Economics of Cancer Care

An examination of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database from 1998 to 2008 revealed that a significant number of patients with cancer receive drugs that are neither indicated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the specific condition nor endorsed by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) compendia—and 18% of the spending on cancer drugs is for off-label drug use.

A study comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) labeling claims in Europe and in the United States showed that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) is more proactive in considering patient-generated feedback in their drug labeling decisions—this despite the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s 2009 guidance that emphasized the importance of gathering and disseminating such data.

An analysis comparing the prescribing habits of urology practices shows that, despite treatment guideline recommendations to the contrary, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, which are only indicated for the palliative treatment of advanced prostate cancer, are routinely prescribed for patients with localized, low- or intermediate-grade prostate cancer, particularly by urologists who have no practice affiliation with a medical school.

;Researchers looking at whether guideline-directed adjuvant treatments for breast cancer were actually being administered in rural areas of the United States found that only 41% of the patients in this study received all of the suggested treatment modalities for breast cancer.

The use of costly diagnostic imaging of uncertain value is increasing rapidly for patients with localized non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), according to data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database.

A case management program for terminally ill patients with cancer can reduce cancer-related healthcare costs and extend hospice length of stay, according to an analysis of the Cancer Support Program (CSP) of Optum Health, a health services company, which was presented at the 2013 National Comprehensive Cancer Network^® annual conference.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for older patients with ovarian cancer would save $19 million annually compared with primary de­bulking surgery, based on a new cost- model assessment

Early palliative care proved to be cost-effective and cost-saving versus routine end-of-life care for patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, according to a decision-model analysis.

San Francisco, CA—In patients with breast cancer with bone metastases, skeletal-related events (SREs) are associated with high treatment costs. For example, the cumulative cost of treating 1 spinal cord compression exceeds $100,000, according to a new cost analysis presented at the 2012 Breast Cancer Symposium.

The cost of cancer care matters; in fact, it matters so much that Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) in New York City has decided not to include in its formulary the newly approved drug ziv-aflibercept (Zaltrap), which was recently approved for use in patients with progressive metastatic colorectal cancer.