Background: FLAURA, the prospective trial of osimertinib as a first-line therapy compared with first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), did not show superior survival benefit for osimertinib in either the subgroup of Asians or the subgroup with the L858R mutation. In addition, the superiority of osimertinib compared with second-generation EGFR-TKI is thus far unclear. Patients and methods: We reviewed the clinical data of all consecutive patients who were treated with osimertinib or afatinib as first-line therapy between May 2016 and October 2019 from 15 institutions in Japan. We defined the groups based on first-line EGFR-TKI as the afatinib group and the osimertinib group. Outcomes included time to discontinuation of any EGFR-TKI (TD-TKI), overall survival (OS), and time to treatment failure, with propensity score analysis carried out as an exploratory analysis in the survival and subgroup analyses. Results: A total of 554 patients were enrolled. Data on 326 patients in the osimertinib group, and 224 patients in the afatinib group were analyzed. TD-TKI adjusted by propensity score in the afatinib and osimertinib groups was 18.6 months (95% confidence interval 15.8 to 22.0) and 20.5 months (95% confidence interval 13.8 to not reached), respectively, without significant difference (P ¼ 0.204). OS adjusted by propensity score favored the afatinib group with a significant difference (P ¼ 0.018). Subgroup analysis with propensity score showed that patients with L858R and without brain metastasis had superior survival benefit with afatinib compared with osimertinib (P < 0.001). Conclusions: TD-TKI in the afatinib group was not significantly prolonged compared with the osimertinib group in the practical data. In the exploratory analysis of patients with L858R-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer without brain metastasis, afatinib showed more benefit in OS over osimertinib.
BackgroundThere have been no multicenter studies that estimated the relations of either nurse or pharmacist home visit program to drug costs of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs). This study aimed to establish whether patients who used nurse or pharmacist home visit programs (nurse or pharmacist program) had lower drug costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse or pharmacist programs for older patients living at home.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in home care settings in Japan, involving 430 patients aged 65 or older, of whom 276 were female. All received regular home visits from five clinics between May and December 2013. After the PIMs were identified with the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, we estimated the drug costs based on actual pharmaceutical prices and measured against who using nurse or pharmacist programs after a propensity score weighted adjustment.ResultsPatients who used nurse programs had lower drug cost of PIMs than those who did not use, but it was not significantly different (5.9 ± 13.1 vs 7.1 ± 13.9 USD per month, P = 0.199). The cost of PIMs for patients who used pharmacist programs also had no difference. (7.2 ± 14.5 vs 5.5 ± 11.5 USD per month, P = 0.06). In the patient groups who used nurse programs, patients who also used pharmacist programs had significantly higher costs of PIMs than those who used only nurse programs (5.5 ± 13.9 vs 2.5 ± 6.0 USD per month, P = 0.006). In patients group who did not use pharmacist programs, patients who only used nurse programs had significantly lower costs of PIMs than those who did not use nurse programs (3.6 ± 7.7 vs 5.8 ± 12.7 USD per month, P = 0.022).ConclusionsPatients who used nurse program have a trend towards lower drug costs of PIMs than those who used nurse and pharmacist program or pharmacist program alone. Although this study tried to adjust the potential confounders as possible as we could by using propensity score analysis, further studies are needed to confirm our results.
BACKGROUND: Older adults' uptake of influenza and pneumococcus vaccines is insufficient worldwide. Although patient experience of primary care is associated with vaccine uptake in children, this relationship remains unclear for older adults. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the association between patient experience of primary care and influenza/ pneumococcal vaccine uptake in older adults. DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a multicentered cross-sectional survey involving 25 primary care institutions in urban and rural areas in Japan. Participants were outpatients aged ≥ 65 years who visited one of the participating institutions within the 1-week study period. We assessed patient experience of primary care using the Japanese version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (JPCAT), which includes six domains: first contact (accessibility), longitudinality (continuity of care), coordination, comprehensiveness (services available), comprehensiveness (services provided), and community orientation. We used a generalized linear mixed-effects model to adjust for clustering within institutions and individual covariates. KEY RESULTS: One thousand participants were included in the analysis. After adjusting for clustering within institutions and other possible confounders, influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake was positively associated with JPCAT total scores (odds ratio per 1 standard deviation increase: 1.19, 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.40 and odds ratio: 1.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.46, respectively). Of the JPCAT domains, coordination and community orientation were associated with influenza vaccine uptake and longitudinality, coordination, and comprehensiveness were associated with pneumococcal vaccine uptake. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake were positively associated with patient experience of primary care in older adults. Consideration of patient experience, particularly longitudinality, coordination, comprehensiveness, and community orientation, could improve vaccine uptake.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.