Promotional payments to medical oncologists and urologists and prescriptions for abiraterone and enzalutamide

Urology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lillian Y. Lai ◽  
Mary K. Oerline ◽  
Samuel R. Kaufman ◽  
Lindsey A. Herrel ◽  
Ted A. Skolarus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (28) ◽  
pp. 2998-3004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aida Raigon-Ponferrada ◽  
María E.D. Recio ◽  
Jose L. Guerrero-Orriach ◽  
Alfredo Malo-Manso ◽  
Juan J. Escalona-Belmonte ◽  
...  

: Breast cancer is a complex heterogeneous disease that is categorized into several histological and genomic subtypes with relevant prognostic and therapeutical implications. Such diversity requires a multidisciplinary approach for a comprehensive treatment that will involve surgeons, radiotherapists and medical oncologists. Breast cancer is classified as either local (or locoregional), which stands for 90-95% of cases, or metastatic, representing 5% of cases. : The management of breast cancer will be determined by the stage of the disease. The treatment of local breast cancer is based on surgery and/or radiotherapy. Systemic breast cancer requires chemotherapy and/or endocrine and/or biological therapy.


ESMO Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 100053
Author(s):  
R. Berardi ◽  
M. Torniai ◽  
M.S. Cona ◽  
F.L. Cecere ◽  
R. Chiari ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 1050-1058.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Jung Kim ◽  
David Hui ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Ji Chan Park ◽  
Gary Chisholm ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 101 (5) ◽  
pp. 550-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Homayounfar ◽  
A. Bleckmann ◽  
H.-J. Helms ◽  
F. Lordick ◽  
J. Rüschoff ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 292-292
Author(s):  
Shiru Liu ◽  
Wing Chan ◽  
Genevieve Bouchard-Fortier ◽  
Stephanie Lheureux ◽  
Sarah Ferguson ◽  
...  

292 Background: Initial treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) consists of combination of cytoreductive surgery (CSR) and/or chemotherapy. Targeted therapies such as bevacizumab have shown to improve outcomes in a subset population with high-risk features. Real-world patterns of systemic therapy delivery in EOC in the modern era are not well understood. Our objective is to evaluate the patterns of first-line systemic treatment of advanced EOC in Ontario, focusing on adoption of bevacizumab, which was approved for use in 2016. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, population cohort study using administrative databases held at the ICES in Ontario, Canada. Patients diagnosed with non-mucinous EOC between 2014 and 2018 were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry; early-stage disease was excluded. Information on systemic therapy was obtained from Activity Level Reporting and New Drug Funding Program databases. Provider of care (gynecologic oncologist vs medical oncologist) information was obtained from billing codes. Academic cancer centers were identified using validated systemic facility codes from Cancer Care Ontario. Statistical analyses include descriptive statistics, t-tests, and multivariable logistic regression using SAS. Results: Out of 4,680 cases diagnosed with EOC during the study period, 3,632 (77.6%) were considered advanced stage. Median age of cohort was between 65-70, and the majority had Charlson score of 1-2 (97%) and are urban (91.8%). A total of 3,181 (87.6%) patients underwent CRS and 2,722(74.9%) patients underwent chemotherapy. Of those who received chemotherapy, 1,259 (46.2%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 1,012 (37.2%) received upfront CRS, and 451(16.5%) received chemotherapy only. The majority of chemotherapy was delivered by gynecologic oncologists (60.6%) and in academic cancer centres (61.7%). There was no significant difference in use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy between medical oncologists and gynecologic oncologists (p = 0.67). Only 53 chemotherapy patients (1.9%) received bevacizumab containing-regimen in the first-line setting. Medical oncologists were 4 times more likely to administer bevacizumab-containing regimen compared to gynecologic oncologists (OR 4.03, 95% CI.29 – 7.36) after adjusting for age, stage, Charlson score and rurality score on logistic regression. Delivery of bevacizumab is relatively higher in non-academic cancer centres (OR 2.61, 95% CI 2.32- 2.94) while 83% of intraperitoneal chemotherapy is delivered in academic cancer centres. Conclusions: Patterns of care of EOC in Ontario remain heterogenous between care providers and institutions, while uptake of bevacizumab for first-line treatment of EOC remains low. Factors leading to low uptake and real-world outcomes should be explored.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 279-279
Author(s):  
Jennifer Marie Rauw ◽  
Sunil Parimi ◽  
Nikita Ivanov ◽  
Jessica Noble ◽  
Eugenia Wu ◽  
...  

279 Background: The PCSC Program was initiated in 2013 at the Vancouver Prostate Centre to provide a comprehensive program for patients and partners with prostate cancer. This program provides educational sessions (ES) and clinical services, including decision-making for primary therapy, sexual health, pelvic floor physiotherapy, hormone therapy, counseling, exercise, and nutrition for patients in BC, Canada. In 2016, the PCSC Program expanded to BC Cancer Victoria and in 2017 to other BC Cancer sites. In 2018, medical oncologists (MDs) in Victoria (JR, SP) developed an Education Module addressing treatment options for men with metastatic hormone sensitive (mHSPC) and metastatic castration resistant (mCRPC) disease. MDs delivered in-person ES in Victoria in 2018 and, in 2019, added a virtual platform (VP) option. From 3-5/2020, the ESs were on hold due to the COVID pandemic and parental leaves. In 6/2020, the ESs resumed only on VP, and the PCSC Oncology Nurse Practitioner (NP), NI, gave the presentations for the MDs on leave. In 10/2020, due to a changing standard of care for mHSPC, the PCSC team consolidated the two ESs into one. We report on the evolution of this Education Module in response to both the changing standard of care and the COVID pandemic. Methods: We prospectively collected attendance and patient characteristic metrics from all ES for men with mPC. We tracked presenter type (MD vs. NP) and prospectively collected anonymous patient satisfaction questionnaires. Results: From 1/2018 to 1/2021, 100 men registered for 27 ES; 81 men, 41 partners, and 2 family members actually attended. 48/75 (64%) men were white, 39/75 (52%) retired, and 56/75 (74.7%) married. 47 men attended 12 mHSPC ES, 13 men attended ten mCRPC ES, and 17 attended four consolidated ES. MDs presented 15 ES, and the NP presented 12 ES. Responses to questions on 70 satisfaction surveys were similar for MD vs. NP presenters. 9 responders to the recently added VP-specific questions said they agreed (4) or strongly agreed (5) that it was beneficial to watch the ES at home on a computer. The Table below shows attendance per site per year. Conclusions: The ESs for men with mPC were well-received. Although there was a VP option before COVID, attendance increased significantly after the lockdown as patients and providers became more familiar with VPs. Satisfaction surveys confirmed that an NP could deliver the ES rather than MD. Consolidation of the mHSPC and mCRPC ES reflected the changing standard of care and resulted in more efficient use of presenter time. Virtual delivery of the sessions provided greater access to those living in distant or remote areas of the province and those in lockdown during the COVID pandemic. [Table: see text]


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 20-20
Author(s):  
Sharon M. Castellino ◽  
Angela Punnett ◽  
Susan K Parsons ◽  
Nicholas P. DeGroote ◽  
Sally Muehle ◽  
...  

Background: HL is an adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer that lacks uniform approaches across medical and pediatric oncology. Differences include risk classification, chemotherapy backbone and use of radiation therapy. Heterogeneity in institutional programs and resources for AYAs adds to the gap in understanding why outcomes for AYA HL differ. In order to expedite equitable access to novel agents for AYA patients by medical and pediatric oncology providers, a NCTN facilitated trial for advanced stage HL was launched. The SWOG-led S1826 trial (NCT03907488), open to patients > 12 years of age, was activated in July 2019. We assessed barriers and facilitators to trial activation at COG institutions for this first in-kind approach. Methods: A web-based survey was distributed through the COG communications office to institutional principal investigators (PIs) of 216 institutions in North America. To achieve optimal response rates, the survey was distributed in four waves over a 6-week period. Branching logic differentiated questions for institutions that had opened or planned to open the trial vs. those who did not. Topics included institutional characteristics, joint partnership with medical oncologists to activate AYA trials, and specific barriers for opening this trial. Descriptive statistics were calculated using SAS v.7.1. Results: The response rate was 73% with 158 unique responses among 216 COG institutions queried. Among responding institutions 24% were freestanding children's hospitals; 18% were NCI-designated cancer centers. 55% of respondents indicated a known affiliation with another NCTN cooperative group other than COG. 31% indicated prior experience in participating in a non-COG led NCTN trial for other diseases. 42% of institutions reported a central trials infrastructure for joint pediatric and medical oncology trials. 44% indicated use of the central IRB mechanism, and 4% used a provincial IRB. While 40% had an established AYA oncology program, 30% reported regular lymphoma tumor boards with medical oncology; 8% indicated the ability to see AYA lymphoma patients in a joint pediatric and medical oncology clinic. The trial is open at 79/158 (50%) COG institutions to date and an additional 56 indicated future intent to open the trial. Among 135 COG institutions with open or intent-to-open status, 73% of institutional principal investigator (PI) were pediatric oncologists, 24% were medical oncologists and 4% were joint PIs. PI determination was based on: enrolling as a COG-only site (57%); institutional policy (5%); a discussion among investigators (23%); or other factors (14%). These were categorized as: more resources or anticipated patients in medical oncology (n=4); the trial being opened in medical oncology before pediatrics (n=11); being open in pediatrics before medical oncology (n=2); no interface for joint studies (n=1). Among the 14% of respondents who indicated the trial would not be opened, a competing trial was the reason in 35%. Other reasons included: lack of awareness of the trial, concerns about study design or chemotherapy backbone, lack of easily accessible protocol documents, anticipated lack of accrual, concerns around funding support, challenges with regulatory support, data management, or institutional process for medical and pediatric joint trials. Respondents' recommendations for facilitating activation of AYA intergroup studies include needs for: increased resources and funding; guidance on communication and navigation with medical oncologists for managing joint trials; institutional infrastructure for AYA trials; clearer rationale for a change in the chemotherapy backbone relative to prior COG studies; accessibility and consistency of protocol study naming conventions and protocol documents (i.e. therapy roadmap) on the COG electronic site. Conclusions: Successful implementation of AYA trials is germane to early access to novel agents for younger adolescents. Overall, COG institutions indicate a high level of endorsement for a NCTN AYA trial for HL with 85% indicating activation completed or planned. This survey suggests that AYA trials can be implemented successfully in a network but require education, early communication between pediatric and medical oncologists, and flexible infrastructure for all group participants. (Funding: U10CA180886, U10CA180888, and UG1CA233230) Disclosures Parsons: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Herrera:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Friedberg:Acerta Pharma - A member of the AstraZeneca Group, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.: Other; Astellas: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.


2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona L. Day ◽  
Emma Link ◽  
Karin Thursky ◽  
Danny Rischin

Universal screening for chronic hepatitis B virus before chemotherapy has been recommended by the Centers for Disease Control, but the majority of Australian medical oncologists have not adopted the practice.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document