Prevalence of Use and Cost of Biological Drugs for Cancer Treatment: A 5-Year Picture from Southern Italy

Background and Objectives: Considering the clinical and economic burden of biological drugs in cancer treatment, it is necessary to explore how these drugs are used in routine care in Italy and how they affect the sustainability of the National Health Services. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of use and costs of biological drugs for cancer treatment in a general population of Southern Italy in the years 2010–2014. Methods: This was a retrospective, observational study using data from the healthcare administrative databases of Messina Province for the years 2010–2014. In this study, users of biological drugs for cancer treatment were characterized and the prevalence of use and costs were calculated over time. The potential impact of biosimilars on the expenditure was also estimated. Results: Of a population of 653,810 residents in the Messina area during the study years, 2491 (0.4%) patients received at least one study drug. The most frequently used were monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (n = 1607; 64.5%) and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (n = 609; 24.4%). mAbs were mainly used by females (60.3%) for metastasis due to an unspecified primary tumor, lymphomas, or breast cancer (24.2, 16.7, and 13.7%, respectively). Most users of small molecules were males (56.3%) being treated for multiple myeloma, metastasis due to unspecified primary tumor, leukemia, and lung cancer (13.1, 12.6, 9.5, and 8.9%, respectively). During the study years, the prevalence of use doubled from 0.9 to 1.8 per 1000 inhabitants; likewise, the related expenditure grew from €6.6 to €13.6 million. Based on our forecasts, this expenditure will grow to €25 million in 2020. Assuming a 50% biosimilar uptake (trastuzumab and rituximab), a potential yearly saving of almost €1 million may be achieved. Conclusions: In recent years, the use and costs of biological drugs in cancer patients have increased dramatically in a large population from Southern Italy. This trend may be counterbalanced by adopting biosimilars once they are available. Claims databases represent a valid tool to monitor the uptake of newly marketed biological drugs and biosimilars

Author Correction to: Prevalence of Use and Cost of Biological Drugs for Cancer Treatment: A 5-Year Picture from Southern Italy

Unfortunately, many errors were identified in the published article. The original article was corrected

Real world use of biological drugs in patients with psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis: a retrospective, population-based study from Southern Italy in the years 2010-2014

BACKGROUND: Biological drugs, such as infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab, ustekinumab, golimumab and certolizumab are third-line therapy for psoriasis (PsO) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA), but they may be used at earlier stage in severe forms. This study investigated the pattern of use and costs of biological drugs for PsO/PsA in a large population from Southern Italy during the years 2010-2014. METHODS: This was a retrospective, population-based, drug-utilization study, using healthcare administrative databases of the ASL (Local Health Unit) and two hospitals of Messina Province (Sicily) in the years 2010-2014. Incident users of adalimumab, ustekinumab, infliximab, etanercept and golimumab for PsO/PsA were characterized. Yearly prevalence of use and costs, as well as time to treatment discontinuation and switch were assessed. RESULTS: During the study period, 517 patients received at least one study drugs prescription for PsO/PsA and 304 (58.8%) were incident users, mostly treated with adalimumab (33.6%). Incident users were mostly males (59.8%), with a median age of 49 years. The prevalence of biological drugs users in PsO/PsA increased from 4.3 to 6.9 per 10,000 inhabitants from 2011 to 2014. Pharmaceutical expenditure of the study drugs almost doubled (from 2.6 to 4.7 million euros over 5 years of observation). During the first year of treatment, discontinuation occurred in 31.8% of incident users and switch was not infrequent (7.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of use and costs of biological drugs for PsO/PsA substantially increased in recent years in a large population of Southern Italy. Larger uptake of lowest cost biological drugs, and biosimilars whenever available, may help access to the most innovative drugs

Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons' practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants' demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results