Comparison of medical costs and healthcare resource utilization of post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2− metastatic breast cancer receiving everolimus-based therapy or chemotherapy: a retrospective claims database analysis

Li, Nanxin; Hao, Yanbin; Koo, Valerie; Fang, Anna; Peeples, Miranda; Kageleiry, Andrew; Wu, Eric Q.; Guérin, Annie

doi:10.3111/13696998.2015.1131704

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Six studies (29%) reported the period of observation as ‘during treatment’ [ 28 , 29 , 34 , 39 , 40 , 44 ]. Three studies (14%) made no statement about the period of observation [ 31 , 32 , 46 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six studies (30%) reported that ED presentations recorded were ‘all-cause’ and included all ED presentations made by cancer patients that fell within the period of observation [ 32 , 33 , 38 , 40 , 41 , 44 ]. Five studies (25%) recorded ED presentations that were defined as specifically relating to treatment; one study (5%) [ 37 ] used a previously developed algorithm used to identify chemotherapy related adverse events in breast cancer patients [ 10 ], and two studies reported on a priori defined common adverse events related to SACT [ 28 , 37 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies controlled for cancer type ( n = 17, 81%) [ 9 , 12 , 28 – 34 , 36 – 40 , 42 , 46 ] and stage of disease ( n = 17, 81%) [ 9 , 12 , 28 – 35 , 37 , 39 , 40 ] as potential confounders in study design. Other potential confounders controlled for during design or analysis included age ( n = 10) [ 29 – 31 , 34 – 39 , 46 ], gender ( n = 13) [ 9 , 12 , 29 – 32 , 34 – 39 , 46 ], race ( n = 3) [ 9 , 34 , 35 ], rurality ( n = 7) [ 9 , 29 – 31 , 37 , 38 , 40 ], comorbidities ( n = 8) [ 9 , 29 , 31 , 32 , 34 , 37 – 39 ], socioeconomic status ( n = 4) [ 29 , 30 , 36 , 37 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the risks when observing people affected by cancer is the substantial risk of loss to follow-up because of deteriorating health or disease progression. For example, in the retrospective cohort study by Li et al [ 32 ], health resource use in women with metastatic breast cancer was explored over a two-year period. In the cohort of participants treated with SACT, almost 50% of participants had less than three months of follow-up data.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Methodological approaches to measuring the incidence of unplanned emergency department presentations by cancer patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy: a systematic review

Dufton

Gerdtz

Jarden

et al. 2022

BMC Med Res Methodol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The need to mitigate the volume of unplanned emergency department (ED) presentations is a priority for health systems globally. Current evidence on the incidence and risk factors associated with unplanned ED presentations is unclear because of substantial heterogeneity in methods reporting on this issue. The aim of this review was to examine the methodological approaches to measure the incidence of unplanned ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy in order to determine the strength of evidence and to inform future research. Methods An electronic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane was undertaken. Papers published in English language between 2000 and 2019, and papers that included patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy as the denominator during the study period were included. Studies were eligible if they were analytical observational studies. Data relating to the methods used to measure the incidence of ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy were extracted and assessed for methodological rigor. Findings are reported in accordance with the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) guideline. Results Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria: 20 cohort studies, and one cross-sectional study. Overall risk of bias was moderate. There was substantial methodological and clinical heterogeneity in the papers included. Methodological rigor varied based on the description of methods such as the period of observation, loss to follow-up, reason for ED presentation and statistical methods to control for time varying events and potential confounders. Conclusions There is considerable diversity in the population and methods used in studies that measure the incidence of unplanned ED presentations by patients receiving systemic anti-cancer therapy. Recommendations to support the development of robust evidence include enrolling participants at diagnosis or initiation of treatment, providing adequate description of regular care to support patients who experience toxicities, reporting reasons for and characteristics of participants who are lost to follow-up throughout the study period, clearly defining the outcome including the observation and follow-up period, and reporting crude numbers of ED presentations and the number of at-risk days to account for variation in the length of treatment protocols.

show abstract