Delivery of meaningful cancer care: a retrospective cohort study assessing cost and benefit with the ASCO and ESMO frameworks

Paggio, Joseph C Del; Sullivan, Richard; Schrag, Deborah; Hopman, Wilma M.; Azariah, Biju; Pramesh, C S; Tannock, Ian F.; Booth, Christopher M.

doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(17)30415-1

Cited by 108 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This review captures recommendations and perspectives from a total of 17 peer-reviewed publications [95,[102][103][104][106][107][108][109][110][111][112][113][114][115][116][117][118]. The reviewed studies were almost evenly split between those including a narrative/qualitative comparison of different frameworks and those incorporating case study/quantitative comparisons across different value frameworks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the need for more robust and/or detailed safety and toxicity data inclusion in these frameworks was the most common recommendation identified. Additionally, several studies called for more overarching changes to clinical trial design with regard to patient inclusion criteria, duration, outcomes measures, and so forth [102,110,112,115,119]. The details of such modifications were not thoroughly addressed in these publications and are the subject of much discussion elsewhere, but they could have significant impact on the type of AE data generated in the future [120].…”

Section: Icer Provide Synthesis For Use By Policymakers and Payers/ Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, more comprehensive insights into methodological and data input assumptions across these studies could be gleaned by review of key underlying studies cited by the studies reviewed here. [103,112,119,138] Frameworks should incorporate data from sources other than clinical trials (e.g., observational studies) 3 of 17 (18%) [102] Frameworks should incorporate more robust and/or detailed safety and/or toxicity data 7 of 17 (41%) [103,104,108,112,115,116] Frameworks should use integrated quality of life measures in lieu of safety data 1 of 17 (6%) [117] Frameworks should incorporate more longitudinal data 2 of 17 (12%) [102,103] Frameworks should engage patients in the data evaluation and input process 3 of 17 (18%) [102,103,110] …”

Section: Limitations Of These Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Pettit

Kirch

2018

Cardio-Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing efficacy of cancer therapeutics means that the timespan of cancer therapy administration is undergoing a transition to increasingly long-term settings. Unfortunately, chronic therapy-related adverse health events are an unintended, but not infrequent, outcome of these life-saving therapies. Historically, the cardio-oncology field has evolved as retrospective effort to understand the scope, mechanisms, and impact of treatment-related toxicities that were already impacting patients. This review explores whether current systemic approaches to detecting, reporting, tracking, and communicating AEs are better positioned to provide more proactive or concurrent information to mitigate the impact of AE's on patient health and quality of life. Because the existing tools and frameworks for capturing these effects are not specific to cardiology, this study looks broadly at the landscape of approaches and assumptions. This review finds evidence of increasing focus on the provision of actionable information to support long-term health and quality of life for survivors and those on chronic therapy. However, the current means to assess and support the impact of this burden on patients and the healthcare system are often of limited relevance for an increasingly long-lived survivor and patient population.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Icer Provide Synthesis For Use By Policymakers and Payers/ Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitations Of These Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Pettit

Kirch

2018

Cardio-Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The core technology is electronics that stretch -elastronics -made from soft plastic circuits thinner than paper that can deform without tearing, biodegrade and even heal themselves (see go.nature.com/2vtutzz). Elastronic sensors respond to touch, pressure, temperature, humidity and light, as well as to chemical and biological signals [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] .…”

Section: Testismentioning

confidence: 99%

Cancer patients need better care, not just more technology

Sullivan

Pramesh

Booth

2017

Nature

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Finally, financial toxicity is an unavoidable barrier for the widespread use of CDK4/6 inhibitors over mono-ET strategies, and must be addressed in the treatment individualization process [50].…”

Section: Advanced Luminal Bc -Current Treatment Status: Cdk4/6 Inhibimentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Advanced Luminal Breast Cancer

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After optimizing endocrine monotherapy modalities in the setting of advanced luminal breast cancer (BC), dual endocrine/targeted therapy combinations have been tested with positive results, and are transforming this BC subtype treatment landscape. Cell cycle deregulation is a hallmark of cancer that has become a key druggable target in hormone receptor (HR)-positive BC due to its role in endocrine resistance mechanisms. Cyclin dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitors have experienced a fast development in combination with endocrine therapy and have already been commercialized in some countries. In this review, we will summarize the development of these CDK4/6 inhibitors in luminal BC, from the preclinical data to the pivotal phase III trials that led to their approval, focusing on the efficacy and safety data for each of the treatment settings. Moreover, we will consider the challenges CDK4/6 inhibitors face in their positioning in the algorithm of treatment for advanced luminal BC and the considerations physicians should take into account when selecting these therapies for their patients. However, we are still in need of reliable predictive biomarkers in order to identify patients who will derive the greatest benefit from these drug combinations that are not exempt from toxicity.

show abstract

Delivery of meaningful cancer care: a retrospective cohort study assessing cost and benefit with the ASCO and ESMO frameworks

Cited by 108 publications

References 28 publications

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Do current approaches to assessing therapy related adverse events align with the needs of long-term cancer patients and survivors?

Cancer patients need better care, not just more technology

Incorporating CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the Treatment of Advanced Luminal Breast Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About