scholarly journals Cancer immunotherapy in routine cost‐effective cancer care?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sir Marc Feldmann
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 164-174
Author(s):  
Shirley Lewis ◽  
Chythra R Rao ◽  
Padmaja Ananth Shenoy ◽  
Naveen Salins ◽  
Rangan Viveganandan ◽  
...  

BackgroundHackathons are a popular trend in the technology domain and is considered a powerful tool to spur creativity and innovation. In a health hackathon, an interdisciplinary team of health, technology and management experts work collaboratively to solve a common problem. Health hackathon can be one of the quickest means to derive technology or process-based solutions to the challenges faced by clinicians.MethodsA 2-day hackathon: Hacking Cancer was conducted at a tertiary cancer centre in India to develop quick, cost-effective solutions in cancer care. Twelve oncology-related problem statements were explored. Undergraduate and postgraduate students of health and dental sciences, pharmacy, nursing, engineering and business management were the participants.OutcomesOne hundred and fifty-seven participants expressed interest, and 90 participated in the event. The participants did a time-bound exploration of 12 challenges in oncology elucidated problem statements. The oncology specialists mentored the participants during the hackathon. Seventeen teams presented their solutions. Judges reviewed the solutions and scored the teams based on feasibility, relevance and applicability. The top-scoring three projects were acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) better-improving adherence to treatment in ALL patients, Donate Life—application for voluntary blood donation and Lumiflex—a novel illuminated flexible abdominal retractor. They received seed funding to develop prototypes and implement their ideas.ConclusionHacking Cancer was an effective way of developing quick, cost-effective solutions to the common problems faced in cancer care. The pool of local participants developed solutions that were relevant and applicable to the practice setting. This one was the first oncology themed hackathon in the country.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolph M Navari ◽  
Eric J Roeland

Breakthrough chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is nausea and/or vomiting occurring within 5 days of chemotherapy administration despite using guideline-directed prophylactic antiemetic agents. It is highly prevalent (30–40%), usually requiring immediate treatment or “rescue” medication. If breakthrough CINV occurs, antiemetic guidelines recommend using an antiemetic agent from a different class not used in prophylaxis, along with intravenous hydration and/or dexamethasone. Data supporting these guideline recommendations are limited. Importantly, costs associated with breakthrough CINV can be substantial (i.e., unscheduled hydrations). Two retrospective analyses evaluating guideline-adherent CINV prophylaxis suggest that the initial antiemetic selection may decrease breakthrough CINV. Here we review optimal CINV prophylactic strategies and introduce unscheduled hydration as a potential important surrogate for breakthrough CINV aligning with cost-effective cancer care.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e000112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Pai ◽  
David Blaisdell ◽  
Rachel Brodie ◽  
Robert Carlson ◽  
Heidi Finnes ◽  
...  

BackgroundQuality measures are important because they can help improve and standardize the delivery of cancer care among healthcare providers and across tumor types. In an environment characterized by a rapidly shifting immunotherapeutic landscape and lack of associated long-term outcome data, defining quality measures for cancer immunotherapy is a high priority yet fraught with many challenges.MethodsThus, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer convened a multistakeholder expert panel to,first, identify the current gaps in measures of quality cancer care delivery as it relates to immunotherapy and to,second, advance priority concepts surrounding quality measures that could be developed and broadly adopted by the field.ResultsAfter reviewing the existing quality measure landscape employed for immunotherapeutic-based cancer care, the expert panel identified four relevant National Quality Strategy domains (patient safety, person and family-centered care, care coordination and communication, appropriate treatment selection) with significant gaps in immunotherapy-based quality cancer care delivery. Furthermore, these domains offer opportunities for the development of quality measures as they relate to cancer immunotherapy. These four quality measure concepts are presented in this consensus statement.ConclusionsThis work represents a first step toward defining and standardizing quality delivery of cancer immunotherapy in order to realize its optimal application and benefit for patients.


2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8201-8201
Author(s):  
M. Ranuzzi ◽  
G. Palmeri ◽  
D. Manzo ◽  
A. Corlito ◽  
A. Taddei ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 171 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.A. Nixon ◽  
M.B. Hannouf ◽  
S. Verma

Cancer therapy has evolved significantly with increased adoption of biologic agents (“biologics”). That evolution is especially true for her2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor-2)–positive breast cancer with the introduction of trastuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against the her2 receptor, which, in combination with chemotherapy, significantly improves survival in both metastatic and early disease.Although the efficacy of biologics is undeniable, their expense is a significant contributor to the increasing cost of cancer care. Across disease sites and indications, biosimilar agents are rapidly being developed with the goal of offering cost-effective alternatives to biologics. Biosimilars are pharmaceuticals whose molecular shape, efficacy, and safety are similar, but not identical, to those of the original product. Although these agents hold the potential to improve patient access, complexities in their production, evaluation, cost, and clinical application have raised questions among experts. Here, we review the landscape of biosimilar agents in oncology, with a focus on trastuzumab biosimilars. We discuss important considerations that must be made as these agents are introduced into routine cancer care.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (23) ◽  
pp. 3868-3874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neal J. Meropol ◽  
Deborah Schrag ◽  
Thomas J. Smith ◽  
Therese M. Mulvey ◽  
Robert M. Langdon ◽  
...  

Advances in early detection, prevention, and treatment have resulted in consistently falling cancer death rates in the United States. In parallel with these advances have come significant increases in the cost of cancer care. It is well established that the cost of health care (including cancer care) in the United States is growing more rapidly than the overall economy. In part, this is a result of the prices and rapid uptake of new agents and other technologies, including advances in imaging and therapeutic radiology. Conventional understanding suggests that high prices may reflect the costs and risks associated with the development, production, and marketing of new drugs and technologies, many of which are valued highly by physicians, patients, and payers. The increasing cost of cancer care impacts many stakeholders who play a role in a complex health care system. Our patients are the most vulnerable because they often experience uneven insurance coverage, leading to financial strain or even ruin. Other key groups include pharmaceutical manufacturers that pass along research, development, and marketing costs to the consumer; providers of cancer care who dispense increasingly expensive drugs and technologies; and the insurance industry, which ultimately passes costs to consumers. Increasingly, the economic burden of health care in general, and high-quality cancer care in particular, will be less and less affordable for an increasing number of Americans unless steps are taken to curb current trends. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) is committed to improving cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment and eliminating disparities in cancer care through support of evidence-based and cost-effective practices. To address this goal, ASCO established a Cost of Care Task Force, which has developed this Guidance Statement on the Cost of Cancer Care. This Guidance Statement provides a concise overview of the economic issues facing stakeholders in the cancer community. It also recommends that the following steps be taken to address immediate needs: recognition that patient-physician discussions regarding the cost of care are an important component of high-quality care; the design of educational and support tools for oncology providers to promote effective communication about costs with patients; and the development of resources to help educate patients about the high cost of cancer care to help guide their decision making regarding treatment options. Looking to the future, this Guidance Statement also recommends that ASCO develop policy positions to address the underlying factors contributing to the increased cost of cancer care. Doing so will require a clear understanding of the factors that drive these costs, as well as potential modifications to the current cancer care system to ensure that all Americans have access to high-quality, cost-effective care.


2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. A2
Author(s):  
D Greenberg ◽  
C Earle ◽  
C Fang ◽  
A Eldar-Lissai ◽  
PJ Neumann

2021 ◽  
pp. 21-33
Author(s):  
Ian Qianhuang Wu ◽  
Francesca Lorraine Wei Inng Lim ◽  
Liang Piu Koh

AbstractManagement of haematology-oncology patients has historically been largely inpatient-based. With advances in the understanding of disease and improvements in supportive care, patients are increasingly being managed in the outpatient setting. This is especially evident in autologous stem cell transplantation, which is now routinely done as an outpatient procedure at various centres. As clinicians gain more experience in novel therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy and bispecific T cell engager (BiTE) therapy, these may potentially be administered in the outpatient setting in the near future with the adoption of a risk-stratified approach. Such a paradigm shift in the practice of haematology-oncology is inevitable and has been driven by several factors, including pressure from the institution/hospital to avoid unnecessary hospital admissions and for optimal use of inpatient resources to be more cost-effective and efficient. With favourable local regulations and funding, outpatient cancer care can be economically beneficial. The success of an outpatient cancer center is heavily dependent on planning the facility to be equipped with the appropriate infrastructure, together with the trained medical and supportive personnel in place. This, coupled with the utilization of emerging technology such as telemedicine, has the potential to revolutionize cancer care delivery in the outpatient setting.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23182-e23182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ammara Majeed ◽  
Midhat Lakhani ◽  
Afia Ashraf ◽  
Udhayvir Singh Grewal ◽  
Prem Thirunagari ◽  
...  

e23182 Background: An estimated 20.3 million cancer survivors are expected to be around by 2026. Estimated national expenditure for cancer care in 2017 were $147.3 billion and expected to increase every year. Cancer treatment is complex and requires management decisions, counselling, psychological support to be made by multidisciplinary teams. For rural and remote patients, these teams may be composed of local clinicians, and experts from distant urban centers using telemedicine (TeleMed). Methods: We used 2 databases to study Teleoncology (TelOnc) since 2002. Results: Scope of TelOnc includes cancer Telegenetics, Telepathology, remote supervision, symptom management, survivorship care, palliative care, and increase access to cancer clinical trials. Mobile applications support symptom management, lifestyle modification, and medication adherence. TeleMed can support the oncologist with interactive tele-education. Future TelOnc models would include web-based tools, mobile technologies and remote chemotherapy supervision. TeleMed had a high patient satisfaction rate. In a survey 82.21% participants were satisfied with their TeleMed experience, only 2.14% was not satisfied. Challenges: Despite an area of growing need, few studies have prospectively evaluated its efficacy in cancer. Even fewer data is available in young adults (group with liking for technology) with cancer. Lack of uniform model for reimbursement and hurdles of interstate practice license for providers are unique challenges. Conclusions: TeleMed / TelOnc can improve access to medical care, reduce healthcare costs, (Table) and reduce geographic health disparities. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document