No abstract

Background: Aprepitant has been shown to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in children receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). In this study, we assessed the cost-effectiveness of aprepitant for children receiving HEC in India, United Kingdom, and the United States. Procedure:We utilized individual patient-level outcome data from a pediatric randomized trial, which demonstrated the superiority of an aprepitant-based anti-emetic prophylaxis over standard ondansetron and dexamethasone for HEC. Health state for each day of follow-up was analyzed and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net monetary benefit (NMB) for each country were estimated. Sensitivity analyses by varying cost of aprepitant, hospitalization, and health state utility values by ±25% were conducted.Results: Use of the aprepitant-based regimen resulted in gain of 0.

No abstract

IntroductionThe outcomes of osteosarcoma in low middle income countries (LMICs) are different due to patients presenting in advanced stages, resource constraints and the use of non-high-dose-methotrexate (HDMTX)-based regimens. This study derived and validated a prognostic score for osteosarcoma that integrates biologic and social factors and is tailored for patients from an LMIC setting using a non-HDMTX-based protocol.Materials and methodsA retrospective study including osteosarcoma patients enrolled for treatment at a single tertiary care centre in India between 2003-19 was conducted. Baseline biologic and social characteristics were extracted from medical records and survival outcomes were noted. The cohort was randomised into a derivation and validation cohort. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify baseline characteristics that were independently prognostic for survival outcomes in the derivation cohort. A score was derived from the prognostic factors identified in the derivation cohort and further validated in the validation cohort with estimation of its predictive ability.Results594 patients with osteosarcoma were eligible for inclusion in the study. Around one-third of the cohort had metastatic disease with 59% of the patients residing in rural areas. The presence of metastases at baseline (HR 3.39; p<0.001; score=3), elevated serum alkaline phosphatase (SAP) >450 IU/L (HR 1.57; p=0.001; score=1) and baseline tumour size > 10 cm (HR 1.68; p<0.001; score=1) were identified to be independent factors predicting inferior event free survival (EFS) and were included in development of the prognostic score. Patients were categorized as low risk (score 0), intermediate risk (score 1-3) and high risk (4-5). Harrell’s c-indices for the score were 0.682, 0.608 and 0.657 respectively for EFS in the derivation, validation and whole cohort respectively. The timed AUC of ROC was 0.67 for predicting 18-month EFS in the derivation, validation and whole cohorts while that for 36-month EFS were 0.68, 0.66 and 0.68 respectively.ConclusionsThe study describes the outcomes among osteosarcoma patients from an LMIC treated uniformly with a non-HDMTX-based protocol. Tumor size, baseline metastases and SAP were prognostic factors used to derive a score with good predictive value for survival outcomes. Social factors did not emerge as determinants of survival.