Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background At present, palliative systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment in the Netherlands for gastric cancer patients with peritoneal dissemination. In contrast to lymphatic and haematogenous dissemination, peritoneal dissemination may be regarded as locoregional spread of disease. Administering cytotoxic drugs directly into the peritoneal cavity has an advantage over systemic chemotherapy since high concentrations can be delivered directly into the peritoneal cavity with limited systemic toxicity. The combination of a radical gastrectomy with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has shown promising results in patients with gastric cancer in Asia. However, the results obtained in Asian patients cannot be extrapolated to Western patients. The aim of this study is to compare the overall survival between patients with gastric cancer with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy, and those treated with gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC after neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy. Methods In this multicentre randomised controlled two-armed phase III trial, 106 patients will be randomised (1:1) between palliative systemic chemotherapy only (standard treatment) and gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC (experimental treatment) after 3–4 cycles of systemic chemotherapy.Patients with gastric cancer are eligible for inclusion if (1) the primary cT3-cT4 gastric tumour including regional lymph nodes is considered to be resectable, (2) limited peritoneal dissemination (Peritoneal Cancer Index < 7) and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology are confirmed by laparoscopy or laparotomy, and (3) systemic chemotherapy was given (prior to inclusion) without disease progression. Discussion The PERISCOPE II study will determine whether gastric cancer patients with limited peritoneal dissemination and/or tumour positive peritoneal cytology treated with systemic chemotherapy, gastrectomy, CRS and HIPEC have a survival benefit over patients treated with palliative systemic chemotherapy only. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov NCT03348150 ; registration date November 2017; first enrolment November 2017; expected end date December 2022; trial status: Ongoing.

\"Today, most patient groups in Canada are funded by the pharmaceutical industry, raising an important ethical question: Do alliances between patient organizations and corporate sponsors ultimately lead to policies that are counter to the public interest? In this examination of Canada's breast cancer movement from 1990 to 2010, health activist, scholar, and cancer survivor Sharon Batt investigates the relationship between patient advocacy groups and the pharmaceutical industry--and the hidden implications of pharma funding for health policy. Health Advocacy, Inc. dissects the alliances between the companies that sell pharmaceuticals and the individuals who use them, drawing links between neoliberalism and corporate financing, and the ensuing threat to the public health care system. Batt combines archival analysis, interviews with advocacy and industry representatives, and personal observation to reveal how a reduction in state funding drove patient groups to form partnerships with the private sector. The resulting power imbalance continues to challenge the groups' ability to put patients' interests ahead of those of the industry. Batt's conclusion is unsettling: a once-vibrant movement that encouraged democratic participation in the development of health policy now eerily echoes the demands of the pharmaceutical industry. This thorough account of the shift from grassroots advocacy to Big Pharma partnership defines the struggles and stakes of activism in public health today.\"-- Provided by publisher.

Background Adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) Siewert type II can be resected by transthoracic esophagectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. Both allow for a complete tumor resection, yet there is an ongoing controversy about which surgical approach is superior with regards to quality of life, oncological outcomes and survival. While some studies suggest a better oncological outcome after transthoracic esophagectomy, others favor transhiatal extended gastrectomy for a better postoperative quality of life. To date, only retrospective studies are available, showing ambiguous results. Methods This study is a multinational, multicenter, randomized, clinical superiority trial. Patients ( n = 262) with a GEJ type II tumor resectable by both transthoracic esophagectomy and transhiatal extended gastrectomy will be enrolled in the trial. Type II tumors are defined as tumors with their midpoint between ≤1 cm proximal and ≤ 2 cm distal of the top of gastric folds on preoperative endoscopy. Patients will be included in one of the participating European sites and are randomized to either transthoracic esophagectomy or transhiatal extended gastrectomy. The trial is powered to show superiority for esophagectomy with regards to the primary efficacy endpoint overall survival. Key secondary endpoints are complete resection (R0), number and localization of tumor infiltrated lymph nodes at dissection, post-operative complications, disease-free survival, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Postoperative survival and quality of life will be followed-up for 24 months after discharge. Further survival follow-up will be conducted as quarterly phone calls up to 60 months. Discussion To date, as level 1 evidence is lacking, there is no consensus on which surgery is superior and both surgeries are used to treat GEJ type II carcinoma worldwide. The CARDIA trial is the first randomized trial to compare transthoracic esophagectomy versus transhiatal extended gastrectomy in patients with GEJ type II tumors. Several quality control measures were implemented in the protocol to ensure data reliability and increase the trial’s significance. It is hypothesized that esophagectomy allows for a higher rate of radical resections and a more complete mediastinal lymph node dissection, resulting in a longer overall survival, while still providing an acceptable quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Trial registration The trial was registered on August 2nd 2019 at the German Clinical Trials Register under the trial-ID DRKS00016923 .

Basal-cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer and its incidence is still rising worldwide. Surgery is the most frequently used treatment for BCC, but large randomised controlled trials with 5-year follow-up to compare treatment modalities are rare. We did a prospective randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of surgical excision with Mohs' micrographic surgery (MMS) for the treatment of primary and recurrent facial BCC. Between Oct 5, 1999, and Feb 27, 2002, 408 primary BCCs (pBCCs) and 204 recurrent BCCs (rBCCs) in patients from seven hospitals in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to surgical excision or MMS. Randomisation and allocation was done separately for both groups by a computer-generated allocation scheme. Tumours had a follow-up of 5 years. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome was recurrence of carcinoma, diagnosed clinically by visual inspection with histological confirmation. Secondary outcomes were determinants of failure and cost-effectiveness. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN65009900. Of the 397 pBCCs that were treated, 127 pBCCs in 113 patients were lost to follow-up. Of the 11 recurrences that occurred in patients with pBCC, seven (4·1%) occurred in patients treated with surgical excision and four (2·5%) occurred in patients treated with MMS (log-rank test χ 2 0·718, p=0·397). Of the 202 rBCCs that were treated, 56 BCCs in 52 patients were lost to follow-up. Two BCCs (2·4%) in two patients treated with MMS recurred, versus ten BCCs (12·1%) in ten patients treated with surgical excision (log-rank test χ 2 5·958, p=0·015). The difference in the number of recurrences between treatments was not significant for pBCC, but significantly favoured MMS in rBCC. In pBCC, Cox-regression analysis showed no significant effects from risk factors measured in the study. In rBCC, aggressive histological subtype was a significant risk factor for recurrence in the Cox-regression analysis. For pBCC, total treatment costs were €1248 for MMS and €990 for surgical excision, whereas for rBCC, treatment costs were €1284 and €1043, respectively. Dividing the difference in costs between MMS and surgical excision by their difference in effectiveness leads to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €23 454 for pBCC and €3171 for rBCC. MMS is preferred over surgical excision for the treatment of facial rBCC, on the basis of significantly fewer recurrences after MMS than after surgical excision. However, because there was no significant difference in recurrence of pBCC between treatment groups, treatment with surgical excision is probably sufficient in most cases of pBCC. The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research ZonMW.

Malignant pleural mesothelioma incidence continues to rise, with few available evidence-based therapeutic options. Results of previous non-randomised studies suggested that video-assisted thoracoscopic partial pleurectomy (VAT-PP) might improve symptom control and survival. We aimed to compare efficacy in terms of overall survival, and cost, of VAT-PP and talc pleurodesis in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. We undertook an open-label, parallel-group, randomised, controlled trial in patients aged 18 years or older with any subtype of confirmed or suspected mesothelioma with pleural effusion, recruited from 12 hospitals in the UK. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either VAT-PP or talc pleurodesis by computer-generated random numbers, stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer risk category (high vs low). The primary outcome was overall survival at 1 year, analysed by intention to treat (all patients randomly assigned to a treatment group with a final diagnosis of mesothelioma). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00821860. Between Oct 24, 2003, and Jan 24, 2012, we randomly assigned 196 patients, of whom 175 (88 assigned to talc pleurodesis, 87 assigned to VAT-PP) had confirmed mesothelioma. Overall survival at 1 year was 52% (95% CI 41–62) in the VAT-PP group and 57% (46–66) in the talc pleurodesis group (hazard ratio 1·04 [95% CI 0·76–1·42]; p=0·81). Surgical complications were significantly more common after VAT-PP than after talc pleurodesis, occurring in 24 (31%) of 78 patients who completed VAT-PP versus ten (14%) of 73 patients who completed talc pleurodesis (p=0·019), as were respiratory complications (19 [24%] vs 11 [15%]; p=0·22) and air-leak beyond 10 days (five [6%] vs one [1%]; p=0·21), although not significantly so. Median hospital stay was longer at 7 days (IQR 5–11) in patients who received VAT-PP compared with 3 days (2–5) for those who received talc pleurodesis (p<0·0001). VAT-PP is not recommended to improve overall survival in patients with pleural effusion due to malignant pleural mesothelioma, and talc pleurodesis might be preferable considering the fewer complications and shorter hospital stay associated with this treatment. BUPA Foundation.

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of avelumab first-line (1L) maintenance therapy plus best supportive care (BSC) versus BSC alone for adults with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) that had not progressed following platinum-based chemotherapy in France. A three-state partitioned survival model was developed to assess the lifetime costs and effects of avelumab plus BSC versus BSC alone. Data from the phase 3 JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial (NCT02603432) were used to inform estimates of clinical and utility values considering a 10-year time horizon and a weekly cycle length. Cost data were estimated from a collective perspective and included treatment acquisition, administration, follow-up, adverse event-related hospitalization, transport, post-progression, and end-of-life costs. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and life-years gained. Costs and clinical outcomes were discounted at 2.5% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used to compare cost-effectiveness and willingness to pay in France. Uncertainty was assessed using a range of sensitivity analyses. Avelumab plus BSC was associated with a gain of 2.49 QALYs and total discounted costs of €136,917; BSC alone was associated with 1.82 QALYs and €39,751. Although avelumab plus BSC was associated with increased acquisition costs compared with BSC alone, offsets of -€20,424 and -€351 were observed for post-progression and end-of-life costs, respectively. The base case analysis ICER was €145,626/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the reference case and showed that efficacy parameters (overall survival, time to treatment discontinuation), post-progression time on immunotherapy, and post-progression costs had the largest impact on the ICER. This analysis demonstrated that avelumab plus BSC is associated with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile for patients with la/mUC who are eligible for 1L maintenance therapy in France.

The COMPASSION-15 trial demonstrated that cadonilimab plus chemotherapy (CAD-CHM) confers clinical benefits over placebo plus chemotherapy (PLA-CHM) as a first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma. However, the introduction of cadonilimab substantially elevates treatment costs, and its cost-effectiveness relative to PLA-CHM remains undetermined. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of CAD-CHM compared with PLA-CHM from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. A Markov model with three health states was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of CAD-CHM in HER2-negative advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Clinical efficacy data were sourced from the COMPASSION-15 trial, while drug costs were calculated based on national tender prices, and additional costs and utility values were extracted from published literature. The analysis encompassed the overall population, as well as subgroups stratified by programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5 and CPS < 5. Outcomes included total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model robustness. The ICER of CAD-CHM was $67,378.09 per QALY in the overall population, $48,433.34 per QALY in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 subgroup, and $78,463.86 per QALY in the PD-L1 CPS < 5 subgroup. Key determinants influencing model outcomes included patient weight, cadonilimab cost, and the utility value of progression-free survival. Across all groups, CAD-CHM resulted in an ICER exceeding the willingness-to-pay threshold of $41,511 per QALY, with a 0% probability of cost-effectiveness compared with PLA-CHM. From the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system, CAD-CHM is not cost-effective as a first-line treatment for HER2-negative advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma, either in the overall population or in subgroups stratified by PD-L1 CPS status, compared with chemotherapy alone.

The screening of persons at risk for lung cancer may reduce lung-cancer mortality by 20%. Although cost-effectiveness estimates vary widely depending on assumptions, a careful analysis indicates that the cost is $81,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States 1 ; however, until recently, no method of screening had been shown to reduce mortality from lung cancer. The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) showed that screening with low-dose helical computed tomography (CT) of the chest in patients at high risk for lung cancer was associated with a 20% reduction in lung-cancer mortality. 2 Several major medical societies have since recommended screening with low-dose CT for patients with a similarly high risk of lung cancer. 3 The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has released a grade B recommendation for low-dose . . .

Background According to the latest World Health Organization report, approximately half of the new cancer cases in Iran are attributed to five common cancers: gastric, breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer. These cancers impose a heavy economic burden on healthcare systems and society, including direct medical costs (DMC), direct non-medical costs (DNMC), and indirect costs (IDC). This systematic review aimed to investigate the economic burden of these cancers in Iran. Methods This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy was developed using MeSH terms, Emtree, and previous literature. To identify relevant studies published up until December 27, 2023, searches were conducted in both international databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database) and national databases (SID, Magiran, and IranMedex). After removing duplicates and screening studies using Endnote software, eligible studies were selected for inclusion in the review. The costs were converted to USD 2021 using the CCEMG-EPPI-Centre cost converter. Results A total of 22 studies were included in this review. Breast and colorectal cancer each had 4 studies, while prostate, gastric, and lung cancer each had 3 studies. The remaining 5 studies covered a combination of multiple cancers. Converting the costs from different studies to USD 2021 showed that the average annual DMC per patient with breast cancer varied from $13,954 to $34,772. These costs ranged from $14,671 to $28,656 for colorectal cancer, $7,970 to $16,821 for prostate cancer, $12,206 to $17,681 for gastric cancer, and $9,369 to $40,682 for lung cancer. Part of these variations may be related to differences in healthcare resource utilization, while another part may be due to differences in cost calculation methodology, study perspective, and study location. Additional cost conversion findings showed that in 85% of the studies, the average annual DNMC per patient for all cancers were estimated to be less than $4,000. Furthermore, the average annual IDC per patient for breast and lung cancer were estimated to be as high as $100,000 due to high mortality, compared to less than $30,000 for other cancers. Conclusions Given the high prevalence of these five cancers in Iran, their economic burden is significant. Policymakers should focus not only on reducing the disease burden but also on minimizing the economic burden of cancer. Strategies such as improving early detection, optimizing treatment pathways, and implementing cost-effective interventions could help reduce both healthcare costs and the overall financial strain on patients and the healthcare system.