Pattern of care and effectiveness of treatment for glioblastoma patients in the real world: Results from a prospective population-based registry. Could survival differ in a high-volume center?

BACKGROUND

As yet, no population-based prospective studies have been conducted to investigate the incidence and clinical outcome of glioblastoma (GBM) or the diffusion and impact of the current standard therapeutic approach in newly diagnosed patients younger than aged 70 years.

METHODS

Data on all new cases of primary brain tumors observed from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2010, in adults residing within the Emilia-Romagna region were recorded in a prospective registry in the Project of Emilia Romagna on Neuro-Oncology (PERNO). Based on the data from this registry, a prospective evaluation was made of the treatment efficacy and outcome in GBM patients.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-seven GBM patients (median age, 64 y; range, 29-84 y) were enrolled. The median overall survival (OS) was 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.2-12.4). The 139 patients ≤aged 70 years who were given standard temozolomide treatment concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy had a median OS of 16.4 months (95% CI, 14.0-18.5). With multivariate analysis, OS correlated significantly with KPS (HR = 0.458; 95% CI, 0.248-0.847; P = .0127), MGMT methylation status (HR = 0.612; 95% CI, 0.388-0.966; P = .0350), and treatment received in a high versus low-volume center (HR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.328-0.986; P = .0446).

CONCLUSIONS

The median OS following standard temozolomide treatment concurrent with and adjuvant to radiotherapy given to (72.8% of) patients aged ≤70 years is consistent with findings reported from randomized phase III trials. The volume and expertise of the treatment center should be further investigated as a prognostic factor.

Staging of breast cancer: what standards should be used in research and clinical practice?

BACKGROUND

Bone scan (BS), chest X-rays (CXR), liver ultrasonography (LUS) and laboratory parameters (LP) are frequently used as routine staging procedures for breast cancer patients. These procedures are not always appropriate in either clinical or research settings, regardless of the stage. The aim of this study was to identify groups of patients with differing risks for metastases in order to select more precise standard staging procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The staging data relating to 406 breast cancer patients consecutively referred to our institution between November 1989 and October 1996 were analysed including pathological TNN grading and biological parameters. All of the cases with a positive or suspicious pre-operatory staging and who proved to have metastatic disease before surgery or during the first six months of follow-up were considered true-positive; all of the other cases with a positive or suspicious initial staging but with no evidence of distant metastasis before surgery and with a disease-free survival longer then six months were considered false-positive. In the same way all cases with negative initial staging who relapsed during the first six months of follow-up were considered false-negative and those with negative initial staging and with a disease-free survival longer then six months were considered true-negative. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

BS, CXR and LUS, 388, 399 and 398 examinations respectively, were considered available, and 17 (4.38%), six (1.5%) and four (1%), respectively, proved to be true-positive. A statistically significant difference was observed when our cases were grouped according to T status (T4 vs. T1-T2-T3, P < 0.01) and nodal status (N0-N1 cases with less than three involved nodes and N1 with more than three positive lymph nodes N2 patients, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that breast cancer patients can be divided into three subgroups with different detection rates for distant metastases at staging (0.59%, 2.94% and 15.53%), and that the standard practice should be changed. In the first (T1N0 and T1N1 patients with < or = 3 positive lymph nodes--41.13% of the patients) and the second group (T2N0, T2N1 with < or = 3 positive lymph nodes, T3N0 and T3N1 patients with < or = 3 positive lymph nodes--33.49% of the patients) there is no need for a complete set of staging procedures, whereas full procedural staging is needed in the third group of patients (T4, N1 with > 3 lymph nodes and N2, 25.37% of the patients).

Evaluation of the cost of home care for terminally ill cancer patients

The aim of this work was to carry out a cost evaluation of the home care programme for terminally ill cancer patients run by the Istituto Oncologico Romagnolo (I.O.R.) in the areas of Forlì, Cesena, Ravenna and Rimini (Romagna, Italy). To determine effective home care direct costs, we first selected 1 week of care as an observation unit. We then proceeded to assess the medical and nursing care units together with the clinical protocols administered for each patient. The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) was also assessed weekly. In this way, we calculated care costs for each patient and for each week as the sum of medical costs, nursing costs, treatment costs and other costs. A consecutive series of 574 patients were involved in the study from 1 April 1994 to 31 March 1995. A total of 5164 patient-weeks of care was provided, with an average cost per week of 177.6 Ecu. This weekly cost increased in the last 100 days of life (week -15 = 179.5 Ecu; week -8 = 188.3 Ecu; week -2 = 221.0 Ecu; P < 0.001). When single components were analysed in relation to total cost (treatment protocols, physician and nursing care) the increased global cost was found to be mainly attributable to the intensification in nursing care (21.8% of costs in week -15 vs 27.3% of costs in week -2). Examination of the relation between the cost of 1 week of care and KPS values clearly shows that healthcare costs increased as KPS decreased (from 152.2 Ecu with KPS > or = 60 to 292.6 Ecu with KPS < or = 20; P < 0.001). Home care costs were also seen to vary with some clinical characteristics and symptoms present when patients entered the study: asthenia, anorexia, nausea/vomiting, bedsores. Given the good results of home care for cancer patients in terms of quality of life, this method of cost accounting for home-care providers can help to monitor the rising cost of assistance and confirm the cost effectiveness of this type of care.