Consultation dédiée de prescription d’une hormonothérapie adjuvante chez la femme jeune traitée pour cancer du sein hormonosensible : une clé pour améliorer l’adhésion ?

[Survivorship care plan (SCP) : The viewpoints of women with breast cancer and their general practitioners]

BACKGROUND

The French National Cancer Institute recommends the use of survivorship care plans (SCP) for all cancer survivors. Developing useful SCP's requires understanding of what survivors and their providers need and how SCP's can be implemented in practice. We conducted a study to assess the delivery of SCP comprehensive binders for breast cancer women (BCW) and their general practitioners (GP) in a Cancer center from January 2019.

METHODS

SCP binders, containing a full range of information on topics related to post-cancer care to survivor-specific information and referrals, were given to BCW during a post-treatment dedicated consultation. Then a letter, containing the treatment summary and 5-year follow-up schedule, was sent to their GPs. Comprehensive binder delivery assessment was carried out using item checkbox, and anonymous open-answered, self-reported questionnaires were sent by email to BCW and their GPs.

RESULTS

The questionnaire response rates were 81.3% for BCW (n = 109/134) and 48.6% for their GPs (n = 52/107). Most BCW (85%) reported that SCP binders provided useful and comprehensive information. However, some of them (18%) felt abandoned and anonymous during the post-treatment follow-up. Most GPs found SCP letters from our anti-cancer center physicians to be useful for their patients, 38% of them had used this information to assure transition of care with other care providers. In addition, GPs were unanimous to express their feeling that this SCP could improve the long-term surveillance of BCW. There was a high concordance between BCW survivors' and PCP' answers, especially regarding SCPs as a communication bridge between GPs and BCW survivors. Response results concerning use of the binders: to talk about them: 59% for BCW vs. 51% for GPs, and to show them: 35% for BCW vs. 31% for GPs.

CONCLUSION

The opinions of BCW survivors' and PCP' opinions about the use of SCP's by our Cancer Center seems to be favourable. It is essential to implement and develop SCP's as a key tool in long-term surveillance and support for cancer patient survivors and they are a useful instrument for care providers in communication and transition.

Half-dose fulvestrant plus anastrozole as a first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

The S0226 trial demonstrated that the combination of half-dose fulvestrant (FUL) and anastrozole (ANA) (F&A) caused a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) versus ANA monotherapy for first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer (PMW-MBC (HR+)). The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of F&A in the first-line treatment for PMW-MBC (HR+) in China.

DESIGN

We constructed a Markov model over a life-time horizon. The clinical outcomes and utility data were obtained from published literature. Cost data were obtained from official Chinese websites. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test result uncertainty.

SETTING

Chinese healthcare system perspective.

POPULATION

A hypothetical cohort of adult patients presenting with PMW-MBC (HR+).

INTERVENTIONS

F&A compared with full-dose FUL and ANAmonotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome of this study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY).

RESULTS

ANA was estimated to have the lowest cost and minimum life-years. The ICER of F&A versus ANA was US$15 665.891/QALY with incremental cost and QALY of US$12 401.120 and 0.792, respectively, which was less than the willingness-to-pay of US$29 383/QALY. Compared with F&A, FUL yielded a higher cost and a shorter lifetime; hence, it was identified as a dominated strategy. The univariate sensitivity analysis indicated the price of FUL was the most influential factor in our study. The probability that F&A was cost-effective at a threshold of US$29 383/QALY in China was 86.5%.

CONCLUSION

F&A is a cost-effective alternative to FUL and ANA monotherapy for the first-line treatment of PMW-MBC (HR+) in China. F&A is a promising first-line treatment for PMW-MBC (HR+), and more research is needed to evaluate the economy of using F&A in other countries.