Equity of access to treatment on the Cancer Drugs Fund:A missed opportunity for cancer research?

AbstractUsing mixed-methods, we investigated the CDF in the South West of England (3193 cancer patients treated through the CDF, April 1st 2011–March 31st 2013) for evidence of: (1) equitable access across socioeconomic groups, age groups, sex, and Cancer Network; (2) time-to-treatment by socioeconomic group; and (3) the perception of the CDF as fair, using semi-structured interviews with oncology consultants.There was no evidence of inequitable access to anti-cancer therapy for those in more deprived areas. For all cancer types, there was a lower proportion of women in the CDF cohort than in the Cancer Registry reference population (e.g., melanoma, CDF 36.8% female, reference population 48.7%; difference 11.9%, 95% CI 3.1–20.7%). There was a lower proportion of older patients in the CDF compared with the reference population (e.g., colorectal cancer, CDF 6.9% ≥80 years, reference population 30.1%; difference 23.2%, 95% CI 20.2–26.2%). Interviewed oncologists felt differences in performance status, not age, influenced referral to the CDF, with neither deprivation, nor gender contributing.Our study suggests that the CDF has differential access by age and sex, but not by deprivation. The absence of high quality CDF data represents a missed opportunity to fully evaluate equity of access and the real-world costs and outcomes of novel anti-cancer drugs

Self- and Carer-Rated Pain in People with Dementia: Influences of Pain in Carers

Although pain is frequent in people with dementia (PwD), evidence on the prevalence and factors influencing ratings of pain in dementia is limited. Carer variables are often associated with bias in proxy ratings of pain, but few studies have examined the role of caregiver pain in influencing these ratings

Economic evaluation alongside pragmatic randomised trials: developing a standard operating procedure for clinical trials units

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is wide recognition that pragmatic randomised trials are the best vehicle for economic evaluation. This is because trials provide the best chance of ensuring internal validity, not least through the rigorous prospective collection of patient-specific data. Furthermore the marginal cost of collecting economic data alongside clinical data is typically modest. UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) does not require a standard operating procedure (SOP) for economic evaluation as a prerequisite for trial unit registration. We judge that such a SOP facilitates the integration of health economics into trials.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A collaboration between health economists and trialists at Bangor University led to the development of a SOP for economic evaluation alongside pragmatic trials, in addition to the twenty SOPs required by UKCRC for registration, which include randomisation, data management and statistical analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our recent telephone survey suggests that no other UKCRC-registered trials unit currently has an economic SOP.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We argue that UKCRC should require, from all Trials Units undertaking economic evaluation and seeking registration or re-registration, a SOP for economic evaluation as one of their portfolio of supporting SOPs.</p

Is age a barrier to chemotherapy? Rates of treatment in older patients with breast, colon or lung cancer in England in 2014: A national registry study

Background Survival from cancer in older patients is poorer in the UK than other countries with similar health systems and wealth possibly due to undertreatment and increased toxicities in this specific population. This population-based observational study describes factors affecting systemic anticancer treatment (SACT) use in older patients in England. Methods We identified patients aged ≥70 with stage II-III breast cancer, stage III colon cancer and stage IIIB-IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosed in 2014 from a dataset collected by the National Health Service in England. We used logistic regression to estimate factors affecting likelihood of receiving SACT and performed separate regression analyses for each disease, adjusting for age, gender, stage at diagnosis, pathological features, performance status, Charlson comorbidity index, ethnicity and socioeconomic group. We assessed 2-year overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier method. Case mix adjusted treatment rates and workload volume were calculated at hospital level and presented using funnel plots, stratified by age groups (<70 and ≥70) to allow for assessment of variation between centres. Results 36892 patients were identified: 19879 with stage II-III breast cancer, 5292 with stage III colon cancer and 11721 with stage IIIB-IV NSCLC. Patients over 70 were less likely to receive SACT compared to those aged under 70: breast 11.7% vs 64.6%, p < 0.001; colon 37.4% vs 79%, p < 0.001; NSCLC 33.5% vs 60.2%, p < 0.001. 2-year OS for patients receiving SACT was similar for patients aged ≥70 and <70: breast 91.5% (95% CI: 89.3%-93.2%) vs 96.4% (95% CI: 95.9%-96.7%); colon 84.8% (95% CI: 82.6%-86.8%) vs 88.3% (95% CI: 86.7%-89.8%); NSCLC 16.7% (95% CI: 15.1%-18.4%) vs 19.8% (95%CI: 18.5%-21.1%). Patients receiving SACT had better OS than those untreated. SACT rates varied widely between hospitals after adjusting for case-mix across all ages. Conclusions Our study suggests that several factors affect the likelihood of receiving SACT but after adjusting for these, age remains determinant. Identifying hospitals with significantly lower SACT rates should prompt local review of multidisciplinary team practice

Validating the use of hospital episode statistics data and comparison of costing methodologies for economic evaluation:An end-of-life case study from the cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for prostate cancer (CAP)

Objectives To evaluate the accuracy of routine data for costing inpatient resource use in a large clinical trial and to investigate costing methodologies. Design Final-year inpatient cost profiles were derived using (1) data extracted from medical records mapped to the National Health Service (NHS) reference costs via service codes and (2) Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data using NHS reference costs. Trust finance departments were consulted to obtain costs for comparison purposes. Setting 7 UK secondary care centres. Population A subsample of 292 men identified as having died at least a year after being diagnosed with prostate cancer in Cluster randomised triAl of PSA testing for Prostate cancer (CAP), a long-running trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing. Results Both inpatient cost profiles showed a rise in costs in the months leading up to death, and were broadly similar. The difference in mean inpatient costs was £899, with HES data yielding ∼8% lower costs than medical record data (differences compatible with chance, p=0.3). Events were missing from both data sets. 11 men (3.8%) had events identified in HES that were all missing from medical record review, while 7 men (2.4%) had events identified in medical record review that were all missing from HES. The response from finance departments to requests for cost data was poor: only 3 of 7 departments returned adequate data sets within 6 months. Conclusions Using HES routine data coupled with NHS reference costs resulted in mean annual inpatient costs that were very similar to those derived via medical record review; therefore, routinely available data can be used as the primary method of costing resource use in large clinical trials. Neither HES nor medical record review represent gold standards of data collection. Requesting cost data from finance departments is impractical for large clinical trials.</p

Systematic review of the effect of policies to restrict the marketing of foods and non-alcoholic beverages to which children are exposed

This systematic review examined the effectiveness of policies restricting the marketing of foods and/or non-alcoholic beverages to children to inform updated World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Databases were searched to March 2020. Inclusion criteria were primary studies of any design assessing implemented policies to restrict food marketing to children (0–19 years). Critical outcomes were exposure to and power of marketing, dietary intake, choice, preference, and purchasing. Important outcomes were purchase requests, dental caries, body weight, diet-related noncommunicable diseases, product change, and unintended consequences. Forty-four observational studies met inclusion criteria; most were moderate quality. Pooling was conducted using vote counting by direction of effect, and GRADE was used to judge evidence certainty. Evidence suggests food marketing policies may result in reduced purchases of unhealthy foods and in unintended consequences favorable for public health. Desirable or potentially desirable (for public health) effects of policies on food marketing exposure and power were also found. Evidence on diet and product change was very limited. The certainty of evidence was very low for four outcomes (exposure, power, dietary intake, and product change) and low for two (purchasing and unintended consequences). Policies can effectively limit food marketing to children; policymakers should prioritize mandatory approaches aligned with WHO recommendations

Association of Food and Nonalcoholic Beverage Marketing with Children and Adolescents' Eating Behaviors and Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance: There is widespread interest in the effect of food marketing on children; however, the comprehensive global evidence reviews are now dated. Objective: To quantify the association of food and nonalcoholic beverage marketing with behavioral and health outcomes in children and adolescents to inform updated World Health Organization guidelines. Data Sources: Twenty-two databases were searched (including MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library) with a publication date limit from January 2009 through March 2020. Study Selection: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines were followed. Inclusion criteria were primary studies assessing the association of food marketing with specified outcomes in children and adolescents (aged 0-19 years). Exclusion criteria were qualitative studies or those on advertising of infant formula. Of 31063 articles identified, 96 articles were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review, and 80 articles in the meta-analysis (19372 participants). Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently extracted data. Random-effects models were used for meta-analyses; meta-regressions, sensitivity analyses, and P curve analyses were also performed. Where appropriate, pooling was conducted using combining P values and vote counting by direction of effect. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was used to judge certainty of evidence. Main Outcomes and Measures: Critical outcomes were intake, choice, preference, and purchasing. Important outcomes were purchase requests, dental caries, body weight, and diet-related noncommunicable diseases. Results: Participants totaled 19372 from 80 included articles. Food marketing was associated with significant increases in intake (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.15-0.35; P 76%) was unexplained by sensitivity or moderator analyses. The combination of P values for purchase requests was significant but no clear evidence was found for an association of marketing with purchasing. Data on dental health and body weight outcomes were scarce. The certainty of evidence was graded as very low to moderate for intake and choice, and very low for preference and purchasing. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, food marketing was associated with increased intake, choice, preference, and purchase requests in children and adolescents. Implementation of policies to restrict children's exposure is expected to benefit child health

Dementia and Imagination: a mixed-methods protocol for arts and science research

ABSTRACT Introduction: Dementia and Imagination is a multidisciplinary research collaboration bringing together arts and science to address current evidence limitations around the benefits of visual art activities in dementia care. The research questions ask: Can art improve quality of life and well-being? If it does make a difference, how does it do this-and why? Does it have wider social and community benefits? Methods and analysis: This mixed-methods study recruits participants from residential care homes, National Health Service (NHS) wards and communities in England and Wales. A visual art intervention is developed and delivered as 1×2-hour weekly group session for 3 months in care and community settings to N=100 people living with dementia. Quantitative and qualitative data are collected at 3 time points to examine the impact on their quality of life, and the perceptions of those who care for them (N=100 family and professional carers). Repeated-measures systematic observations of well-being are obtained during the intervention (intervention vs control condition). The health economics component conducts a social return on investment evaluation of the intervention. Qualitative data are collected at 3 time points (n=35 carers/staff and n=35 people living with dementia) to explore changes in social connectedness. Self-reported outcomes of the intervention delivery are obtained (n=100). Focus groups with intervention participants (n=40) explore perceptions of impact. Social network analysis of quantitative and qualitative data from arts and healthcare professionals (N=100) examines changes in perceptions and practice. Ethics and dissemination: The study is approved by North Wales Research Ethics Committee-West. A range of activities will share the research findings, including international and national academic conferences, quarterly newsletters and the project website. Public engagement projects will target a broad range of stakeholders. Policy and practice summaries will be developed. The visual art intervention protocol will be developed as a freely available practitioners guide

Cost-effectiveness of a national exercise referral programme for primary care patients in Wales: results of a randomised controlled trial

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.The research was independent and funded by the Welsh Assembly Government. RTE is supported by Public Health Wales. Additional support for LM and SM during write up was provided by The Centre for the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement (DECIPHer), a UKCRC Public Health Research: Centre of Excellence. Funding from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council (RES-590-28-0005), Medical Research Council, the Welsh Assembly Government and the Wellcome Trust (WT087640MA), under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged

Life after prostate cancer diagnosis: protocol for a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study

Background: Prostate cancer and its treatment may impact physically, psychologically and socially; affecting the health-related quality of life of men and their partners/spouses. The Life After Prostate Cancer Diagnosis (LAPCD) study is a UK-wide patient-reported outcomes study which will generate information to improve the health and well-being of men with prostate cancer. Methods and analysis: Postal surveys will be sent to prostate cancer survivors (18–42 months postdiagnosis) in all 4 UK countries (n=∼70 000). Eligible men will be identified and/or verified through cancer registration systems. Men will be surveyed twice, 12 months apart, to explore changes in outcomes over time. Second, separate cohorts will be surveyed once and the design will include evaluation of the acceptability of online survey tools. A comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure has been developed using generic and specific instruments with proven psychometric properties and relevance in national and international studies. The outcome data will be linked with administrative health data (eg, treatment information from hospital data). To ensure detailed understanding of issues of importance, qualitative interviews will be undertaken with a sample of men who complete the survey across the UK (n=∼150) along with a small number of partners/spouses (n=∼30). Ethics and dissemination: The study has received the following approvals: Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Research Ethics Committee (15/NE/0036), Health Research Authority Confidentiality Advisory Group (15/CAG/0110), NHS Scotland Public Benefit and Privacy Panel (0516-0364), Office of Research Ethics Northern Ireland (16/NI/0073) and NHS R&D approval from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Using traditional and innovative methods, the results will be made available to men and their partners/spouses, the funders, the NHS, social care, voluntary sector organisations and other researchers