Dataset Information

Adherence to guidelines in requesting Oncotype DX in a publicly funded health care system.

ABSTRACT: Background:Oncotype dx [odx (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA, U.S.A.)] is an approved prognostic tool for women with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive, her2-negative breast cancer. Because of cost, optimal use of this test is crucial, especially in a publicly funded health care system. We evaluated adherence with our provincial guidelines for odx requests, the management of patients with an intermediate recurrence score (rs), and the cost impact of odx. Methods:This retrospective study included 201 consecutive patients with an odx request from two university institutions in Quebec between May 2012 and December 2014. Concordance with provincial guidelines was estimated, with its 95% confidence interval (ci). For patients with an intermediate rs, factors influencing the final treatment decision were assessed. The cost impact of odx was derived from the proportion of patients for whom chemotherapy was not recommended. Results:In 93.0% of patients (95% ci: 89.5% to 96.6%), odx was ordered according to guidelines. The concordance was similar in both institutions (92.7%; 95% ci: 88.1% to 97.3%; and 93.6%; 95% ci: 88.2% to 99.0%). In 112 (55.7%), 78 (38.8%), and 9 (4.5%) patients, the rs suggested low, intermediate, and high risk respectively. In the intermediate-risk group, most patients (n = 58, 74.4%) did not receive chemotherapy, mainly because of patient preference and the absence of a clear proven benefit. Savings of CA$100,000 for the study period (2.5 years) were estimated to be associated with odx use. Conclusions:In our experience, the use of odx was concordant with published recommendations and had a positive cost impact.

SUBMITTER: Martel S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6092063 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Adherence to guidelines in requesting Oncotype DX in a publicly funded health care system.

Martel S S Lambertini M M Simon R R Matte C C Prady C C

Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) 20180814 4

<h4>Background</h4>Oncotype dx [odx (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA, U.S.A.)] is an approved prognostic tool for women with node-negative, hormone receptor-positive, her2-negative breast cancer. Because of cost, optimal use of this test is crucial, especially in a publicly funded health care system. We evaluated adherence with our provincial guidelines for odx requests, the management of patients with an intermediate recurrence score (rs), and the cost impact of odx.<h4>Methods</h4>This retros ...[more]

PMID: 30111977

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecent investigations of breast cancer survival in the United States suggest that patients who receive mastectomy have poorer survival than those who receive breast-conserving surgery (BCS) plus radiotherapy, despite clinically established equivalence. This study investigates breast cancer survival in the publicly funded health care system present in Alberta, Canada.Patients and methodsSurgically treated stage I-III breast cancer cases diagnosed in Alberta from 2002 to 2010 were included. Demographic, treatment and mortality information were collected from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Unadjusted overall and breast cancer-specific mortality was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and cumulative incidence curves, respectively. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate stage-specific mortality hazard estimates associated with surgical treatment received.ResultsA total of 14 939 cases of breast cancer (14 633 patients) were included in this study. The unadjusted 5-year all-cause survival probabilities for patients treated with BCS plus radiotherapy, mastectomy, and BCS alone were 94% (95% CI 93% to 95%), 83% (95% CI 82% to 84%) and 74% (95% CI 70% to 78%), respectively. Stage II and III patients who received mastectomy had a higher all-cause (stage II HR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.13-1.48; stage III HR = 1.74, 95% CI 1.24-2.45) and breast cancer-specific (stage II HR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.09-1.76; stage III HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.21-2.65) mortality hazard compared with those who received BCS plus radiotherapy, adjusting for patient and clinical characteristics. BCS alone was consistently associated with poor survival.ConclusionsStage II and III breast cancer patients diagnosed in Alberta, Canada, who received mastectomy had a significantly higher all-cause and breast cancer-specific mortality hazard compared with those who received BCS plus radiotherapy. We suggest greater efforts toward educating and encouraging patients to receive BCS plus radiotherapy rather than mastectomy when it is medically feasible and appropriate.

Project description:BackgroundThe association between socioeconomic status (SES) and outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in publicly funded health care systems is poorly described. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of SES on postoperative outcomes in patients who underwent AAA repair in Nova Scotia, Canada.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all elective AAA repairs in Nova Scotia between November 2005 and March 2015 using administrative data sources. We compared postoperative 30-day outcomes and long-term survival across socio-economic quintiles, defined as the Pampalon Material Deprivation Index (MDI) and Social Deprivation Index (SDI). We also compared the relation between baseline characteristics, MDI quintile, SDI quintile and 30-day mortality. We used multivariable logistic regression and survival analysis to calculate adjusted 30-day mortality and long-term survival, respectively.ResultsA total of 1913 patients underwent AAA repair during the study period. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 2.6% (50 patients). Thirty-day outcomes including death (p = 0.8), stroke (p = 0.7), myocardial infarction (p = 0.06), length of stay (p = 0.3) and discharge disposition other than home (p = 0.8) were similar across MDI quintiles. Similarly, there was no statistically significant association between SDI quintile and postoperative outcomes. Multivariable analysis showed that age greater than 70 years (odds ratio [OR] 3.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.55-6.06) and open repair (OR 3.22, 95% CI 1.59-6.52) but not MDI quintile (p = NS) or SDI quintile (p = NS) were associated with increased 30-day mortality. There was no effect of MDI or SDI quintile on long-term survival on univariable or multivariable analysis.ConclusionSocioeconomic status does not appear to affect short- or long-term mortality after AAA repair in a publicly funded health care system. Further research is needed to address any existing gaps in screening and referral before repair.

Project description:BackgroundThere is little systematic assessment of how total health expenditure is distributed across diseases and comorbidities. The objective of this study was to use statistical methods to disaggregate all publicly funded health expenditure by disease and comorbidities in order to answer three research questions: (1) What is health expenditure by disease phase for noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in New Zealand? (2) Is the cost of having two NCDs more or less than that expected given the independent costs of each NCD? (3) How is total health spending disaggregated by NCDs across age and by sex?Methods and findingsWe used linked data for all adult New Zealanders for publicly funded events, including hospitalisation, outpatient, pharmaceutical, laboratory testing, and primary care from 1 July 2007 to 30 June 2014. These data include 18.9 million person-years and $26.4 billion in spending (US$ 2016). We used case definition algorithms to identify if a person had any of six NCDs (cancer, cardiovascular disease [CVD], diabetes, musculoskeletal, neurological, and a chronic lung/liver/kidney [LLK] disease). Indicator variables were used to identify the presence of any of the 15 possible comorbidity pairings of these six NCDs. Regression was used to estimate excess annual health expenditure per person. Cause deletion methods were used to estimate total population expenditure by disease. A majority (59%) of health expenditure was attributable to NCDs. Expenditure due to diseases was generally highest in the year of diagnosis and year of death. A person having two diseases simultaneously generally had greater health expenditure than the expected sum of having the diseases separately, for all 15 comorbidity pairs except the CVD-cancer pair. For example, a 60-64-year-old female with none of the six NCDs had $633 per annum expenditure. If she had both CVD and chronic LLK, additional expenditure for CVD separately was $6,443/$839/$9,225 for the first year of diagnosis/prevalent years/last year of life if dying of CVD; additional expenditure for chronic LLK separately was $6,443/$1,291/$9,051; and the additional comorbidity expenditure of having both CVD and LLK was $2,456 (95% confidence interval [CI] $2,238-$2,674). The pattern was similar for males (e.g., additional comorbidity expenditure for a 60-64-year-old male with CVD and chronic LLK was $2,498 [95% CI $2,264-$2,632]). In addition to this, the excess comorbidity costs for a person with two diseases was greater at younger ages, e.g., excess expenditure for 45-49-year-old males with CVD and chronic LLK was 10 times higher than for 75-79-year-old males and six times higher for females. At the population level, 23.8% of total health expenditure was attributable to higher costs of having one of the 15 comorbidity pairs over and above the six NCDs separately; of the remaining expenditure, CVD accounted for 18.7%, followed by musculoskeletal (16.2%), neurological (14.4%), cancer (14.1%), chronic LLK disease (7.4%), and diabetes (5.5%). Major limitations included incomplete linkage to all costed events (although these were largely non-NCD events) and missing private expenditure.ConclusionsThe costs of having two NCDs simultaneously is typically superadditive, and more so for younger adults. Neurological and musculoskeletal diseases contributed the largest health system costs, in accord with burden of disease studies finding that they contribute large morbidity. Just as burden of disease methodology has advanced the understanding of disease burden, there is a need to create disease-based costing studies that facilitate the disaggregation of health budgets at a national level.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare spending has grown over the last decades in all developed countries. Making hard choices for investments in a rational, evidence-informed, systematic, transparent and legitimate manner constitutes an important objective. Yet, most scientific work in this area has focused on developing/improving prescriptive approaches for decision making and presenting case studies. The present work aimed to describe existing practices of priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) within the context of publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries and inform areas for further improvement and research.MethodsAn online qualitative survey, developed from a theoretical framework, was administered with decision-makers and academics from 18 countries. 450 individuals were invited and 58 participated (13% of response rate).ResultsWe found evidence that resource allocation is still largely carried out based on historical patterns and through ad hoc decisions, despite the widely held understanding that decisions should be based on multiple explicit criteria. Health technology assessment (HTA) was the tool most commonly indicated by respondents as a formal priority setting strategy. Several approaches were reported to have been used, with special emphasis on Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), but limited evidence exists on their evaluation and routine use. Disinvestment frameworks are still very rare. There is increasing convergence on the use of multiple types of evidence to judge the value of investment options.ConclusionsEfforts to establish formal and explicit processes and rationales for decision-making in priority setting and resource allocation have been still rare outside the HTA realm. Our work indicates the need of development/improvement of decision-making frameworks in PSRA that: 1) have well-defined steps; 2) are based on multiple criteria; 3) are capable of assessing the opportunity costs involved; 4) focus on achieving higher value and not just on adoption; 5) engage involved stakeholders and the general public; 6) make good use and appraisal of all evidence available; and 6) emphasize transparency, legitimacy, and fairness.

Dataset Information

Adherence to guidelines in requesting Oncotype DX in a publicly funded health care system.

Publications

Adherence to guidelines in requesting Oncotype DX in a publicly funded health care system.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets