening ProgramVancouverBCCanada
| | - Marette H. Lee
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCervical Cancer Screening ProgramVancouverBCCanada
- Vancouver General HospitalGynecologic OncologyVancouverBCCanada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- Faculty of MedicineThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverBCCanada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCervical Cancer Screening ProgramVancouverBCCanada
| | - Gina Ogilvie
- British Columbia Centre for Disease ControlVancouverBCCanada
- Faculty of MedicineThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverBCCanada
- Women’s Health Research InstituteBC Women’s HospitalVancouverBCCanada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer ControlBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
- British Columbia Cancer AgencyCancer Control ResearchBC Cancer Research InstituteVancouverBCCanada
- Faculty of Health SciencesSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyBCCanada
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Kalyta A, De Vera MA, Peacock S, Telford JJ, Brown CJ, Donnellan F, Gill S, Loree JM. Canadian Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines: Do They Need an Update Given Changing Incidence and Global Practice Patterns? Curr Oncol 2021; 28:1558-1570. [PMID: 33919428 PMCID: PMC8161738 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28030147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2021] [Revised: 04/07/2021] [Accepted: 04/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer and second leading cause of cancer death in Canada. Organized screening programs targeting Canadians aged 50 to 74 at average risk of developing the disease have contributed to decreased rates of CRC, improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs. However, data shows that recent incidence reductions are unique to the screening-age population, while rates in people under-50 are on the rise. Similar incidence patterns in the United States prompted the American Cancer Society and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to recommend screening begin at age 45 rather than 50. We conducted a review of screening practices in Canada, framing them in the context of similar global health systems as well as the evidence supporting the recent U.S. recommendations. Epidemiologic changes in Canada suggest earlier screening initiation in average-risk individuals may be reasonable, but the balance of costs to benefits remains unclear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anastasia Kalyta
- Division of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer/University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada; (A.K.); (S.G.)
| | - Mary A. De Vera
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3, Canada;
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada;
| | - Jennifer J. Telford
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada; (J.J.T.); (F.D.)
| | - Carl J. Brown
- Division of General Surgery, St. Paul’s Hospital, Vancouver, BC V6Z 1Y6, Canada;
| | - Fergal Donnellan
- Division of Gastroenterology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada; (J.J.T.); (F.D.)
| | - Sharlene Gill
- Division of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer/University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada; (A.K.); (S.G.)
| | - Jonathan M. Loree
- Division of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer/University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V5Z 4E6, Canada; (A.K.); (S.G.)
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Abstract
Trade-offs abound in healthcare yet depending on where one stands relative to the stages of a pandemic, choice making may be more or less constrained. During the early stages of COVID-19 when there was much uncertainty, healthcare systems faced greater constraints and focused on the singular criterion of “flattening the curve.” As COVID-19 progressed and the first wave diminished (relatively speaking depending on the jurisdiction), more opportunities presented for making explicit choices between COVID and non-COVID patients. Then, as the second wave surged, again decision makers were more constrained even as more information and greater understanding developed. Moving out of the pandemic to recovery, choice making becomes paramount as there are no set rules to lean back into historical patterns of resource allocation. In fact, the opportunity at hand, when using explicit tools for priority setting based on economic and ethical principles, is significant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Craig Mitton
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | | | - Francois Dionne
- Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.,Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Simkin J, Smith L, van Niekerk D, Caird H, Dearden T, van der Hoek K, Caron NR, Woods RR, Peacock S, Ogilvie G. Sociodemographic characteristics of women with invasive cervical cancer in British Columbia, 2004-2013: a descriptive study. CMAJ Open 2021; 9:E424-E432. [PMID: 33888548 PMCID: PMC8101640 DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20200139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although cancer screening has led to reductions in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer (ICC) across Canada, benefits of prevention efforts are not equitably distributed. This study investigated the sociodemographic characteristics of women with ICC in British Columbia compared with the general female population in the province. METHODS In this descriptive study, data of individuals 18 years and older diagnosed with ICC between 2004 and 2013 were obtained from the BC Cancer Registry. Self-reported sociodemographic characteristics were derived from standardized health assessment forms (HAFs) completed upon admission in the BC Cancer Registry. Standardized ratios (SRs) were derived by dividing observed and age-adjusted expected counts by ethnicity or race, language, and marital, smoking and urban-rural status. Differences between observed and expected counts were tested using χ2 goodness-of-fit tests. General population data were derived from the 2006 Census, 2011 National Household Survey and 2011/12 Canadian Community Health Survey. RESULTS Of 1705 total cases of ICC, 1315 were referred to BC Cancer (77.1%). Of those who were referred, 1215 (92.4%) completed HAFs. Among Indigenous women, more cases were observed (n = 85) than expected (n = 39; SR 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.15-2.18). Among visible minorities, observed cases (n = 320) were higher than expected (n = 253; 95% CI 1.26-1.26). Elevated SRs were observed among women who self-identified as Korean (SR 1.78, 95% CI 1.76-1.80), Japanese (SR 1.77, 95% CI 1.74-1.79) and Filipino (SR 1.60, 95% CI 1.58-1.62); lower SRs were observed among South Asian women (SR 0.63, 95% CI 0.62-0.63). Elevated SRs were observed among current smokers (SR 1.34, 95% CI 1.33-1.34) and women living in rural-hub (SR 1.29, 95% CI 1.28-1.31) and rural or remote (SR 2.62, 95% CI 2.61-2.64) areas; the SR was lower among married women (SR 0.90, 95% CI 0.90-0.90). INTERPRETATION Women who self-identified as visible minorities, Indigenous, current smokers, nonmarried and from rural areas were overrepresented among women with ICC. Efforts are needed to address inequities to ensure all women benefit from cervical cancer prevention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan Simkin
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Laurie Smith
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Hannah Caird
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Tania Dearden
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Kimberly van der Hoek
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Nadine R Caron
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Ryan R Woods
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Stuart Peacock
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| | - Gina Ogilvie
- School of Population and Public Health (Simkin, Caron, Ogilvie), University of British Columbia; Cancer Control Research (Simkin, van der Hoek, Woods, Peacock, Ogilvie), BC Cancer; Women's Health Research Institute (Simkin, Smith, Caird, Ogilvie); Cancer Control Research (Smith, van Niekerk, Caron), BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC; Faculty of Health Sciences (Caird, Woods, Peacock), Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC; School of Nursing (Dearden), University of British Columbia; Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (van der Hoek, Peacock); Centre for Excellence in Indigenous Health (Caron), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC
| |
Collapse
|
43
|
Lambert SD, Duncan LR, Ellis J, Robinson JW, Sears C, Culos-Reed N, Matthew A, De Raad M, Schaffler JL, Mina DS, Saha-Chaudhuri P, McTaggart-Cowan H, Peacock S. A study protocol for a multicenter randomized pilot trial of a dyadic, tailored, web-based, psychosocial, and physical activity self-management program (TEMPO) for men with prostate cancer and their caregivers. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2021; 7:78. [PMID: 33743804 PMCID: PMC7980105 DOI: 10.1186/s40814-021-00791-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2020] [Accepted: 02/08/2021] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Prostate cancer predisposes patients and caregivers to a wide range of complex physical and psychosocial challenges, and interventions must incorporate a wide range of self-management strategies to help patients and their caregivers effectively cope with cancer challenges. To palliate this need, our team recently developed and evaluated the initial acceptability of a dyadic, Tailored, wEb-based, psychosocial, and physical activity self-Management PrOgram (TEMPO). TEMPO is a 10-week, interactive, web-based intervention consisting of five modules designed to help dyads manage their physical and psychosocial needs. It aims to teach dyads new self-management strategies and encourages them to increase their physical activity (PA) levels, mainly through walking and strength-based exercises. Initial acceptability evaluation of TEMPO revealed high user satisfaction, in addition to having a number of potential benefits for participants. After integrating suggested changes to TEMPO, the proposed pilot study aims to further test the acceptability and feasibility of TEMPO. Methods This study is a multicenter, stratified, parallel, two-group, pilot randomized control trial (RCT), where patient–caregiver dyads are randomized (stratified by anxiety level) to receive (a) TEMPO or (b) usual care. Participants (n goal = 40) are recruited across Canada at participating cancer centers and through self-referral (e.g., online recruitment). Patient inclusion criteria are (a) having received prostate cancer treatment within the past 2 years or scheduled to receive treatment, (b) identified a primary caregiver willing to participate in the study, and (c) has access to the Internet. Eligible caregivers are those identified by the patient as his primary source of support. Dyads complete a baseline questionnaire (T1) and another one 3 months later (T2) assessing various aspects of physical and emotional functioning (e.g., the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS)), self-management behaviors (e.g., the Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ)), physical activity (the International Physical Activity Questionnaires (IPAQ) and the Multidimensional Self-efficacy for Exercise Scale (MSES)), and dyadic coping (the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI)). Dyads that used TEMPO are also asked to participate in a semi-structured exit interview exploring their overall experience with the program. Discussion This feasibility analysis will begin to develop the knowledge base on TEMPO’s value for men with prostate cancer and their caregivers to inform a larger trial. Trial registration NCT04304196 Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40814-021-00791-6.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvie D Lambert
- Ingram School of Nursing, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. .,St. Mary's Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
| | - Lindsay R Duncan
- Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Janet Ellis
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.,Psychosocial Care in Trauma, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - John Wellesley Robinson
- Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | | | - Nicole Culos-Reed
- Health and Exercise Psychology, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Psychosocial Resources, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Cancer Care, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Andrew Matthew
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.,Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.,Department of Surgery, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada
| | - Manon De Raad
- St. Mary's Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | | | - Daniel Santa Mina
- Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.,Toronto General Hospital, Toronto, Canada
| | | | - Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada.,Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Toronto, Canada.,Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, Canada.,Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Seow H, Sutradhar R, Burge F, McGrail K, Guthrie DM, Lawson B, Oz UE, Chan K, Peacock S, Barbera L. End-of-life outcomes with or without early palliative care: a propensity score matched, population-based cancer cohort study. BMJ Open 2021; 11:e041432. [PMID: 33579764 PMCID: PMC7883853 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041432] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate whether cancer decedents who received palliative care early (ie, >6 months before death) and not-early had different risk of using hospital care and supportive home care in the last month of life. DESIGN/SETTING We identified a population-based cohort of cancer decedents between 2004 and 2014 in Ontario, Canada using linked administrative data. Analysis occurred between August 2017 to March 2019. PARTICIPANTS We propensity-score matched decedents on receiving early or not-early palliative care using billing claims. We created two groups of matched pairs: one that had Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) home care assessments in the exposure period (Yes-RAI group) and one that did not (No-RAI group) to control for confounders uniquely available in the assessment, such as health instability and pain. The outcomes were the absolute risk difference between matched pairs in receiving hospital care, supportive home care or hospital death. RESULTS In the No-RAI group, we identified 36 238 pairs who received early and not-early palliative care. Those in the early palliative care group versus not-early group had a lower absolute risk difference of dying in hospital (-10.0%) and receiving hospital care (-10.4%) and a higher absolute risk difference of receiving supportive home care (23.3%). In the Yes-RAI group, we identified 3586 pairs, where results were similar in magnitude and direction. CONCLUSIONS Cancer decedents who received palliative care earlier than 6 months before death compared with those who did not had a lower absolute risk difference of receiving hospital care and dying in hospital, and an increased absolute risk difference of receiving supportive home care in the last month of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hsien Seow
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Rinku Sutradhar
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Fred Burge
- Department of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Kimberlyn McGrail
- School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Dawn M Guthrie
- Department of Health Sciences, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Beverley Lawson
- Department of Family Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Urun Erbas Oz
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Kelvin Chan
- Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lisa Barbera
- Department of Oncology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Gottschlich A, van Niekerk D, Smith LW, Gondara L, Melnikow J, Cook DA, Lee M, Stuart G, Martin RE, Peacock S, Franco EL, Coldman A, Krajden M, Ogilvie G. Assessing 10-Year Safety of a Single Negative HPV Test for Cervical Cancer Screening: Evidence from FOCAL-DECADE Cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2021; 30:22-29. [PMID: 33082202 PMCID: PMC8284866 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-20-1177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/06/2020] [Revised: 09/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Long-term safety of a single negative human papillomavirus (HPV) test for cervical cancer screening is unclear. The HPV FOr cerviCAL Cancer Trial (FOCAL) was a randomized trial comparing HPV testing with cytology. The FOCAL-DECADE cohort tracked women who received one HPV test during FOCAL, and were HPV negative, for up to 10 years to identify cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) detected through a provincial screening program. METHODS FOCAL participants who received one HPV test, were negative, and had at least one post-FOCAL cervix screen were included (N = 5,537). We constructed cumulative incidence curves of CIN2+/CIN3+ detection, analyzed cumulative risk of detection at intervals post-HPV test, calculated average incidence rates for detection, and compared hazard across ages. RESULTS Ten years after one negative HPV test, the probability of CIN2+ detection was lower than 1%, with most lesions detected 7 years or later. Average incidence rates of CIN2+/CIN3+ lesions over follow-up were 0.50 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.31-0.78] and 0.18 (95% CI, 0.07-0.36) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. Hazards were higher for younger ages (nonsignificant trend). CONCLUSIONS Among women with a single negative HPV test, long-term risk of CIN2+ detection was low, particularly through 7 years of follow-up; thus, one negative HPV test appears to confer long-term protection from precancerous lesions. Even 10-year risk is sufficiently low to support extended testing intervals in average-risk populations. IMPACT Our findings support the safety of screening policies using HPV testing alone at 5-year or longer intervals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Gottschlich
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- Lower Mainland Laboratories, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Laurie W Smith
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Lovedeep Gondara
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Joy Melnikow
- Center for Healthcare Policy and Research, University of California Davis, Sacramento, California
| | - Darrel A Cook
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Marette Lee
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gavin Stuart
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Ruth E Martin
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Cancer Control Research, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC), Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Eduardo L Franco
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Andrew Coldman
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Mel Krajden
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Gina Ogilvie
- Women's Health Research Institute, BC Women's Hospital and Health Service, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
- British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Wranik WD, Gambold L, Peacock S. Uncertainty tolerance among experts involved in drug reimbursement recommendations: Qualitative evidence from HTA committees in Canada and Poland. Health Policy 2020; 125:307-319. [PMID: 33388158 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.12.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2019] [Revised: 11/09/2020] [Accepted: 12/15/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Drug reimbursement decisions often rely on health technology assessment (HTA). Increasingly, new drugs have limited clinical evidence and uncertain clinical benefit. Our goal was to describe how members of drug advisory committees and other stakeholders conceptualize and tolerate uncertainty and how they rationalize uncertainty tolerance. METHODS Our triangulated parallel design applied two qualitative methods. We interviewed 31 members of drug advisory committees in Canada and Poland about their information needs and included hypothetical scenarios with uncertain clinical benefits. Respondents speculated about their likely reimbursement recommendation. We analyzed written recommendations of the pan Canadian Oncology Drug Review for drugs with uncertain benefit and compared initial recommendations to the responses from patient and clinician groups. RESULTS Uncertainty tolerance varied among committee members and across jurisdictions. In the scenario analysis, 7 Canadian and 11 Polish respondents leaned against recommending a hypothetical drug with uncertain clinical benefit, whereas 5 Canadian and 5 Polish respondents leaned in favour. Those against rationalized that uncertainty increases potential harm; those in favour rationalized that patients often have no alternatives. The document analysis revealed that patients had higher uncertainty tolerance in general. CONCLUSIONS Uncertainty tolerance varies among committee members and other stakeholders depending on their backgrounds and on the decision contexts. We argue that policy guidance around uncertainty management could improve the transparency and consistency of recommendations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wiesława Dominika Wranik
- School of Public Administration, Faculty of Management, Dahousie University, 6100 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 3N4, Canada; Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; Jean Monnet European Union Centre for Excellence, Dalhousie University, 6299 South Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4R2, Canada; College of Economic Analysis, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, ul. Madalińskiego 6/8, 02-513 Warszawa, Poland.
| | - Liesl Gambold
- Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Dalhousie University, 6135 University Avenue, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4R2, Canada; Jean Monnet European Union Centre for Excellence, Dalhousie University, 6299 South Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4R2, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control ARCC, 675 West 10(th) Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 1L3, Canada; Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer Agency Research Centre, 675 West 10(th) Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 1L3, Canada; Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
McTaggart-Cowan H, Bentley C, Raymakers A, Metcalfe R, Hawley P, Peacock S. Understanding cancer survivors' reasons to medicate with cannabis: A qualitative study based on the theory of planned behavior. Cancer Med 2020; 10:396-404. [PMID: 33068314 PMCID: PMC7826491 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.3536] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/20/2020] [Revised: 09/22/2020] [Accepted: 09/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Prior to nonmedical cannabis legalization in Canada, individuals were only able to access cannabis legally through licensed producers with medical authorization. Now with an additional legal access system designed for nonmedical purposes, it is unclear what factors influence cancer survivors’ decisions to medicate or not medicate cannabis as a complementary therapy to alleviate their cancer symptoms. Methods We recruited cancer survivors via social media. Interested individuals were purposively sampled to ensure maximization in terms of age, sex, and province of residence. Constructs of the Theory of Planned Behavior were explored during the telephone interviews as participants described what influenced their decisions to medicate or not medicate cannabis to manage their symptoms. Results Interviews were conducted with 33 cancer survivors. All individuals believed that cannabis would manage their cancer symptoms. Those that chose to medicate with cannabis provided a variety of reasons, including that cannabis was a more natural alternative; that it reduced their overall number of prescription drugs; and that safer products had become available with the legalization of nonmedical cannabis. Some individuals also indicated that support from physicians and validation from family and friends were important in their decision to medicate with cannabis. Individuals who opted not to medicate with cannabis raised concerns about the lack of scientific evidence and/or possible dependency issues. Some also felt their physician's disapproval was a barrier to considering cannabis use. Conclusions The findings revealed that recreational legalization made using cannabis appear safer and easier to access for some cancer survivors. However, physicians’ censure of cannabis use for symptom management was a barrier for survivors considering its use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen McTaggart-Cowan
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Colene Bentley
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Adam Raymakers
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Rebecca Metcalfe
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Philippa Hawley
- Pain & Symptom Management/Palliative Care Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
Bentley C, Sundquist S, Dancey J, Peacock S. Barriers to conducting cancer trials in Canada: an analysis of key informant interviews. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 27:e307-e312. [PMID: 32669937 DOI: 10.3747/co.27.5707] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
Background In Canada, there is growing evidence that oncology clinical trials units (ctus) and programs face serious financial challenges. Investment in cancer research in Canada has declined almost 20% in the 5 years since its peak in 2011, and the costs of conducting leading-edge trials are rising. Clinical trials units must therefore be strategic about which studies they open. We interviewed Canadian health care professionals responsible for running cancer trials programs to identify the barriers to sustainability that they face. Methods One-on-one telephone interviews were conducted with clinicians and clinical research professionals at oncology ctus in Canada. We asked for their perspectives about the barriers to conducting trials at their institutions, in their provinces, and nationwide. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, anonymized, and coded in the NVivo software application (version 11: QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). The initial coding structure was informed by the interview script, with new concepts drawn out and coded during analysis, using a constant comparative approach. Results Between June 2017 and November 2018, 25 interviews were conducted. Key barriers that participants identified were■ insufficient stable funding to support trials infrastructure and retain staff;■ the need to adopt strict cost-recovery policies, leading to fewer academic trials in portfolios; and■ an overreliance on industry to fund clinical research in Canada. Conclusions Funding uncertainties have led ctus to increasingly rely on industry sponsorship and more stringent feasibility thresholds to remain solvent. Retaining skilled trials staff can create efficiencies in opening and running studies, with spillover effects of more trials being open to patients. More academic studies are needed to curb industry's influence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C Bentley
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC.,Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC
| | - S Sundquist
- Canadian Cancer Clinical Trials Network, Toronto, ON.,Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON
| | - J Dancey
- Canadian Cancer Clinical Trials Network, Toronto, ON.,Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON.,Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Queens University, Kingston, ON.,Canadian Cancer Trials Group, Kingston, ON
| | - S Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Vancouver, BC.,Department of Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC.,Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Coldman AJ, van Niekerk D, Krajden M, Smith LW, Cook D, Gondara L, Ceballos K, Quinlan DJ, Lee M, Elwood-Martin R, Gentile L, Peacock S, Stuart GCE, Franco EL, Ogilvie GS. Disease detection at the 48-month exit round of the HPV FOCAL cervical cancer screening trial in women per-protocol eligible for routine screening. Int J Cancer 2020; 146:1810-1818. [PMID: 31245842 DOI: 10.1002/ijc.32524] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2018] [Accepted: 04/18/2019] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Abstract
HPV FOCAL is a randomized control trial of cervical cancer screening. The intervention arm received baseline screening for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) and the control arm received liquid-based cytology (LBC) at baseline and 24 months. Both arms received 48-month exit HPV and LBC cotesting. Exit results are presented for per-protocol eligible (PPE) screened women. Participants were PPE at exit if they had completed all screening and recommended follow-up and had not been diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia Grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) earlier in the trial. Subgroups were identified based upon results at earlier trial screening. There were 9,457 and 9,552 and women aged 25-65 randomized to control and intervention and 7,448 (77.8%) and 8,281 (86.7%), respectively, were PPE and screened. Exit cotest results were similar (p = 0.11) by arm for PPE and the relative rate (RR) of CIN2+ for intervention vs. control was RR = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.56-1.23). The RR for CIN2+ comparing intervention women baseline HPV negative to control women with negative cytology at baseline and at 24 months, was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.43-1.06). PPE women who had a negative or CIN1 colposcopy in earlier rounds had elevated rates (per 1,000) of CIN2+ at exit, control 31 (95% CI: 14-65) and intervention 43 (95% CI: 25-73). Among PPE women HPV negative at exit LBC cotesting identified little CIN2+, Rate = 0.3 (95% CI: 0.1-0.7). This per-protocol analysis found that screening with HPV using a 4-year interval is as safe as LBC with a 2-year screening interval. LBC screening in HPV negative women at exit identified few additional lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dirk van Niekerk
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Mel Krajden
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Laurie W Smith
- Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Darrel Cook
- BC Centre for Disease Control, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | | | - Kathy Ceballos
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - David J Quinlan
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Marette Lee
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Ruth Elwood-Martin
- School of Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Laura Gentile
- Cervical Cancer Screening Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Stuart Peacock
- Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Gavin C E Stuart
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Eduardo L Franco
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
| | - Gina S Ogilvie
- Women's Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Cottrell L, Duggleby W, Ploeg J, McAiney C, Peacock S, Ghosh S, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Nekolaichuk C, Forbes D, Paragg J, Swindle J. Using focus groups to explore caregiver transitions and needs after placement of family members living with dementia in 24-hour care homes. Aging Ment Health 2020; 24:227-232. [PMID: 30588823 DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2018.1531369] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
Objectives: Family caregivers (defined broadly as family and friends) of persons with dementia are challenged to cope with myriad stressors and changes that occur along the dementia trajectory. The purpose of this study was to explore the transitions experienced by caregivers of persons with dementia after their relative relocated to a 24-hour care home.Method: Qualitative thematic and conversational analysis were used: themes were co-created and modes of speech and syntactical patterns analysed to expose discourses related to caregiving after placement in 24-hour care homes.Results: Four main themes were co-constructed from the data analysis: living with loss, relinquishing, redefining the caregiving role, and rediscovering and recreating a new self.Discussion: Caregiving continues after placement of family members with dementia in 24-hour care homes. Caregivers are at-risk group and require ongoing support throughout the caregiving journey. Study participants reported that navigation skills such as relationship building, communication, and advocacy were particularly salient to the post-placement period, when navigating the complex health care environment was a significant obstacle. Ultimately, findings from these focus groups will be used to inform an online intervention to support caregivers of a family member with dementia residing in a 24-hour care home.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Cottrell
- Faculty of Nursing, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - W Duggleby
- Faculty of Nursing, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - J Ploeg
- School of Nursing, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - C McAiney
- Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - S Peacock
- College of Nursing, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | - S Ghosh
- Department of Medical Oncology/Department of Mathematical & Statistical Sciences, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - J M Holroyd-Leduc
- Department of Medicine & Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - C Nekolaichuk
- Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - D Forbes
- Faculty of Nursing, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - J Paragg
- Faculty of Nursing, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| | - J Swindle
- Faculty of Nursing, The University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
| |
Collapse
|