Multivariate analysis of febrile neutropenia occurrence in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: data from the INC-EU Prospective Observational European Neutropenia Study

Myelosuppression, particularly febrile neutropenia (FN), are serious dose-limiting toxicities that occur frequently during the first cycle of chemotherapy. Identifying patients most at risk of developing FN might help physicians to target prophylactic treatment with colony-stimulating factor (CSF), in order to decrease the incidence, or duration, of myelosuppression and facilitate delivery of chemotherapy as planned. We present a risk model for FN occurrence in the first cycle of chemotherapy, based on a subgroup of 240 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) enroled in our European prospective observational study. Eligible patients had an International Prognostic Index of 0–3, and were scheduled to receive a new myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimen with at least four cycles. Clinically relevant factors significantly associated with cycle 1 FN were older age, increasing planned cyclophosphamide dose, a history of previous chemotherapy, a history of recent infection, and low baseline albumin (<35 g/l). Prophylactic CSF use and higher weight were associated with a significant protective effect. The model had high sensitivity (81%) and specificity (80%). Our model, together with treatment guidelines, may rationalise the clinical decision of whether to support patients with CSF primary prophylaxis based on their risk factor profile. Further validation is required

Cost-effectiveness of Pembrolizumab in Second-line Advanced Bladder Cancer

BACKGROUND: Immune-modulating drugs have recently been introduced to the second-line setting of advanced bladder cancer. Pembrolizumab increases overall survival and is associated with less toxicity compared with chemotherapy in this setting based on the Keynote 045 study. The high cost of immunotherapy necessitates an assessment of its value by considering both efficacy and cost.OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer from the perspective of payers in multiple countries.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We developed a Markov model to compare the cost and effectiveness of pembrolizumab with those of chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced bladder cancer based on the Keynote 045 study. Drug costs were acquired for the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and Australia. All costs were converted from local currency to US dollars at the exchange rates in September 2017.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Pembrolizumab generated a gain of 0.36-0.37 QALYs compared with chemotherapy. Our analysis established the following incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in second-line advanced bladder cancer treatment: US $122 557/QALY; UK$91 995/QALY; Canada $90 099/QALY; and Australia$99 966/QALY. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds per QALY are considered to be around 100 000-150 000 US dollars for the US, 20 000-50 000 pounds for the UK (US$25 000-65 000), 20 000 -100 000 CAD for Canada (US$16 000-80 000), and 40 000-75 000 AUD for Australia (US$32 000-60 000).CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness and WTP thresholds vary between countries. Compared with the other countries examined, US drug prices were found to be the highest, leading to the highest ICER. With standard WTP thresholds, pembrolizumab may be considered cost-effective in the US but not in the other countries examined.PATIENT SUMMARY: This article assessed the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab for the treatment of patients with metastatic bladder cancer who had previously failed one treatment regimen. It would cost$122 557 in the United States, $91 995 in the United Kingdom,$90 099 in Canada, and $99 966 in Australia to gain one quality-adjusted life-year with pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in these patients, which may be considered cost-effective only in the United States because of the differences in willingness-to-pay thresholds.</p

Living with prostate cancer: randomised controlled trial of a multimodal supportive care intervention for men with prostate cancer

Background: Prostate cancer is the most common male cancer in developed countries and diagnosis and treatment carries with it substantial morbidity and related unmet supportive care needs. These difficulties may be amplified by physical inactivity and obesity. We propose to apply a multimodal intervention approach that targets both unmet supportive care needs and physical activity.Methods/design: A two arm randomised controlled trial will compare usual care to a multimodal supportive care intervention &ldquo;Living with Prostate Cancer&rdquo; that will combine self-management with tele-based group peer support. A series of previously validated and reliable self-report measures will be administered to men at four time points: baseline/recruitment (when men are approximately 3-6 months post-diagnosis) and at 3, 6, and 12 months after recruitment and intervention commencement. Social constraints, social support, self-efficacy, group cohesion and therapeutic alliance will be included as potential moderators/mediators of intervention effect. Primary outcomes are unmet supportive care needs and physical activity levels. Secondary outcomes are domain-specific and healthrelated quality of life (QoL); psychological distress; benefit finding; body mass index and waist circumference. Disease variables (e.g. cancer grade, stage) will be assessed through medical and cancer registry records. An economic evaluation will be conducted alongside the randomised trial.Discussion: This study will address a critical but as yet unanswered research question: to identify a populationbased way to reduce unmet supportive care needs; promote regular physical activity; and improve disease-specific and health-related QoL for prostate cancer survivors. The study will also determine the cost-effectiveness of the intervention.<br /