Home-based chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer patients in Thailand: Cost-utility and budget impact analyses

Patient Satisfaction Survey on Portable Infusion Pumps for Colorectal Cancer Chemotherapy: Hard-Shelled or Soft-Shelled?

Purpose

Elastomeric infusion pumps are widely used in colorectal cancer chemotherapy. However, no studies to date have investigated patient preferences regarding different infusion pump types.

Patients and Methods

Twenty patients with unresectable colorectal cancer undergoing chemotherapy were initially treated with a portable hard-shelled continuous infusion pump, followed by a soft-shelled continuous infusion pump. The respondents used a numerical rating scale (0-10) to rate their comfort when using each pump, their ease of carrying it, the pump size and shape, its weight, their ease of reading its memory, and their overall satisfaction with it. They were then asked to determine which pump they would ultimately prefer.

Results

In terms of comfort, significantly higher user satisfaction was reported for the soft-shelled pump during the daytime and when going out (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). For pump portability, size, shape, and weight, the soft-shelled type also outperformed the hard-shelled one (P < 0.001, P=0.0011, P < 0.001, respectively). However, the hard-shelled pump scored significantly better in terms of ease of viewing memory (P < 0.001). Overall satisfaction was significantly higher for the soft-shelled pump than the hard-shelled type (P=0.0095). Finally, 13 patients (65%) indicated that they would prefer a soft-shelled pump for their next treatment, while only one patient (5%) preferred a hard-shelled alternative. A preference for soft-shelled pump was observed, particularly in female patients and those with a body mass index of < 22 kg/m2.

Conclusion

The selection of portable elastomeric infusion pumps should consider the preferences of patients with colorectal cancer, as these devices have the potential to enhance their quality of life.

National expert consensus on home-administered oncologic therapies in Spain

The diagnosis and treatment of cancer impose a significant emotional and psychological burden on patients, families, and caregivers. Patients undergo several interventions in a hospital setting, and the increasing number of patients requiring extended care and follow-up is driving the demand for additional clinical resources to address their needs. Hospital at Home (HaH) teams have introduced home-administered oncologic therapies that represent a new model of patient-centered cancer care. This approach can be integrated with traditional models and offers benefits to both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Home-administered treatment programs have been successfully piloted globally, demonstrated as a preferred option for most patients and a safe alternative that could reduce costs and hospital burden. The document aims to establish the minimum recommendations for the home administration of oncologic therapies (ODAH) based on a national expert agreement. The expert panel comprised seven leading members from diverse Spanish societies and three working areas: clinical and healthcare issues, logistical and administrative issues, and economic, social, and legal issues. The recommendations outlined in this article were obtained after a comprehensive literature review and thorough discussions. This document may serve as a basis for the future development of home-administered oncologic therapy programs in Spain. .

Home infusion services in Saudi Arabia: Where are we standing?

Diseases management has reached the highest level of complexity and cost in history, worldwide, and in Saudi Arabia in particular, which led to prolonged, unnecessary hospital stays. There have been many recent innovative measures to reduce these issues. One is to provide home infusion services. Hence, this narrative review emphasizes the expected benefits and challenges of such services and the applicability of their implementation in Saudi Arabia. A literature search was conducted via PubMed database, involving all published studies from inception until March 24th, 2023. Many studies showed positive impacts of home infusion on reducing the length of hospital stays, increasing cost-saving, and leading to high patient satisfaction.

Contingency planning for cancer care in low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic: a rapid assessment for future disaster resilience

BACKGROUND

Many countries appear to be ill-prepared in their emergency responses towards the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, particularly in managing chronic diseases such as cancer. We aimed to gain insight on the preparedness of health systems within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in maintaining delivery of cancer care amid the pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a rapid review of publications focusing on emergency contingency plans for cancer care during the pandemic in LMICs. An online desk research was conducted to identify relevant policy documents, guidelines or scientific publications.

RESULTS

Very few LMICs had readily accessible documents to ensure continuity in delivery of cancer care during the pandemic. A majority of publications were focused on delivery of cancer treatment whereas early detection, diagnosis and delivery of supportive and survivorship care received very little attention. Far fewer of the published guidelines appear to have been formulated at the national level by governmental agencies. A vast majority of publications constituted consensus guidelines from professional societies, followed by sharing of best practices from local institutions. Overall, three main strategies have been recommended to maintain delivery of cancer care amid the pandemic in LMICs: 1) Modification of cancer treatment regimens, 2) Changes in methods of administration of curative and supportive cancer care and 3) Implementation of generic measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection in healthcare settings.

CONCLUSION

All LMICs should consider collating best practices from the current pandemic and translating them into an explicit cancer preparedness plan, which can be escalated during future disasters.

Is the Scope of Costs Considered in Budget Impact Analyses for Anticancer Drugs Rational? A Systematic Review and Comparative Study

Background: With the increasing disease burden of cancer worldwide, more and more anticancer drugs have been approved in many countries, and the results of budget impact analyses (BIAs) have become important evidence for related reimbursement decisions.

Objectives: We systematically reviewed whether BIAs for anticancer drugs consider the scope of costs rationally and compared the results of different cost scopes to provide suggestions for future analyses and decision-making.

Methods: Eligible BIAs published in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from 2016 to 2021 were identified based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We extracted 15 terms from the included studies and analyzed how they considered the scope of costs. In addition, a budget impact model was developed for the introduction of geptanolimab to China's National Reimbursement Drug List to enable a comparison of two cost-scope scenarios.

Results: A total of 29 studies were included in the systematic review. All 29 studies considered the costs of anticancer drugs, and 25 (86%) also considered condition-related costs, but only 11 (38%) considered subsequent treatment costs. In the comparative study, the predicted budget impacts from 2022 to 2024 were significantly impacted by subsequent treatment costs, with annual differences between the two cost-scope scenarios of $39,546,664, $65,866,161, and $86,577,386, respectively.

Conclusions: The scope of costs considered in some existing BIAs for anticancer drugs are not rational. The variations between different cost scopes in terms of budget impact were significant. Thus, BIAs for anticancer drugs should consider a rational scope of costs that adheres to BIA guidelines. Researchers and decision-makers should pay more attention to the scope of costs to achieve better-quality BIAs for anticancer drugs and enhance reimbursement decision-making.