No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundLung cancer is one of the most common types of cancer worldwide, and it causes significant challenges for patients due to the poor survival rate and treatment‐related side‐effects. Because of lung cancer's great burden, identification and use of the patients' preferences can help to improve patients' quality of life.ObjectiveInterviews with patients who have lung cancer were used to ascertain a range of experiences and to make recommendations regarding the improvement of treatment based on these patients' preferences. Because chemotherapy is the common treatment option for lung cancer, we focused on this treatment. The interviews were audio‐taped, verbally transcribed and evaluated via content analysis.Setting and ParticipantsA total of 18 participants (11 men and 7 women) with small or non‐small‐cell lung cancer who were receiving chemotherapy in one clinic were interviewed between June and July 2013.ResultsTwo main aspects with different subthemes were identified during the interviews. One main aspect focused on organizational context, such as the treatment day process, or experiences with different stakeholders, such as with the health insurance company or physicians. The other category referred to experiences that influenced psychosocial factors, including physical and mental experiences.Discussion and ConclusionPatients reported different experiences concerning physical, psychological and organizational areas during chemotherapy. Nevertheless, some potential areas for improving care, and therefore the quality of life of patients with lung cancer, could be identified. These improvement measures highlighted that with small, non‐time‐consuming and inexpensive changes, the treatment for patients with lung cancer can be improved.

Purpose Treatments for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded rapidly. They include the chemotherapies docetaxel and cabazitaxel, hormonal drugs abiraterone and enzalutamide, and best supportive care (BSC). Cabazitaxel has proven to be the last life-prolonging option, associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events. Given the lack of real-world evidence, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel, docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and BSC. Methods We used 2014-2017 claims data from a large German statutory health insurance fund, the Techniker Krankenkasse, to identify patients with mCRPC. Patient allocation to individual therapy regimens was based on clinical knowledge and included therapy cycles, duration of therapy, and continuous treatment. The study period lasted from the first claim until death, the end of data availability, a drug switch, or discontinuation of therapy, whichever came first. Multivariate regression models were used to compare monthly all-cause and mCRPC-related HRU and costs across cohorts by adjusting for baseline covariates (including age and comorbidities). Results The 3944 identified patients with mCRPC initiated treatment with cabazitaxel (n = 240), docetaxel (n = 539), abiraterone (n = 486), enzalutamide (n = 351), or BSC (n = 2328). In most domains, HRU was highest in the cabazitaxel cohort and lowest in the BSC group. Accordingly, the highest all-cause and mCRPC-related costs per month, respectively, were observed in patients receiving cabazitaxel (€7631/€6343), followed by abiraterone (€5226/€4579), enzalutamide (€5079/€4416), docetaxel (€2392/€1580), and BSC (€959/€438). Cost variations were mostly attributable to drugs, inpatient treatment, and sick leave payments. Conclusion mCRPC treatment imposes a high economic burden on statutory health insurance. Cabazitaxel is associated with substantially higher expenses, resulting from higher drug costs and a greater need for inpatient treatment. As mCRPC continues to be incurable, decision makers and clinician leaders should carefully evaluate public access to innovative agents and optimal treatment strategies.