Patient preferences regarding side effects of chemotherapy for ovarian cancer: do they change over time?

Determination of quality of life-related health utilities for surgical complications in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the health state utilities of ovarian cancer patients, clinicians, and non-cancer controls regarding surgical complications in ovarian cancer.

METHODS

Utilities for 14 surgical complications were assessed from patients with recently diagnosed or recurrent ovarian cancer, clinicians, and non-cancer controls using the visual analog scale (VAS) and time trade-off (TTO) methods. Health state utilities were converted to a 0-to-1 scale, where 0 represents the least favorable outcome and 1 represents the most favorable outcome.

RESULTS

Fifty patients, 50 clinicians, and 50 controls participated. Median VAS scores were lower than TTO scores across all groups (p < 0.01). Patients viewed 'bleeding requiring transfusion' most favorably (VAS utility 0.75), followed in order by less favorable utility scores for hernia, thromboembolism, pleural effusion, abscess, ileus/bowel obstruction, wound infection, bowel obstruction requiring surgery, anastomotic leak requiring drain, temporary ostomy, anastomotic leak requiring surgery, genito-urinary fistula, permanent ostomy, and genito-intestinal fistula (VAS utility 0.2). Overall, clinicians perceived complications more favorably than patients by VAS (overall utility score 0.49 vs 0.43, p < 0.01), but not by the TTO. There were no differences in overall utility scores between patients and controls. Patients who had not experienced certain surgical complications had less favorable scores than patients who did (utility score for ostomy = 0.2 for patients without ostomy vs. 0.7 for patients with ostomy, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

This study establishes health state utilities for surgical complications associated with ovarian cancer. These utilities can be used in future cost-effectiveness evaluations to determine quality-adjusted outcomes and may help in counseling patients during the shared decision-making process.

Nanocargos designed with synthetic and natural polymers for ovarian cancer management

Ovarian cancer cells usually spread in the peritoneal region, and if chemotherapeutic drugs can be given in these regions with proximity, then the anticancer property of the chemotherapeutic drugs can enhance. However, chemotherapeutic drug administrations are hindered by local toxicity. In the drug delivery system, microparticles or nanoparticles are administered in a controlled manner. Microparticles stay in a close vicinity while nanoparticles are smaller and can move evenly in the peritoneum. Intravenous administration of the drug evenly distributes the medicine in the target places and if the composition of the drug has nanoparticles it will have more specificity and will have easy access to the cancer cells and tumors. Among the different types of nanoparticles, polymeric nanoparticles were proven as most efficient in drug delivery. Polymeric nanoparticles are seen to be combined with many other molecules like metals, non-metals, lipids, and proteins, which helps in the increase of cellular uptake. The efficiency of different types of polymeric nanoparticles used in delivering the load for management of ovarian cancer will be discussed in this mini-review.

The physical, psychological and social experiences of alopecia among women receiving chemotherapy: An integrative literature review

PURPOSE

To conduct an integrative scoping review of the physical, psychological and social experiences of women who have experienced chemotherapy-induced alopecia (CIA).

METHOD

An integrative review was undertaken. A systematic search of MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycInfo identified 23 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Data relating to women's experiences of alopecia was extracted and synthesized thematically.

RESULTS

Four analytical themes were formed; 'the physical and psychological effect of alopecia', 'more than the loss of hair', 'the complexities of a visual cancer identity' and 'coping with new internal and external relationships'. CIA involves a public and private representation of illness which disrupts women's identity and their acceptance in public, yet this is a highly individualised experience. There is disparity in current evidence regarding the experience of CIA for women among older age groups, with rarer forms of cancer, haematological malignancies and those receiving palliative care or targeted treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the continued pervasive psychosocial implications arising from CIA, however this is not exclusive to scalp hair as alopecia from the face and body has also been found to require adaptation and effective coping. Limited knowledge exists on the experience of alopecia induced by treatment for haematological cancers and rarer-tumour groups and emerging systemic anti-cancer treatment modalities. Healthcare professionals must endeavour to support and discuss the potential risks of alopecia, and provide patients with an opportunity to voice their fears, concerns, and experiences of CIA. Future research should incorporate the identified underserved populations and the experience of newer therapies.

Cost-effectiveness of a fixed combination of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) relative to aprepitant plus granisetron (APR + GRAN) for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): a trial-based analysis

PURPOSE

To assess, from a United States (US) perspective, the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis using a single dose of netupitant and palonosetron in a fixed combination (NEPA) versus aprepitant plus granisetron (APR + GRAN), each in combination with dexamethasone, in chemotherapy-naïve patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC).

METHODS

We analyzed patient-level outcomes over a 5-day post-HEC period from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial of NEPA (n = 412) versus APR + GRAN (n = 416). Costs and CINV-related utilities were assigned to each subject using published sources. Parameter uncertainty was addressed via multivariate probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA).

RESULTS

Compared to APR + GRAN, NEPA resulted in a gain of 0.09 quality-adjusted life-days (QALDs) (4.04 vs 3.95; 95% CI -0.06 to 0.25) and a significant total per-patient cost reduction of $309 ($943 vs $1252; 95% CI $4-$626), due principally to $258 in lower medical costs of CINV-related events ($409 vs $668; 95% CI -$46 to $572) and $45 in lower study drug costs ($531 vs $577). In the PSA, NEPA resulted in lower costs and higher QALD in 86.5% of cases and cost ≤ $25,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in 97.8% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-ever economic analysis using patient-level data from a phase 3 trial comparing neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK1 RA) antiemetic regimens suggests that NEPA is highly cost-effective (and in fact cost-saving) versus an aprepitant-based regimen in post-HEC CINV prevention. Actual savings may be higher, as we focused only on the first chemotherapy cycle and omitted the impact of CINV-related chemotherapy discontinuation.

The validation of a newly developed Arabic scale to assess patient-reported side-effects of antineoplastic agents

Background

Multiple scales in different languages were developed to measure patient-reported side effects of antineoplastics. However, these scales vary in their coverage of antineoplastics’ side effects, and none of them address both the severity and impact of antineoplastics’ side effects on patient quality of life. Hence, there is a need to develop a comprehensive, concise, and general scale to assess patients’ perceptions of both severity and impact of the commonly reported side effects of antineoplastics on patients’ activities of daily living and make it available in Arabic.

Objectives

To develop and validate a new scale in Arabic to assess patient-reported antineoplastics’ side-effects among Arabic-speaking patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Methods

A new scale was developed in Arabic that addresses 40 different emotional, cognitive, and physical side-effects of antineoplastics. The Antineoplastic Side effects Scale (ASES) contained three subscales focused on the side effects frequency, severity, and interference with patients’ activities of daily living. Seventy-eight patients with different cancer types were recruited from the oncology clinics of a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The reliability of the questionnaire was examined using Cronbach’s alpha method. The construct validity was examined using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. The association between the scores of ASES subscales and various patient medical and sociodemographic characteristics were also examined.

Results

The mean age of participants was 53.8 (12.5) years and most of them were female (65.3%) and married (84.6%). The ASES demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.91). The severity of the perceived side effects and their impact on activities of daily living were positively associated with female gender.

Conclusion

The newly developed ASES demonstrated good validity and reliability. This tool will hopefully help healthcare providers and patients to identify commonly reported antineoplastic side effects.

Phenanthroimidazole derivatives act as potentinducer of autophagy by activating DNA damage pathway

A series of imidazo[4,5f][1,10]phenanthroline derivatives (1-6) have been synthesized in this study, and their inhibitory activity was evaluated by MTT assay. Results showed that all of these compounds demonstrate a promising inhibitory activity against a panel of human cancer cell lines. The 6, the most effective compound with IC₅₀ of approximately 2.3 ± 0.1 µM, was against the growth and could induce autophagy of HepG2 cells. This condition was confirmed by abundant autophagic vacuoles appearing in cells and evident ultrastructural changes observed under transmission electron microscopy. The autophage induced by 6 has also been demonstrated by up-regulating LC3-II and Beclin1. The apoptosis and G2/M phase cell cycle arrest through DSB damage have also been confirmed after the HepG2 cells were treated by 6. These multiple effects, especially induction apoptosis and autophagy, indicate the potential of 6 for development as a novel anticancer drug.

Cost-utility analysis of aprepitant for patients who truly need it in Japan

PURPOSE

Neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK₁RA) is recommended to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients who receive highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC, respectively). We previously reported that aprepitant, an NK₁RA, was needed to control CINV in 43% and 12% of patients who received HEC and MEC, respectively (Support Care Cancer 23:905-912, 2015). To elucidate the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant in these patients, a cost-utility analysis according to the necessity of aprepitant was performed.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was developed according to the necessity of aprepitant and CINV responses in both acute and delayed phases of chemotherapy. Probabilities of health states and medical costs were derived from the results of the abovementioned trial.

RESULT

In patients who received HEC and needed aprepitant, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with aprepitant, relative to the regimen with no aprepitant, was 7912 US dollars (USD) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, which was far below the commonly accepted threshold of 50,000 USD/QALY. The ICER was 27,457 USD/QALY in patients who received MEC and needed aprepitant. In contrast, in patients who received HEC or MEC but did not need aprepitant, the ICER was 175,959 or 478,844 USD/QALY, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of whether a patient received HEC or MEC, aprepitant use was highly cost-effective for patients who truly needed it. These results warrant further research to predict the necessity of NK₁RA treatment before initiating emetogenic chemotherapies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of olanzapine-containing antiemetic therapy for managing highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Southeast Asia: a multinational study

PURPOSE

Recent studies suggested that olanzapine, together with dexamethasone and serotonin-3 receptor antagonist (5HT3RA), is effective in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) following highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). This regimen is particularly useful in Southeast Asia (SEA) countries where resources are limited. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incorporating olanzapine into standard antiemetic regimens for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving HEC among SEA countries.

METHODS

Using a decision tree model, clinical and economic outcomes associated with olanzapine-containing regimen and standard antiemetic regimen (doublet antiemetic regimen: dexamethasone+first generation 5HT3RA) in most SEA countries except in Singapore (triplet antiemetic regimen: dexamethasone+first generation 5HT3RA + aprepitant) for CINV prevention following HEC were evaluated. This analysis was performed in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore, using societal perspective method with 5-day time horizon. Input parameters were derived from literature, network meta-analysis, government documents, and hospital databases. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in USD/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A series of sensitivity analyses including probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also performed.

RESULTS

Compared to doublet antiemetic regimen, addition of olanzapine resulted in incremental QALY of 0.0022-0.0026 with cost saving of USD 2.98, USD 27.71, and USD 52.20 in Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia, respectively. Compared to triplet antiemetic regimen, switching aprepitant to olanzapine yields additional 0.0005 QALY with cost saving of USD 60.91 in Singapore. The probability of being cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of 1 GDP/capita varies from 14.7 to 85.2% across countries.

CONCLUSION

The use of olanzapine as part of standard antiemetic regimen is cost-effective for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving HEC in multiple SEA countries.

Cost-effectiveness of aprepitant in Japanese patients treated with cisplatin-containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy

Chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains a major adverse event in cancer chemotherapy. Although aprepitant is effective in preventing CINV, an increment in financial burden for uniform use of aprepitant is a concern. The aim of the present study was to define the cost‐effectiveness of aprepitant from the perspective of the Japanese National Health Insurance system. Based on the results of a randomized phase II trial comparing an aprepitant‐containing regimen versus a nonaprepitant regimen in Japanese patients who received cisplatin‐containing highly emetogenic chemotherapy, a decision analytic model was developed. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated both in the outpatient care setting (OCS) and in the inpatient care setting (ICS). The use of the aprepitant‐containing regimen was associated with improved quality of life compared with the nonaprepitant regimen, with an increment in quality‐adjusted life years (QALY) of 0.0016. The incremental total medical costs associated with the use of the aprepitant regimen were lower in the OCS than in the ICS, 6192 JPY (56.92 USD) and 9820 JPY (90.27 USD), respectively. The ICER was calculated as 3 906 698 JPY (35 910 USD) per QALY gained in the OCS and 6 195 781 JPY (56 952 USD) per QALY gained in the ICS. Cost‐effectiveness of the aprepitant‐containing antiemetic therapy was limited to the OCS, considering the threshold of willingness‐to‐pay commonly accepted (5 million JPY [45 960 USD] in Japan and 50 000 USD in the USA). The efficacy of aprepitant offsets the costs for revisiting clinics or rehospitalization added with rescue medications in the OCS.

A Systematic Review of the Techniques Used to Value Temporary Health States

BACKGROUND

A broad literature on health state utility values exists, but compared with chronic health states (HSs), issues surrounding the valuation of temporary health states (THSs) have been poorly explored.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the methods used by previous studies to value HSs that are considered temporary so as to determine the strengths and limitations associated with various approaches and to inform future study designs.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken to explore the methods used, assess how the valuation was conducted for diseases that might lead to HSs deemed as temporary, and identify the challenges encountered in the valuation of THSs.

RESULTS

Of the 36 relevant studies, 22 were explicit that the HS being valued was temporary. Most of the studies used more than one technique (often incorporating both conventional and adapted approaches). In using adapted techniques, the primary challenge was identifying an appropriate intermediate "anchor" HS and the possibility of negative utilities.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no agreement on the most methodologically robust approach to THS valuation. Valuation is complex and important issues relating to the validity, practicality, and reliability of the techniques used were not adequately covered by most of the studies identified.

Adherence of Primary Care Physicians to Evidence-Based Recommendations to Reduce Ovarian Cancer Mortality

Ovarian cancer is the deadliest gynecologic cancer. Receipt of treatment from a gynecologic oncologist is an evidence-based recommendation to reduce mortality from the disease. We examined knowledge and application of this evidence-based recommendation in primary care physicians as part of CDC gynecologic cancer awareness campaign efforts and discussed results in the context of CDC National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP). We analyzed primary care physician responses to questions about how often they refer patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer to gynecologic oncologists, and reasons for lack of referral. We also analyzed these physicians' knowledge of tests to help determine whether a gynecologic oncologist is needed for a planned surgery. The survey response rate was 52.2%. A total of 84% of primary care physicians (87% of family/general practitioners, 81% of internists and obstetrician/gynecologists) said they always referred patients to gynecologic oncologists for treatment. Common reasons for not always referring were patient preference or lack of gynecologic oncologists in the practice area. A total of 23% of primary care physicians had heard of the OVA1 test, which helps to determine whether gynecologic oncologist referral is needed. Although referral rates reported here are high, it is not clear whether ovarian cancer patients are actually seeing gynecologic oncologists for care. The NCCCP is undertaking several efforts to assist with this, including education of the recommendation among women and providers and assistance with treatment summaries and patient navigation toward appropriate treatment. Expansion of these efforts to all populations may help improve adherence to recommendations and reduce ovarian cancer mortality.

Cannabinoids for nausea and vomiting in adults with cancer receiving chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Cannabis has a long history of medicinal use. Cannabis-based medications (cannabinoids) are based on its active element, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), and have been approved for medical purposes. Cannabinoids may be a useful therapeutic option for people with chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting that respond poorly to commonly used anti-emetic agents (anti-sickness drugs). However, unpleasant adverse effects may limit their widespread use.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of cannabis-based medications for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in adults with cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified studies by searching the following electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and LILACS from inception to January 2015. We also searched reference lists of reviews and included studies. We did not restrict the search by language of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a cannabis-based medication with either placebo or with a conventional anti-emetic in adults receiving chemotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently conducted eligibility and risk of bias assessment, and extracted data. We grouped studies based on control groups for meta-analyses conducted using random effects. We expressed efficacy and tolerability outcomes as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs. Most were of cross-over design, on adults undergoing a variety of chemotherapeutic regimens ranging from moderate to high emetic potential for a variety of cancers. The majority of the studies were at risk of bias due to either lack of allocation concealment or attrition. Trials were conducted between 1975 and 1991. No trials involved comparison with newer anti-emetic drugs such as ondansetron. Comparison with placebo People had more chance of reporting complete absence of vomiting (3 trials; 168 participants; RR 5.7; 95% CI 2.6 to 12.6; low quality evidence) and complete absence of nausea and vomiting (3 trials; 288 participants; RR 2.9; 95% CI 1.8 to 4.7; moderate quality evidence) when they received cannabinoids compared with placebo. The percentage of variability in effect estimates that was due to heterogeneity rather than chance was not important (I(2) = 0% in both analyses).People had more chance of withdrawing due to an adverse event (2 trials; 276 participants; RR 6.9; 95% CI 1.96 to 24; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence) and less chance of withdrawing due to lack of efficacy when they received cannabinoids, compared with placebo (1 trial; 228 participants; RR 0.05; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.89; low quality evidence). In addition, people had more chance of 'feeling high' when they received cannabinoids compared with placebo (3 trials; 137 participants; RR 31; 95% CI 6.4 to 152; I(2) = 0%).People reported a preference for cannabinoids rather than placebo (2 trials; 256 participants; RR 4.8; 95% CI 1.7 to 13; low quality evidence). Comparison with other anti-emetics There was no evidence of a difference between cannabinoids and prochlorperazine in the proportion of participants reporting no nausea (5 trials; 258 participants; RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.67 to 3.2; I(2) = 63%; low quality evidence), no vomiting (4 trials; 209 participants; RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.44; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence), or complete absence of nausea and vomiting (4 trials; 414 participants; RR 2.0; 95% CI 0.74 to 5.4; I(2) = 60%; low quality evidence). Sensitivity analysis where the two parallel group trials were pooled after removal of the five cross-over trials showed no difference (RR 1.1; 95% CI 0.70 to 1.7) with no heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%).People had more chance of withdrawing due to an adverse event (5 trials; 664 participants; RR 3.9; 95% CI 1.3 to 12; I(2) = 17%; low quality evidence), due to lack of efficacy (1 trial; 42 participants; RR 3.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 8.9; very low quality evidence) and for any reason (1 trial; 42 participants; RR 3.5; 95% CI 1.4 to 8.9; low quality evidence) when they received cannabinoids compared with prochlorperazine.People had more chance of reporting dizziness (7 trials; 675 participants; RR 2.4; 95% CI 1.8 to 3.1; I(2) = 12%), dysphoria (3 trials; 192 participants; RR 7.2; 95% CI 1.3 to 39; I(2) = 0%), euphoria (2 trials; 280 participants; RR 18; 95% CI 2.4 to 133; I(2) = 0%), 'feeling high' (4 trials; 389 participants; RR 6.2; 95% CI 3.5 to 11; I(2) = 0%) and sedation (8 trials; 947 participants; RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 1.8; I(2) = 31%), with significantly more participants reporting the incidence of these adverse events with cannabinoids compared with prochlorperazine.People reported a preference for cannabinoids rather than prochlorperazine (7 trials; 695 participants; RR 3.3; 95% CI 2.2 to 4.8; I(2) = 51%; low quality evidence).In comparisons with metoclopramide, domperidone and chlorpromazine, there was weaker evidence, based on fewer trials and participants, for higher incidence of dizziness with cannabinoids.Two trials with 141 participants compared an anti-emetic drug alone with a cannabinoid added to the anti-emetic drug. There was no evidence of differences between groups; however, the majority of the analyses were based on one small trial with few events. Quality of the evidence The trials were generally at low to moderate risk of bias in terms of how they were designed and do not reflect current chemotherapy and anti-emetic treatment regimens. Furthermore, the quality of evidence arising from meta-analyses was graded as low for the majority of the outcomes analysed, indicating that we are not very confident in our ability to say how well the medications worked. Further research is likely to have an important impact on the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis-based medications may be useful for treating refractory chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. However, methodological limitations of the trials limit our conclusions and further research reflecting current chemotherapy regimens and newer anti-emetic drugs is likely to modify these conclusions.

Topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride, paclitaxel, trabectedin and gemcitabine for advanced recurrent or refractory ovarian cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cancer in the UK, and the fourth most common cause of cancer death. Of those people successfully treated with first-line chemotherapy, 55-75% will relapse within 2 years. At this time, it is uncertain which chemotherapy regimen is more clinically effective and cost-effective for the treatment of recurrent, advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of topotecan (Hycamtin(®), GlaxoSmithKline), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride (PLDH; Caelyx(®), Schering-Plough), paclitaxel (Taxol(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), trabectedin (Yondelis(®), PharmaMar) and gemcitabine (Gemzar(®), Eli Lilly and Company) for the treatment of advanced, recurrent ovarian cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (MEDLINE(®), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Health Technology Assessment database, NHS Economic Evaluations Database) and trial registries were searched, and company submissions were reviewed. Databases were searched from inception to May 2013.

METHODS

A systematic review of the clinical and economic literature was carried out following standard methodological principles. Double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials, evaluating topotecan, PLDH, paclitaxel, trabectedin and gemcitabine, and economic evaluations were included. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was carried out. A de novo economic model was developed.

RESULTS

For most outcomes measuring clinical response, two networks were constructed: one evaluating platinum-based regimens and one evaluating non-platinum-based regimens. In people with platinum-sensitive disease, NMA found statistically significant benefits for PLDH plus platinum, and paclitaxel plus platinum for overall survival (OS) compared with platinum monotherapy. PLDH plus platinum significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with paclitaxel plus platinum. Of the non-platinum-based treatments, PLDH monotherapy and trabectedin plus PLDH were found to significantly increase OS, but not PFS, compared with topotecan monotherapy. In people with platinum-resistant/-refractory (PRR) disease, NMA found no statistically significant differences for any treatment compared with alternative regimens in OS and PFS. Economic modelling indicated that, for people with platinum-sensitive disease and receiving platinum-based therapy, the estimated probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER; incremental cost per additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY)] for paclitaxel plus platinum compared with platinum was £24,539. Gemcitabine plus carboplatin was extendedly dominated, and PLDH plus platinum was strictly dominated. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and receiving non-platinum-based therapy, the probabilistic ICERs associated with PLDH compared with paclitaxel, and trabectedin plus PLDH compared with PLDH, were estimated to be £25,931 and £81,353, respectively. Topotecan was strictly dominated. For people with PRR disease, the probabilistic ICER associated with topotecan compared with PLDH was estimated to be £324,188. Paclitaxel was strictly dominated.

LIMITATIONS

As platinum- and non-platinum-based treatments were evaluated separately, the comparative clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these regimens is uncertain in patients with platinum-sensitive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

For platinum-sensitive disease, it was not possible to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of platinum-based therapies with non-platinum-based therapies. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and treated with platinum-based therapies, paclitaxel plus platinum could be considered cost-effective compared with platinum at a threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY. For people with platinum-sensitive disease and treated with non-platinum-based therapies, it is unclear whether PLDH would be considered cost-effective compared with paclitaxel at a threshold of £30,000 per additional QALY; trabectedin plus PLDH is unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared with PLDH. For patients with PRR disease, it is unlikely that topotecan would be considered cost-effective compared with PLDH. Randomised controlled trials comparing platinum with non-platinum-based treatments might help to verify the comparative effectiveness of these regimens.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003555.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Patients' and doctors' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in resected non-small-cell lung cancer: What makes it worthwhile?

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) improves overall survival, but the benefits must be weighed against its harms. We sought to determine the survival benefits that patients and their doctors judged sufficient to make ACT in NSCLC worthwhile.

METHODS

122 patients completed a self-administered questionnaire at baseline and 6 months (before & after ACT, if they had it); 82 doctors completed the questionnaire once only. The time trade-off method was used to determine the minimum survival benefits judged sufficient in four hypothetical scenarios. Baseline survival times were 3 years & 5 years and baseline survival rates (at 5 years) were 50% & 65%.

RESULTS

At baseline, the median benefits judged sufficient by patients were an extra 9 months (Interquartile range (IQR) 1-12 months) beyond 3 years & 5 years and an extra 5% (IQR 0.1-10%) beyond 50% & 65%. At 6 months (n=91), patients' preferences had the same median benefit (9 months & 5%) but varied more (IQRs 0-18 months & 0-15%) than at baseline. Factors associated with judging smaller benefits sufficient were deciding to have ACT (P=0.01, 0.02) and better well-being (P=0.01, 0.006) during ACT. Doctors' preferences, compared with patients' preferences, had similar median benefits (9 months & 5%) but varied less (IQR 6-12 months versus 1-12 months, P<0.001; 5%-10% versus 0.1-10%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Most patients and doctors judged moderate survival benefits sufficient to make ACT in NSCLC worthwhile, but the preferences of doctors varied less than those of patients. Doctors should endeavour to elicit patients' preferences during discussions about ACT in NSCLC.

[Health-related quality of life in patients treated for ovarian cancer: tools and issues]

Health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients treated for ovarian cancer is directly and heavily impacted by the natural history of cancer, its evolution and its therapeutic modalities. The evaluation and consideration of various parameters of QoL seems to be a major issue. Indeed, on the one hand, it is essential to take into account the opinion of patients in the choice of therapeutic strategies for this cancer with a poor prognosis and, on the other hand, more and more studies show that QoL is an independent prognostic factor in ovarian cancer. Improvement in this case, in addition to being an endpoint by itself, would potentially improve the overall survival of patients. To date there are several tools to assess QOL of patients with ovarian cancer. The 2 questionnaires most commonly used are: FACT-O and the EORTC QLQ-OV28. The aim of our study was to evaluate from a review of the literature, the reciprocal effects of ovarian cancer on QoL and QoL on ovarian cancer survival, as well as specificities of each of the 2 questionnaires most commonly used in assessing the QoL.

Therapy preferences in melanoma treatment--willingness to pay and preference of quality versus length of life of patients, physicians and healthy controls

Background

New melanoma therapies, like e.g. ipilimumab, improve survival. However, only a small subset of patients benefits while 60% encounter side effects. Furthermore, these marginal benefits come at a very high price of €110’000 per treatment. This study examines attitudes towards melanoma therapy options of physicians, healthy individuals and patients, their willingness to pay and preference of quality versus length of life.

Methods

Based on findings from a focus group questionnaires were developed and pretested. After obtaining ethical approval and informed consent surveys were conducted in a total of 90 participants (n = 30 for each group). Statistical analyses were conducted using R.

Findings

Attitudes vastly differed between healthy participants, physicians and melanoma patients. Whereas melanoma patients show a high willingness to endure side effects despite very small survival gains (down to 1 extra week) or even only hope with no survival benefit, healthy controls are more critical, while physicians are the most therapy adverse. Consequently, if given €100’000 and the free decision what to spend the money on the willingness to pay for therapy was much higher in the patient group (68%) compared to 28% of healthy controls and only 43% of the physicians, respectively. When lowering the amount of cash that could be received instead of ipilimumab to €50’000 or €10’000 to test price sensitivity 69% (+1%) and 76% (+8%) of melanoma patients, respectively, preferred ipilimumab over cash. When judging on societal spending even melanoma patients opted for spending on ipilimumab in only 21%.

Conclusion

The judgment about the benefits of new treatment options largely differs between groups, physicians being the most critical against therapy. Price elasticity was low.

Economic analysis of aprepitant-containing regimen to prevent chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Hong Kong

AIM

We aim to evaluate the cost effectiveness of aprepitant-containing regimens for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) among patients receiving high emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in Hong Kong.

METHODS

Both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were conducted utilizing a decision-analytic model to measure the economic costs and clinical outcomes associated with the aprepitant-containing regimen versus a standard regimen in the prevention of CINV. Analyses were conducted on the basis of four published double-blind randomized clinical trials involving different usages of serotonin receptor antagonists.

RESULTS

The use of aprepitant-containing regimens is associated with an improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with non-aprepitant regimens. For cisplatin-based chemotherapy, the incremental cost per QALY gained is HKD 239,644 (1 USD approximates HKD 7.8) when ondansetron is administered on day 1 only. The incremental cost per QALY is HKD 440,950 when ondansetron is used on day 1 to 4. For anthracycline and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy, the aprepitant-containing regimen is associated with incremental cost of HKD 195,442 per QALY gained. Similar results were obtained when other 5HT3 receptor antagonists are used. The use of aprepitant was associated with higher cost of drug but lower costs of emesis-related management. With the cost-effectiveness threshold set at the World Health Organization endorsed criteria of three times gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (three times GDP per capita in Hong Kong in 2011 is HKD 798,078), the current analyses showed that the aprepitant-containing regimen was cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing HEC, the use of aprepitant as the anti-emetic is cost-effective in Hong Kong.

Willingness to pay to prevent chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting among patients with breast, lung, or colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the value patients place on avoiding various aspects of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can help medical professionals assess whether current and emerging treatments are acceptable based on their costs and expected effects. Little is known, however, about the value patients place on avoiding various aspects of CINV. The current study helps fill this gap in the literature.

METHODS

301 patients completed a discrete-choice conjoint survey. Patients viewed 25 conjoint tasks, each containing two descriptions of CINV, and indicated which they preferred. The descriptions combined levels from eight CINV attributes (likelihood of nausea, duration of nausea, severity of nausea, likelihood of vomiting, duration of vomiting, severity of vomiting, need to seek treatment for dehydration, and out-of-pocket treatment costs).

RESULTS

Cost contributed more to patient choices than any other single attribute. The combined effect of the likelihood, duration, and severity attributes for nausea, however, was a stronger driver of patient choices than cost, as was the combined effect of the likelihood, duration, and severity attributes for vomiting. The nausea attributes also were a stronger driver of patient choices than the vomiting attributes. Patients were willing to pay to avoid increases in all attributes, except likelihood of vomiting, where the result was not statistically different from zero. Willingness-to-pay varied by income, disease stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, chemotherapy status, and whether patients worked while on chemotherapy.

LIMITATIONS

Although the study used a convenience sample, data were collected from several geographically dispersed U.S. oncology clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

Several antiemetics are now available at different price points. This study assesses the value patients place on their benefits and may be used to inform decisions about the management of CINV.

Cost-effectiveness of an aprepitant regimen for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with breast cancer in the UK

Purpose

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains an important goal for patients receiving chemotherapy. The objective of this study was to define, from the UK payer perspective, the cost-effectiveness of an antiemetic regimen using aprepitant, a selective neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, for patients receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Methods

A decision-analytic model was developed to compare an aprepitant regimen (aprepitant, ondansetron, and dexamethasone) with a standard UK antiemetic regimen (ondansetron, dexamethasone, and metoclopramide) for expected costs and health outcomes after single-day adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. The model was populated with results from patients with breast cancer participating in a randomized trial of CINV preventative therapy for cycle 1 of single-day chemotherapy.

Results

During 5 days after chemotherapy, 64% of patients receiving the aprepitant regimen and 47% of those receiving the UK comparator regimen had a complete response to antiemetic therapy (no emesis and no rescue antiemetic therapy). A mean of £37.11 (78%) of the cost of aprepitant was offset by reduced health care resource utilization costs. The predicted gain in quality-adjusted lifeyears (QALYs) with the aprepitant regimen was 0.0048. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) with aprepitant, relative to the UK comparator, was £10,847/QALY, which is well below the threshold commonly accepted in the UK of £20,000–£30,000/QALY.

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that aprepitant is cost-effective for preventing CINV associated with chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer in the UK health care setting.

Patient-centered management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

Oncology providers frequently underestimate the incidence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV), and patients often are reluctant to report symptoms. Inadequate patient-provider communication is a significant barrier to optimal management of this debilitating toxicity.

METHODS

The author reviews relevant published data and methods to optimize the clinical care of patients receiving chemotherapy with moderate-to-high emetogenic potential.

RESULTS

Patient reticence plus physician expectations that patients will report symptoms accurately lead to lapses in communication and suboptimal clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Communication strategies should serve to encourage patients to share the responsibility for establishing goals of therapy and understanding the risks and benefits of their selected antiemetic regimen, thereby becoming active participants in their own cancer care.

Patient preferences for chemotherapies used in breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Therapies for invasive breast cancer may be associated with an incremental survival advantage that should be weighed against the risk of toxicities when making treatment decisions. The objective of this study was to elicit patient preferences for a comprehensive profile of attributes associated with chemotherapies for breast cancer.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of 121 patients with stage I-IV breast cancer who completed an internet-based conjoint survey that assessed the following attributes: ten grade III/IV toxicities, survival advantage, and administration regimen. Literature and expert input were used to identify descriptions for each attribute and respective levels (eg, different risks of toxicities). Subjects rated the attribute levels on a series of scales and indicated preferences in pair-wise comparisons of two hypothetical treatments differing in attribute levels. Ordinary least-squares regression was used to calculate utilities (preference weights) for each attribute level.

RESULTS

Of the twelve attributes, survival was the most important; specifically, a survival advantage of 3 months versus no survival advantage was most influential in the perceived value of chemotherapy. Among toxicities, the differences in the risks of neutropenia with hospitalization, diarrhea, nausea, and fatigue had the most impact on preferences; the risk differences of myalgia, stomatitis, and hand-foot syndrome had the least. In general, a more convenient administration regimen was less important than a 13% chance or more of severe toxicities, but more important than a 10%-12% chance of severe toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer patients place high value on small incremental survival advantages associated with treatment despite the risk of serious toxicities.

Aprepitant for Patients Receiving Highly Emetogenic Chemotherapy: An Economic Analysis for Singapore

BACKGROUND

Aprepitant (a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist), in combination with a serotonin receptor antagonist (5-HT3 RA) and dexamethasone, has demonstrated superior efficacy on end points related to chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) compared with standard care (combination 5-HT3 RA and dexamethasone).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of an aprepitant-containing regimen compared with current clinical practice for the prevention of CINV in patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) in Singapore.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was constructed to assess the costs and outcomes associated with an aprepitant-containing regimen compared with standard care in the prevention of CINV following HEC. Three scenarios were modeled on the basis of results of four double-blind randomized clinical trials of aprepitant. CINV event probabilities were calculated on the basis of the occurrence of nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue medication in the 5 days following a single cycle of HEC. The analysis was conducted from the Singapore health care system perspective.

RESULTS

Aprepitant reduced emesis and nausea, resulting in small but clinically important improvements when measured in quality-adjusted life-years. The aprepitant-containing regimen was associated with higher acquisition costs but lower costs relating to patient management, hospitalization, and use of rescue medication. Across the scenarios, the incremental cost per emetic event avoided ranged from cost saving to Singapore $63 (US $51). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from cost saving to Singapore $49,800 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (US $40,600). The analysis was relatively insensitive to changes in the inputs.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant is a clinically important and cost-effective therapy for the prevention of CINV in patients treated with HEC in Singapore.

Chemotherapy-induced emesis: quality of life and economic impact in the context of current practice in Canada

In this study, we estimated the proportion of patients who experience chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in current practice and evaluated the impact of CINV on quality of life and cost in Canada. Patients receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy were recruited from 4 Canadian oncology centers. Patients used diaries to record information on their activities, incidence of nausea and vomiting, and health resources consumed each day for 5 days following chemotherapy. They also completed the Functional Living Index-Emesis (FLIE) questionnaire and a health utility instrument before chemotherapy and 5 days later. Of the 323 patients recruited, 266 (82%) completed their diary. On day 1, 26% of patients reported nausea or vomiting (acute emesis). From day 2 to day 5 after chemotherapy, 44% reported nausea or vomiting (delayed emesis). Patients who experienced nausea or vomiting during the study period had a decrease in FLIE score of 22% and a decrease in health utility of 15%. Patients with nausea or vomiting reported an average of 19 hours per cycle during which they were unable to perform their normal activities. Also, friends or relatives spent an average of 10 hours helping these patients. Incremental medical costs per patient experiencing CINV were $61 Canadian. Including productivity losses, total incremental costs were $592 Canadian per patient. Despite use of antiemetics, CINV remains problematic, impacting the quality of life of patients with cancer and increasing costs.

Utility scores and treatment preferences for clinical early-stage cervical cancer

OBJECTIVES

To determine utility scores for health states relevant to the treatment of early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer.

METHODS

Seven descriptive health states incorporating the physical and emotional aspects of medical treatment, recovery, and prognosis were developed. Forty-five female volunteers valuated each health state using the visual analogue score (VAS) and time trade off (TTO) methods. Treatment options were ranked by mean and median TTO scores. The 95% confidence intervals were calculated to determine the statistical significance of ranking preferences. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare central tendencies related to age, race, parity, and subject history of abnormal cervical cytology.

RESULTS

VAS and TTO scores were highly correlated. Volunteers ranked minimally invasive radical hysterectomy with low-risk features as most preferred (mean TTO = 0.96; median TTO = 1.00) and aborted radical hysterectomy followed by chemoradiation as least preferred (mean TTO = 0.69; median TTO = 0.83). Health states that included radical surgery were ranked higher than those that included chemoradiation, either in the adjuvant or primary setting. When survival was comparable, volunteers rated radical hysterectomy with high-risk pathology followed by adjuvant chemoradiation (mean TTO = 0.78; median TTO = 0.92; 95% CI: 0.69-0.87) similarly to chemoradiation alone (mean TTO = 0.76; median TTO 0.90; 95% CI: 0.66-0.86; p = NS). Utility scores for the majority of health states were not significantly associated with age, race, parity, or subject history of abnormal cervical cytology.

CONCLUSION

Subjects consistently preferred surgical excision to treat early-stage, high-risk cervical cancer and chose a minimally invasive approach. Such utility scores can be used to incorporate quality-of-life effects into comparative-effectiveness models for cervical cancer.

Symptom experience in patients with gynecological cancers: the development of symptom cIusters through patient narratives

The vast majority of the increasing cancer literature on physical and psychological symptom clusters is quantitative, attempting either to model clusters through statistical techniques or to test priori clusters for their strength of relationship. Narrative symptom clusters can be particularly sensitive outcomes that can generate conceptually meaningful hypotheses for symptom cluster research. We conducted a study to explore the explanation of patients about the development and coexistence of symptoms and how patients at tempted to self-manage them. We collected 2-month qualitative longitudinal data over four assessment points consisting of 39 interview data sets from 10 participants with gynecological cancer. Participants' experiences highlighted the presence of physical and psychological symptom clusters, complicating the patients 'symptom experience that often lasted 1 year. While some complementary and self-management approaches were used to manage symptoms, few options and interventions were discussed. The cancer care team maybe able to develop strategies for a more thorough patient assessment of symptoms reported as the most bother so mean and patient-centered sensitive interventions that encompass the physiological, psychological, sociocultural, and behavioral components of the symptom experience essential for effectives symptom management.

A review of cost-effectiveness studies in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Ovarian cancer is the fifth leading cause of all cancer-related deaths among women. While the costs of diagnosis and treatment impact the affected individual and the health system, the most important costs for the patient are often the pain and suffering associated with ovarian cancer. The quality of life associated with any management decision should be closely examined. Cost-effectiveness models take into account costs, effects, and quality of life and provide clinicians with useful tools to aid in making these difficult decisions.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of cost-effectiveness analyses was undertaken concerning screening for and treatment of ovarian cancer.

RESULTS

Screening methods to detect ovarian cancer are unproven, and the majority of women present with advanced-stage disease. Multimodal screening strategies with high specificities targeted at the highest-risk individuals are the most likely strategies to be cost-effective. Primary treatment with intravenous paclitaxel and platinum regimens has proven to be cost-effective in multiple studies. Studies evaluating intraperitoneal chemotherapy show that this strategy is potentially cost-effective over a long-term time horizon. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the management of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer showed that treatment with carboplatin and paclitaxel is cost-effective compared to single-agent therapy. However, the preferred option for patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer appears to be supportive care (no chemotherapy) or single-agent therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Many therapeutic choices are cost-effective in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Cost-effectiveness models offer one way to examine options in the management of a disease. The quality of life of the patient should be the most important factor in any management decision and is incorporated into well-designed studies on cost-effectiveness.

Determination of quality of life-related utilities for health states relevant to ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment

OBJECTIVES

(1) To define a set of health state descriptions related to screening, diagnosis, prognosis, and toxicities relevant to ovarian cancer; (2) To derive a set of quality of life-related utilities to be used for cost-effectiveness analyses.

METHODS

A comprehensive list of health states was developed to represent the experiences of diagnostic testing for ovarian cancer, natural history of ovarian cancer (e.g., newly diagnosed early stage ovarian cancer, recurrent progressive ovarian cancer) and the most common chemotherapy-related toxicities (e.g. alopecia, peripheral neuropathy, pain, neutropenia, fatigue). Valuation of each health state was obtained through individual interviews of 13 ovarian cancer patients and 37 female members of the general public. Interviews employed visual analog score (VAS) and time trade off (TTO) methods of health state valuation.

RESULTS

Mean TTO-derived utilities were higher than VAS-derived utilities by 0.118 U (p<0.0001). Mean VAS-derived utilities for screening tests were 0.83 and 0.81 for true negative blood test and ultrasound; 0.79 and 0.78 for false negative blood test and ultrasound, respectively. Patients and volunteers generally agreed in their preference ranking of chemotherapy-associated states, with lowest rankings being given to febrile neutropenia, grades 3-4 fatigue, and grades 3-4 nausea/vomiting. For 55% of chemotherapy-associated health states, the average utility assigned was higher for patients than for volunteers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study establishes societal preferences for a number of health states related to screening, diagnosis and treatment of ovarian cancer that can be used for assessing the cost-effectiveness of different ovarian cancer screening and treatment regimens.

Supportive care for women with gynecologic cancers

Supportive care is a multidimensional field, that involves caring for a patient's symptoms either during and/or after treatment. Ideally, once these supportive care needs are met, patients can enjoy an improved quality of life. Supportive care needs include all body systems, and are, therefore, difficult to manage, secondary to the fact that they require collaboration among multiple medical specialties. In this review, several components of supportive care are separated into two categories: tumor-related morbidities and treatment-related morbidities. Some of the themes discussed include nausea and vomiting, cancer pain, psychological distress, fatigue and anemia, small bowel obstruction and peripheral neuropathy. While all of these components are challenging to manage, it is perhaps the psychosocial realm that remains the most unmet need. Regardless, the oncologist must act as a facilitator who addresses these needs and, if unable to address the issue alone, knows how to steer the patient toward the appropriate provider. As these needs are met, the goal is for quality of life to improve; and with the improvement in quality of life we may expect to see improved survival outcomes.

Quality of life for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer

Ovarian cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide and the seventh most common cause of deaths from cancer in women. Recent annual worldwide figures reflect 204,000 new cases of ovarian cancer and 125,000 deaths. Treatment of advanced ovarian cancer involves a combination of surgery and chemotherapy, both of which may impact a woman's physical, social, and emotional well-being. A woman's quality of life (QOL) is affected by disease site, and treatment-specific and patient-specific factors, but other common QOL issues include changes in physical functioning owing to side effects of treatment, psychological distress caused by fear and anxiety of recurrence, sexual dysfunction associated with anatomic and physiologic changes of treatment, and for younger women, loss of childbearing potential. As new diagnostic and treatment strategies for gynecologic malignancies are developed, research efforts should include QOL consequences. Further studies are needed to develop strategies for identifying women at risk for serious QOL disruption so that effective interventions to assist these women can be designed.

Health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of aprepitant in outpatients receiving antiemetic prophylaxis for highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Germany

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) remains a major adverse effect of cancer therapy. We aimed to determine outcomes associated with use of aprepitant in outpatients undergoing highly emetogenic chemotherapy in Germany from a patient's and payer's perspective.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model compared an aprepitant regimen (aprepitant/ondansetron/dexamethasone) to a control regimen (ondansetron/dexamethasone) over a five days period. Clinical results and resource utilisation observed in aprepitant phase III clinical trials were assigned German unit cost data.

RESULTS

Complete response over one chemotherapy cycle was observed in 68% of patients in the aprepitant group (N=514) compared to 48% of patients in the control group (N=518). Patients were estimated to have gained an equivalent of 15 additional hours of perfect health per cycle (0.63 quality-adjusted life days) with aprepitant-based regimen compared to control regimen. Cost per quality-adjusted life year gained with aprepitant was estimated at euro28,891.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant substantially improved CINV-related health outcomes in patients undergoing highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Incremental benefits materialised in a cost-effective fashion.

Quality of life and gynecologic malignancies

In 2005, an estimated 79,480 new cases of gynecologic malignancies will be diagnosed, and almost 29,000 women will die. Treatment of gynecologic malignancies involves a combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy, all of which may affect a woman's physical, social, and emotional well-being. Although specific effects on quality of life (QOL) depend on disease site, treatment-, and patient-specific factors, common QOL issues include changes in physical functioning due to side effects of treatment, psychological distress due to fear and anxiety of recurrence, sexual dysfunction associated with anatomic and physiologic changes of treatment, and, for younger women, loss of childbearing potential. As new diagnostic and treatment strategies for gynecologic malignancies are developed, research efforts should include QOL consequences. Further studies are needed to develop strategies for identifying women at risk for serious QOL disruption so that effective interventions to assist these women can be designed.

Rankings and symptom assessments of side effects from chemotherapy: insights from experienced patients with ovarian cancer

GOALS OF WORK

Although many patients with ovarian cancer achieve favorable responses to primary chemotherapy, the majority of women will experience recurrence of their cancer. Selection of second- or third-line chemotherapy ultimately depends on patient preferences for different side effects. To better understand this process, we evaluated preferences and symptom distress in patients with ovarian cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 70 women with ovarian cancer who had previously received at least three cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy and currently undergoing chemotherapy for newly diagnosed or recurrent disease were interviewed in an outpatient chemotherapy clinic. The patients were asked to rank order 27 health states using a modified visual analog scale and to complete the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale (MSAS).

MAIN RESULTS

Most favorable health states included perfect health, clinical remission and complete control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Least favorable health states included more severe CINV health states and death. Patients on first-line chemotherapy had less symptom distress, and rated sexual dysfunction, fatigue and memory loss more favorably than patients on second- or third-line chemotherapy (P<0.05). Married patients generally had less symptom distress compared to patients who were not married, but married patients indicated more distress with sexual dysfunction (P=0.04). Married patients rated alopecia less favorably than unmarried patients (P=0.03), but married patients viewed certain CINV health states more favorably (P=0.02-0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

CINV remains one of the most dreaded side effects of chemotherapy. Separate preference profiles exist for patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent disease, as well as for married versus unmarried patients. While MSAS scores and VAS rankings showed consistency across some health states, this was not true for CINV, suggesting that current symptom status may only influence patient preferences for selected side effects.

Measuring chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and emesis (CINE) is one of the most dreaded side effects of cancer therapy. To investigate the influence of these symptoms on a patient's quality of life (QOL), a validated tool measuring many domains is needed.

METHODS

A QOL questionnaire consisting of scales from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, the Morrow Assessment of Nausea and Emesis, the Osoba Nausea and Emesis Module, and new items specific to nausea, emesis, and retching was constructed and administered daily for 7-9 days to outpatients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Test-retest and internal consistency reliabilities ranged from 0.44 to 0.84 and from 0.59 to 0.85, respectively. Item and scale correlations indicated good convergent and discriminant validity. Scales and items measuring similar factors (e.g., severity of emesis and severity of nausea) had strong correlations than did scales measuring dissimilar factors (e.g., cognitive functioning and physical functioning). The validity of known groups was demonstrated by significant differences (P < 0.01) in patients' QOL scores between days with no episodes of nausea, emesis, or retching, days with 1 or 2 episodes, and days with more than 3 episodes. Patients' QOL significantly decreased as the number of episodes per day increased (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A CINE QOL questionnaire that successfully measures the short-term impact of nausea, emesis, and retching on patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy has been developed, largely as a battery of preexisting questionnaires. The psychometric properties of the new questionnaire show adequate reliability and validity to warrant its use in clinical trials and outcomes studies. CINE adversely affects many domains within a patient's QOL.