Experiences and health care preferences of women with ovarian cancer during the diagnosis phase

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 379-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lebecca Jelicic ◽  
Joanne Brooker ◽  
Lyndel Shand ◽  
Tess Knight ◽  
Lina Ricciardelli ◽  
...  
2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lene Seibaek ◽  
Lone K Petersen ◽  
Jan Blaakaer ◽  
Lise Hounsgaard

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 582
Author(s):  
EmmanuelObiora Izuka ◽  
ObinnaChinedu Nwafor ◽  
JosephTochukwu Enebe ◽  
IfeanyichukwuJude Ofor ◽  
ChineloElizabeth Obiora-Izuka ◽  
...  

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Richardson ◽  
Hae Jung Min ◽  
Quan Hong ◽  
Katie Compton ◽  
Sze Wing Mung ◽  
...  

New streamlined models for genetic counseling and genetic testing have recently been developed in response to increasing demand for cancer genetic services. To improve access and decrease wait times, we implemented an oncology clinic-based genetic testing model for breast and ovarian cancer patients in a publicly funded population-based health care setting in British Columbia, Canada. This observational study evaluated the oncology clinic-based model as compared to a traditional one-on-one approach with a genetic counsellor using a multi-gene panel testing approach. The primary objectives were to evaluate wait times and patient reported outcome measures between the oncology clinic-based and traditional genetic counselling models. Secondary objectives were to describe oncologist and genetic counsellor acceptability and experience. Wait times from referral to return of genetic testing results were assessed for 400 patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer undergoing genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer from June 2015 to August 2017. Patient wait times from referral to return of results were significantly shorter with the oncology clinic-based model as compared to the traditional model (403 vs. 191 days; p < 0.001). A subset of 148 patients (traditional n = 99; oncology clinic-based n = 49) completed study surveys to assess uncertainty, distress, and patient experience. Responses were similar between both models. Healthcare providers survey responses indicated they believed the oncology clinic-based model was acceptable and a positive experience. Oncology clinic-based genetic testing using a multi-gene panel approach and post-test counselling with a genetic counsellor significantly reduced wait times and is acceptable for patients and health care providers.


2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (23) ◽  
pp. 2041-2050 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone N. Koole ◽  
Christiaan van Lieshout ◽  
Willemien J. van Driel ◽  
Evi van Schagen ◽  
Karolina Sikorska ◽  
...  

PURPOSE In the randomized open-label phase III OVHIPEC trial, the addition of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to interval cytoreductive surgery (CRS) improved recurrence-free and overall survival in patients with stage III ovarian cancer. We studied the cost effectiveness of the addition of HIPEC to interval CRS in patients with ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS We constructed a Markov health-state transition model to measure costs and clinical outcomes. Transition probabilities were derived from the OVHIPEC trial by fitting survival distributions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), was calculated from a Dutch societal perspective, with a time horizon of 10 years. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the decision uncertainty. RESULTS Total health care costs were €70,046 (95% credibility interval [CrI], €64,016 to €76,661) for interval CRS compared with €85,791 (95% CrI, €78,766 to €93,935) for interval CRS plus HIPEC. The mean QALY in the interval CRS group was 2.12 (95% CrI, 1.66 to 2.64 QALYs) and 2.68 (95% CrI, 2.11 to 3.28 QALYs) in the interval CRS plus HIPEC group. The ICER amounted to €28,299/QALY. In univariable sensitivity analysis, the utility of recurrence-free survival and the number of days in the hospital affected the calculated ICER most. CONCLUSION On the basis of the trial data, treatment with interval CRS and HIPEC in patients with stage III ovarian cancer was accompanied by a substantial gain in QALYs. The ICER is below the willingness-to-pay threshold in the Netherlands, indicating interval CRS and HIPEC is cost effective for this patient population. These results lend additional support for reimbursing the costs of treating these patients with interval CRS and HIPEC in countries with comparable health care systems.


2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erum Nadeem ◽  
Jane M. Lange ◽  
Jeanne Miranda

2014 ◽  
Vol 133 ◽  
pp. 156-157
Author(s):  
B.J. Long ◽  
J. Chang ◽  
A. Ziogas ◽  
K.S. Tewari ◽  
H. Anton-Culver ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 700-706 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Goldstein ◽  
Eugene Z. Oddone ◽  
Lori A. Bastian ◽  
Maren K. Olsen ◽  
Bryan C. Batch ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document