Progenitor cell therapies for traumatic brain injury: barriers and opportunities in translation.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) directly affects nearly 1.5 million new patients per year in the USA, adding to the almost 6 million cases in patients who are permanently affected by the irreversible physical, cognitive and psychosocial deficits from a prior injury. Adult stem cell therapy has shown preliminary promise as an option for treatment, much of which is limited currently to supportive care. Preclinical research focused on cell therapy has grown significantly over the last decade. One of the challenges in the translation of this burgeoning field is interpretation of the promising experimental results obtained from a variety of cell types, injury models and techniques. Although these variables can become barriers to a collective understanding and to evidence-based translation, they provide crucial information that, when correctly placed, offers the opportunity for discovery. Here, we review the preclinical evidence that is currently guiding the translation of adult stem cell therapy for TBI.

Exploring the use of pharmaceutical patient assistance programs as an option to improve access to and affordability of prescription drugs

Background. Pharmaceutical-sponsored patient assistance programs (PAPs) are charity programs that provide free or reduced-priced medications to eligible patients. PAPs have the potential to improve prescription drug accessibility for patients but currently there is limited information about their use and effectiveness. ^ Objectives and methods. This dissertation described the use of PAPs in the U.S. through the conduct of two studies: (1) a systematic review of primary studies of PAPs from commercially-published and “grey” literature sources; and (2) a retrospective, cross-sectional study of cancer patients' use of PAPs at a tertiary care cancer outpatient center. ^ Results. (1) The systematic review identified 33 studies: 15 evaluated the impact of PAP enrollment assistance programs on patient healthcare outcomes; 7 assessed institutional costs of providing enrollment assistance; 7 surveyed stakeholders; 4 examined other aspects. Standardized mean differences calculated for disease indicator outcomes (most of which were single group, pre-posttest designs) showed significant decreases in glycemic and lipid control, and inconsistent results for blood pressure. Grey literature abstracts reported insufficient statistics for calculations. Study heterogeneity made weighted summary estimates inappropriate. Economic analyses indicated positive financial benefits to institutions providing enrollment assistance (cost) compared to the wholesale value of the medications provided (benefit); analyses did not value health outcomes. Mean quality of reporting scores were higher for observational studies in commercially-published articles versus full text, grey literature reports. (2) The cross-sectional study found that PAP outpatients were significantly more likely to be uninsured, indigent, and < 65 years old than non-PAP patients. Nearly all non-PAP and PAP prescriptions were for non-cancer conditions, either for co-morbidities (e.g., hypertension) or the management of treatment side effects (e.g., pain). Oral chemotherapies from PAPs were significantly more likely to be for breast versus other cancers, and be a newer, targeted versus traditional chemotherapy.^ Conclusions. In outpatient settings, PAP enrollment assistance plus additional medication services (e.g., counseling, reminders, and free samples) is associated with improved disease indicators for patients. Healthcare institutions, including cancer centers, can offset financial losses from uncompensated drug costs and recoup costs invested in enrollment assistance programs by procuring free PAP medications. Cancer patients who are indigent and uninsured may be able to access more outpatient medications for their supportive care needs through PAPs, than for cancer treatment options like oral chemotherapies. Because of the selective availability of drugs through PAPs, there may be more options for newer, oral, targeted chemotherapies for the treatment breast cancer versus other for other cancers.^

Determinants of quality of advanced cancer care in Latin America. A look at five countries: Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Peru

The World Health Organization reports that nearly half a million people died of cancer in Latin America in 2001. As a growing public health problem, cancer is now either the first or second leading cause of death among adults in most Latin American nations. Despite these trends, information on the quality of care people with advanced cancer in Latin America receive has been limited. This study assessed the quality of advanced cancer care in diverse Latin American countries and institutions by surveying cancer care providers from: Argentina; Brazil; Cuba; Mexico; and Peru. This study also identified the most salient factors that influence the quality of this care at the national and institutional levels and compared these factors across countries. This study was based on the secondary analyses of data collected by the University of Texas M. D. Anderson's WHO/PAHO Collaborating Center in Supportive Cancer Care from March 2000 to November 2002. The sample for this survey was a convenience sample of physicians and nurses who treat cancer patients in these regions. Strategies for the dissemination of this survey included: mass mailings; distribution at professional meetings/conferences; collaboration with regional institutions, professional organizations and PAHO; and the posting of online surveys. The strongest predictor of providers' assessments of the quality of advanced cancer care was their ratings of access to care. This major finding reflects a shared equitable notion of quality care among providers from diverse countries and medical institutions that is highly interrelated with providing accessible care to those with advanced cancer. Higher ratings of the affordability of care, an increased reported availability of end-of-life services and opioid analgesics, practicing in either a private hospital or specialized cancer center, and practicing in Cuba were also associated with higher provider ratings of the quality of advanced cancer care. The findings of this study contribute towards the much needed body of knowledge that may guide the formulation of policies and interventions aimed at improving the care for people with advanced cancer in Latin America. ^

The role and impact of transitional care utilization in colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND Although one out of every five gastrointestinal cancer patients needs transitional care (home-based skilled care or placement in skilled nursing or rehabilitation facilities) following treatment, few studies have examined outcomes in this population compared to patients who return home without assistance. This study has two primary goals: 1. To evaluate long-term cancer-specific outcomes in colorectal cancer patients utilizing transitional care compared to those that return home without assistance following therapy 2. To compare results using standard regression techniques and propensity scores. ^ METHODS Patients undergoing curative surgery for colorectal adenocarcinoma will be identified using data from a tertiary care Veterans Administration hospital. Survival and recurrence will then be determined from VA records and the Social Security Death Index. ^ The association between transitional care utilization and overall and disease-free survival will be evaluated using Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for confounding factors. Predictors of transitional care utilization will be assessed using multiple logistic regression to generate a propensity score which will also be used to assess differences in survival based on transitional care use. ^ POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE If transitional care utilization is associated with worse survival and recurrence following therapy then it will be important to subsequently assess the mechanism in order to target interventions to improve outcomes. If there is no difference in cancer-specific outcomes, then this project can potentially highlight benefits of supportive therapy following colorectal cancer resection.^