Considering racial and ethnic preferences in communication and interactions among the patient, family member, and physician following diagnosis of localized prostate cancer: study of a US population

Prostate cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among American men. The multiple treatment options for localized prostate cancer and potential side effects can complicate the decision-making process. We describe the level of engagement and communication among the patient, family member, and physician (the decision-making “triad”) in the decision process prior to treatment. Using the Family and Cancer Therapy Selection (FACTS) study baseline survey data, we note racial/ethnic variations in communication among the triad. Sensitivity to and awareness of decision-making styles of both the patient and their family member (or caregiver) may enable clinicians to positively influence communication exchanges about important clinical decisions

Pharmacoeconomics of Available Treatment Options for Metastatic Prostate Cancer

The resources devoted to managing metastatic prostate cancer are enormous, yet little attention has been given to directly measuring the economic consequences of treatment alternatives. The purpose of this article was to evaluate the pharmacoeconomics of available treatments for metastatic prostate cancer, including hormone-sensitive disease, androgen-independent prostate cancer and locally advanced/progressive disease. We identified 58 articles addressing economic issues related to metastatic prostate cancer. Treatment alternatives with considerably different costs are available in many areas of disease management, most notably, medical androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) versus surgical castration; combined androgen blockage (CAB) versus monotherapy for initial treatment of hormone-sensitive disease; as well as bisphosphonates and bone-targeted radioisotopes for palliation. The few available pharmacoeconomic studies indicate that the additional costs are not supported by clear and compelling evidence of differences in survival or quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes. Our review revealed that authors often use considerably different assumptions about efficacy and survival outcomes in their analyses, which may be due to the inconsistency of available clinical evidence. Although there have been many clinical trials comparing various therapies, we identified only three trials that included economic assessments. Thus, few sources of economic data are available and most pharmacoeconomic studies rely on information mined from indirect sources. We note that, while there has been considerable enthusiasm about the role of docetaxel regimens in the past 2 years, no study has yet examined the costs of these therapies. Survival remains poor for metastatic disease, thus QOL is the primary consideration for many therapies. However, QOL for treatment of metastatic disease is poorly measured and, in most analyses, the impact of therapy on QOL was inferred based on speculation by the authors. Given the large cost burdens of these treatments, it is essential that we more fully understand the true QOL gains potentially offered by more expensive therapies. The economic studies of advanced prostate cancer highlight several aspects of clinical care that are filled with considerable uncertainty and remain guided by forces other than optimal resource allocation. It is essential that we address the weaknesses in our understanding of the economic consequences of therapies for prostate cancer, and find ways to include economic information into the process of determining optimal therapy.Antiandrogens, Antineoplastics, Cost-analysis, Cost-effectiveness, Cost-utility, Estradiol-congeners, Gonadotropin-releasing-hormone-agonists, Orchiectomy, Prostate-cancer, Radiotherapy

Economics of hematopoietic cell transplantation

Abstract Given the rapidly rising healthcare costs, it is important to understand the economic costs of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), a procedure that is being used more frequently in the treatment of various hematologic disorders. Studies have reported a wide range of costs for HCT, from $36 000 to$88 000 (USD) for a single autologous transplantation for the initial hospitalization, to $200 000 (USD) or more for a myeloablative allogeneic procedure involving an unrelated donor. Common posttransplantation complications, such as infections and GVHD, have been shown to be significant cost drivers. Comparisons across studies are limited by differences in patient populations, cost ascertainment methods, and length of follow-up. This article summarizes the current state of knowledge about costs and cost-effectiveness of HCT, highlighting the challenges in conducting these studies and identifying important areas for future research. We discuss the need for more value-based assessments of HCT using high-quality approaches to measuring costs and outcomes so that potential future efforts to contain costs are well informed and appropriate.</jats:p