scholarly journals Can proton therapy be considered a standard of care in oncology? Lessons from the United States

2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (8) ◽  
pp. 775-776 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony L. Zietman
2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Braunstein ◽  
Li Wang ◽  
Wayne Newhauser ◽  
Todd Tenenholz ◽  
Yi Rong ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii466-iii466
Author(s):  
Karina Black ◽  
Jackie Middleton ◽  
Sunita Ghosh ◽  
David Eisenstat ◽  
Samor Patel

Abstract BACKGROUND Proton therapy for benign and malignant tumors has dosimetric and clinical advantages over photon therapy. Patients in Alberta, Canada are referred to the United States for proton treatment. The Alberta Heath Care Insurance Plan (AHCIP) pays for the proton treatment and the cost of flights to and from the United States (direct costs). This study aimed to determine the out-of-pocket expenses incurred by patients or their families (indirect costs). METHODS Invitation letters linked to an electronic survey were mailed to patients treated with protons between 2008 and 2018. Expenses for flights for other family members, accommodations, transportation, food, passports, insurance, and opportunity costs including lost wages and productivity were measured. RESULTS Fifty-nine invitation letters were mailed. Seventeen surveys were completed (28.8% response rate). One paper survey was mailed at participant request. Nine respondents were from parent/guardian, 8 from patients. All patients were accompanied to the US by a family member/friend. Considerable variability in costs and reimbursements were reported. Many of the accompanying family/friends had to miss work; only 3 patients themselves reported missed work. Time away from work varied, and varied as to whether it was paid or unpaid time off. CONCLUSIONS Respondents incurred indirect monetary and opportunity costs which were not covered by AHCIP when traveling out of country for proton therapy. Prospective studies could help provide current data minimizing recall bias. These data may be helpful for administrators in assessing the societal cost of out-of-country referral of patients for proton therapy.


2018 ◽  
pp. 327-331
Author(s):  
Elizabeth DeVos

This case demonstrates a common presentation of appendicitis including frequent signs and symptoms and classic examination findings. Options for diagnostic imaging are reviewed. Clinical decision scores may assist in risk stratification, which may be particularly useful in austere or low-resource settings. The discussion introduces the concept of “antibiotics first” treatment for appendicitis including a discussion of patients who are poor candidates for such treatment, risks for need of future operative management, and proposed treatment protocols. While surgical management remains the standard of care in the United States, this case discusses potential utility for an “antibiotics first” protocol when definitive surgical treatment is not readily available.


2020 ◽  
Vol 118 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-402
Author(s):  
Xue Han ◽  
Gregory E Frey ◽  
Changyou Sun

Abstract Abstract Forest-management burns have been widely acknowledged as a useful land-management tool in the United States. Nevertheless, fire is inherently risky and may lead to severe damages or create smoke that affects public health. Past research has not explored the difference in policy and practice between open burns, which meet minimum legal criteria, and certified prescribed burns, which follow a higher standard of care. This study seeks to understand the distinction between legal open burns and certified prescribed burns, and, furthermore, to identify trends by type of burn in the Southeast United States. To that end, we compared statutes, regulations, incentives, and notifications of fire as a forest-management tool among nine states in the US Southeast. We found no steady time trends in number or area of burns among the states for the past decade. A nontrivial proportion of legal open burns, which tend to be smaller burns, are noncertified burns, meaning they meet minimum legal requirements, but not the higher standard required for certified prescribed burns.


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 1715-1729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacey Kowal ◽  
Eliza Kruger ◽  
Pinar Bilir ◽  
James H. Holmes ◽  
William Hickerson ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (10) ◽  
pp. 1058-1063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura C. Beamer ◽  
Marcia L. Grant ◽  
Carin R. Espenschied ◽  
Kathleen R. Blazer ◽  
Heather L. Hampel ◽  
...  

Purpose Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 protein expression and microsatellite instability (MSI) are well-established tools to screen for Lynch syndrome (LS). Although many cancer centers have adopted these tools as reflex LS screening after a colorectal cancer diagnosis, the standard of care has not been established, and no formal studies have described this practice in the United States. The purpose of this study was to describe prevalent practices regarding IHC/MSI reflex testing for LS in the United States and the subsequent follow-up of abnormal results. Materials and Methods A 12-item survey was developed after interdisciplinary expert input. A letter of invitation, survey, and online-survey option were sent to a contact at each cancer program. A modified Dillman strategy was used to maximize the response rate. The sample included 39 National Cancer Institute–designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (NCI-CCCs), 50 randomly selected American College of Surgeons–accredited Community Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Programs (COMPs), and 50 Community Hospital Cancer Programs (CHCPs). Results The overall response rate was 50%. Seventy-one percent of NCI-CCCs, 36% of COMPs, and 15% of CHCPs were conducting reflex IHC/MSI for LS; 48% of the programs used IHC, 14% of the programs used MSI, and 38% of the programs used both IHC and MSI. One program used a presurgical information packet, four programs offered an opt-out option, and none of the programs required written consent. Conclusion Although most NCI-CCCs use reflex IHC/MSI to screen for LS, this practice is not well-adopted by community hospitals. These findings may indicate an emerging standard of care and diffusion from NCI-CCC to community cancer programs. Our findings also described an important trend away from requiring written patient consent for screening.


PLoS Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. e1003418
Author(s):  
Starley B. Shade ◽  
Valerie B. Kirby ◽  
Sally Stephens ◽  
Lissa Moran ◽  
Edwin D. Charlebois ◽  
...  

Background In the United States, patients with HIV face significant barriers to linkage to and retention in care which impede the necessary steps toward achieving the desired clinical outcome of viral suppression. Individual-level interventions, such as patient navigation, are evidence based, effective strategies for improving care engagement. In addition, use of surveillance and clinical data to identify patients who are not fully engaged in care may improve the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these programs. Methods and findings We employed a pre-post design to estimate the outcomes and costs, from the program perspective, of 5 state-level demonstration programs funded under the Health Resources and Services Administration’s Special Projects of National Significance Program (HRSA/SPNS) Systems Linkages Initiative that employed existing surveillance and/or clinical data to identify individuals who had never entered HIV care, had fallen out of care, or were at risk of falling out of care and navigation strategies to engage patients in HIV care. Outcomes and costs were measured relative to standard of care during the first year of implementation of the interventions (2013 to 2014). We followed patients to estimate the number and proportion of additional patients linked, reengaged, retained, and virally suppressed by 12 months after enrollment in the interventions. We employed inverse probability weighting to adjust for differences in patient characteristics across programs, missing data, and loss to follow-up. We estimated the additional costs expended during the first year of each intervention and the cost per outcome of each intervention as the additional cost per HIV additional care continuum target achieved (cost per patient linked, reengaged, retained, and virally suppressed) 12 months after enrollment in each intervention. In this study, 3,443 patients were enrolled in Louisiana (LA), Massachusetts (MA), North Carolina (NC), Virginia (VA), and Wisconsin (WI) (147, 151, 2,491, 321, and 333, respectively). Patients were a mean of 40 years old, 75% male, and African American (69%) or Caucasian (22%). At baseline, 24% were newly diagnosed, 2% had never been in HIV care, 45% had fallen out of care, and 29% were at risk of falling out of care. All 5 interventions were associated with increases in the number and proportion of patients with viral suppression [percent increase: LA = 90.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 88.4 to 93.4; MA = 78.1%, 95% CI = 72.4 to 83.8; NC = 47.5%, 95% CI = 45.2 to 49.8; VA = 54.6, 95% CI = 49.4 to 59.9; WI = 58.4, 95% CI = 53.4 to 63.4]. Overall, interventions cost an additional $4,415 (range = $3,746 to $5,619), $2,009 (range = $1,516 to $2,274), $920 (range = $627 to $941), $2,212 (range = $1,789 to $2,683), and $3,700 ($2,734 to $4,101), respectively per additional patient virally suppressed. The results of this study are limited in that we did not have contemporaneous controls for each intervention; thus, we are only able to assess patients against themselves at baseline and not against standard of care during the same time period. Conclusions Patient navigation programs were associated with improvements in engagement of patients in HIV care and viral suppression. Cost per outcome was minimized in states that utilized surveillance data to identify individuals who were out of care and/or those that were able to identify a larger number of patients in need of improvement at baseline. These results have the potential to inform the targeting and design of future navigation-type interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document