Healthcare costs in women with metastatic breast cancer receiving chemotherapy as their principal treatment modality

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The economic costs of treating patients with metastatic breast cancer have been examined in several studies, but available estimates of economic burden are at least a decade old. In this study, we characterize healthcare utilization and costs in the US among women with metastatic breast cancer receiving chemotherapy as their principal treatment modality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using a large private health insurance claims database (2000-2006), we identified all women initiating chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer with no evidence of receipt of concomitant or subsequent hormonal therapy, or receipt of trastuzumab at anytime. Healthcare utilization and costs (inpatient, outpatient, medication) were estimated on a cumulative basis from date of chemotherapy initiation ("index date") to date of disenrollment from the health plan or the end of the study period, whichever occurred first. Study measures were cumulated over time using the Kaplan-Meier Sample Average (KMSA) method; 95% CIs were generated using nonparametric bootstrapping. Findings also were examined among the subgroup of patients with uncensored data.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study population consisted of 1444 women; mean (SD) age was 59.1 (12.1) years. Over a mean follow-up of 532 days (range: 3 to 2412), study subjects averaged 1.7 hospital admissions, 10.7 inpatient days, and 83.6 physician office and hospital outpatient visits. Mean (95% CI) cumulative total healthcare costs were $128,556 ($118,409, $137,644) per patient. Outpatient services accounted for 29% of total costs, followed by medication other than chemotherapy (26%), chemotherapy (25%), and inpatient care (20%).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Healthcare costs-especially in the outpatient setting--are substantial among women with metastatic breast cancer for whom treatment options other than chemotherapy are limited.</p

Self-Reported and Actual Beta-Blocker Prescribing for Heart Failure Patients: Physician Predictors

Beta-blockers reduce mortality among patients with systolic heart failure (HF), yet primary care provider prescription rates remain low.To examine the association between primary care physician characteristics and both self-reported and actual prescription of beta-blockers among patients with systolic HF.Cross-sectional survey with supplementary retrospective chart review.Primary care providers at three New York City Veterans Affairs medical centers.Main outcomes were: 1) self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers, and 2) actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients. Physician HF practice patterns and confidence levels, as well as socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, were also assessed.Sixty-nine of 101 physicians (68%) completed the survey examining self-reported prescribing of beta-blockers. Physicians who served as inpatient ward attendings self-reported significantly higher rates of beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients when compared with physicians who did not attend (78% vs. 58%; p = 0.002), as did physicians who were very confident in managing HF patients when compared with physicians who were not (82% vs. 68%; p = 0.009). Fifty-one of these 69 surveyed physicians (74%) were successfully matched to 287 HF patients for whom beta-blocker prescribing data was available. Physicians with greater self-reported rates of prescribing beta-blockers were significantly more likely to actually prescribe beta-blockers (p = 0.02); however, no other physician characteristics were significantly associated with actual prescribing of beta-blockers among HF patients.Physician teaching responsibilities and confidence levels were associated with self-reported beta-blocker prescribing among their HF patients. Educational efforts focused on improving confidence levels in HF care and increasing exposure to teaching may improve beta-blocker presciption in HF patients managed in primary care

Clinical Validation of Automatable Gaussian Normalized CBV in Brain Tumor Analysis: Superior Reproducibility and Slightly Better Association with Survival than Current Standard Manual Normal Appearing White Matter Normalization.

PURPOSE: To validate Gaussian normalized cerebral blood volume (GN-nCBV) by association with overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients and compare this association with current standard white matter normalized cerebral blood volume (WN-nCBV). METHODS: We retrieved spin-echo echo-planar dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI acquired after maximal resection and prior to radiation therapy between 2006 and 2011 in 51 adult patients (28 male, 23 female; age 23-87 years) with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Software code was developed in house to perform Gaussian normalization of CBV to the standard deviation of the whole brain CBV. Three expert readers manually selected regions of interest in tumor and normal-appearing white matter on CBV maps. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves associating nCBV with 15-month OS were calculated for both GN-nCBV and WN-nCBV. Reproducibility and interoperator variability were compared using within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: GN-nCBV ICC (≥0.82) and wCV (≤21%) were superior to WN-nCBV ICC (0.54-0.55) and wCV (≥46%). The area under the ROC curve analysis demonstrated both GN-nCBV and WN-nCBV to be good predictors of OS, but GN-nCBV was consistently superior, although the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: GN-nCBV has a slightly better association with clinical gold standard OS than conventional WM-nCBV in our glioblastoma patient cohort. This equivalent or superior validity, combined with the advantages of higher reproducibility, lower interoperator variability, and easier automation, makes GN-nCBV superior to WM-nCBV for clinical and research use in glioma patients. We recommend widespread adoption and incorporation of GN-nCBV into commercial dynamic susceptibility contrast processing software

Genome Sequence of the Brown Norway Rat Yields Insights Into Mammalian Evolution

The laboratory rat (Rattus norvegicus) is an indispensable tool in experimental medicine and drug development, having made inestimable contributions to human health. We report here the genome sequence of the Brown Norway (BN) rat strain. The sequence represents a high-quality 'draft' covering over 90% of the genome. The BN rat sequence is the third complete mammalian genome to be deciphered, and three-way comparisons with the human and mouse genomes resolve details of mammalian evolution. This first comprehensive analysis includes genes and proteins and their relation to human disease, repeated sequences, comparative genome-wide studies of mammalian orthologous chromosomal regions and rearrangement breakpoints, reconstruction of ancestral karyotypes and the events leading to existing species, rates of variation, and lineage-specific and lineage-independent evolutionary events such as expansion of gene families, orthology relations and protein evolution

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine