ABSTRACT Objective: To determine the association of red cell blood counts, and liver panel tests to predict outcomes in patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors who underwent systemic antineoplastic treatments. Methods: Patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in systemic treatment were assessed according to laboratory tests within the same period. Progression free survival was determined by the period between the beginning of treatment and the date of progression. We used conditional models (PWP model) to verify the association between laboratory tests and tumor progression. The level of significance used was 5%. Results: A total of 30 treatments given to 17 patients in the intention-to-treat population were evaluated. Treatment included octreotide, lanreotide, everolimus, lutetium, and chemotherapy. We had statistically significant results in chromogranin A, neutrophils and platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio. The risk of progression increases by 2% with the addition of 100ng/mL of chromogranin A (p=0.034), 4% with the increase of 100 neutrophil units (p=0.006), and 21% with the addition of 10 units in platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio (p=0.002). Conclusion: Chromogranin A, neutrophils and platelets-to-lymphocyte ratio were associated with disease progression during systemic treatment in gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Further prospective studies with larger cohorts are necessary to validate our findings.

ABSTRACT Objective Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) overexpression occurs in up to 30% of breast cancer cases. Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) is approved to treat residual HER2-positive breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study was to determine the quality-adjusted time with symptoms or toxicity and without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWiST) of T-DM1 compared to trastuzumab for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. Methods The authors developed an analytical model extracting individual patient data and estimated invasive disease-free survival and overall survival over a 30-year time horizon. Only direct costs from adjuvant treatment were considered as well as relapse treatment from Brazilian and American payer perspectives. Heart events were considered for utility and cost analysis. Results The 30-year projection utilizing the Weibull method estimated a mean invasive disease-free survival of 16.4 years for T-DM1 and 10.4 for Trastuzumab, in addition to a mean overall survival of 18.1 and 15.4 years, respectively. We determined a Q-TWiST gain of 3,812 years for the T-DM1 arm when compared to trastuzumab and an Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per Q-TWiST of US$ 11,467.65 in the United States and US$ 3,332.73 in Brazil. Conclusion Ado-trastuzumab emtansine is cost-effective from both Brazilian and American perspectives.

RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a relação custo-efetividade da adição de quimioterapia ou abiraterona à terapia de privação hormonal. Métodos Um modelo analítico foi desenvolvido para determinar a relação custo-efetividade da adição de docetaxel ou abiraterona comparada à terapia de privação hormonal isolada. Custos diretos e indiretos foram incluídos no modelo. Os efeitos foram expressos em Anos de Vida Ajustados para Qualidade corrigidos pelos efeitos colaterais de cada terapia. Resultados A adição de quimioterapia e de abiraterona à terapia de privação hormonal aumentou os Anos de Vida Ajustados para Qualidade em 0,492 e 0,999, respectivamente, em comparação à terapia de privação hormonal isolada. A abiraterona promoveu ganho de Anos de Vida Ajustados para Qualidade de 0,506 em relação ao docetaxel. O custo incremental por Anos de Vida Ajustados para Qualidade foi R$ 133.649,22 para o docetaxel, R$ 330.828,70 para a abiraterona e R$ 571.379,42 para a abiraterona comparada ao docetaxel. Conclusão A adição de quimioterapia à terapia de privação hormonal é mais custo-efetiva que a adição de abiraterona à terapia de privação hormonal. Contudo, descontos no custo da abiraterona poderiam tornar esse tratamento mais custo-efetivo.

ABSTRACT Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of chemotherapy or abiraterone to androgen deprivation. Methods We developed an analytical model to determine the cost-effectiveness of the addition of docetaxel or abiraterone versus androgen deprivation therapy alone. Direct and indirect costs were included in the model. The effects were expressed in Quality-Adjusted Life Years adjusted for side effects. Results Compared to androgen deprivation therapy alone, the addition of chemotherapy and of abiraterone generated 0.492 and 0.999, respectively, in Quality-Adjusted Life Years. Abiraterone led to a Quality-Adjusted Life Years gain of 0.506 compared to docetaxel. The incremental costs per Quality-Adjusted Life Years were R$ 133.649,22 for docetaxel, R$ 330.828,70 for abiraterone and R$ 571.379,42 for abiraterone compared to docetaxel, respectively. Conclusion The addition of chemotherapy to androgen deprivation therapy is more cost-effective than the addition of abiraterone to androgen deprivation therapy. However, discounts on abiraterone cost might improve cost-effectiveness.

RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a relação custo-efetividade da adição de quimioterapia hormonal em pacientes com câncer de próstata metastático sensível a hormônio ou localizado de alto risco. Métodos Um modelo de decisão analítico foi desenvolvido para determinar o custo-efetividade da adição de quimioterapia versus a monoterapia de privação de andrógeno para pacientes com câncer de próstata metastático hormônio-sensível e pacientes de alto risco com câncer de próstata não metastático. O custo-efetividade em pacientes metastáticos com um alto volume da doença foi verificado isoladamente. Os dados do modelo foram obtidos de ensaios clínicos randomizados utilizando custos de aquisição de medicamentos no Brasil. Os custos de terapias pós-progressão também foram incluídos no modelo. Os efeitos foram expressos em anos de vida ajustados por qualidade, e foram calculadas as razões de custo-efetividade incremental. Resultados A adição de quimioterapia levou a um ganho de anos de vida ajustados por qualidade para todos os doentes. Este incremento foi seis vezes maior para os pacientes com doença metastática de alto volume. Nestes pacientes, as taxas do custo incremental por anos de vida ajustados por qualidade foram até 74% mais baixos do que o aumento das taxas dos pacientes com doença não metastática. Conclusão A adição de quimioterapia foi mais custo-efetiva para pacientes com doença metastática de alto volume.

ABSTRACT Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of chemohormonal therapy in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive and non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. Methods An analytical decision model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of chemohormonal therapy versus androgen deprivation therapy alone in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. The cost-effectiveness in metastatic patients with a high-volume disease was assessed separately. The model used data from randomized clinical trials and drug acquisition costs in Brazil. In addition, the costs of post-progression therapies have been included in this model. The benefits to health are expressed as the quality-adjusted life-years, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Results Chemohormonal therapy may be associated with improved quality-adjusted life-years for all patient. The improvement was more than six times greater for patients with high-volume metastatic disease. In these patients, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were up to 74% lower than the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of patients with non-metastatic disease. Conclusion Chemohormonal therapy has been more cost-effective in patients with high-volume metastatic disease.

RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar os aspectos relacionados a câncer em populações indígenas. Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo conduzido em um hospital universitário público. Foram incluídos pacientes com 18 anos ou mais, diagnosticados com tumores sólidos e acompanhados entre 2005 e 2015. Os aspectos clínicos foram avaliados por meio de estatística descritiva, e a sobrevida foi avaliada por meio de curvas de Kaplan-Meier e regressão multivariada de Cox. Resultados: Foram incluídos 50 pacientes. A incidência de câncer foi 15,73 por 100 mil. A média de idade ao diagnóstico foi 54 anos, e a maioria era do sexo feminino (58%). O câncer de colo uterino (28%) e o de próstata (16%) foram os mais frequentes. O tempo médio entre o início dos sintomas e o diagnóstico foi 9 meses, e entre o diagnóstico e o tratamento, de 3,4 meses. Doença diagnosticada no estágio IV (17%) resultou em pior sobrevida global (HR: 11,4; p<0,05). A sobrevida em 5 anos variou de 88% para o câncer de próstata a 0% para pulmão. Todas as taxas de sobrevida em 5 anos foram menores em comparação a outras populações. Conclusão: Os locais mais frequentes de neoplasia foram colo de útero e próstata. O estágio da doença e o sítio primário foram fatores prognósticos.

ABSTRACT Objective: To assess aspects related to cancer in indigenous population. Methods: This is a retrospective study developed in a public university hospital. We included patients with 18 or more years of age, diagnosed with solid tumors, and followed between 2005 and 2015. Clinical features were assessed by descriptive statistics, and survival was evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate Cox regression. Results: Fifty patients were included. The cancer incidence was 15.73 per 100,000. The mean age at diagnosis was 54 years and most patients were female (58%). Cancer of the cervix (28%) and prostate (16%) were the most common. The mean time between the onset of symptoms and the diagnosis was 9 months and from diagnosis to the treatment was 3.4 months. Disease diagnosed at stage IV (17%) had worse overall survival (HR: 11.4; p<0.05). The 5-year survival rate ranged from 88% for prostate cancer to 0% for lung cancer. All 5-year survival rates were lower as compared to other populations. Conclusion: The most prevalent cancer sites were cervix and prostate. Disease stage and primary site were prognostic factors.