MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A real-world observational study of somatostatin analogue use and costs in Canada.

2020· article· en· W3005445298 on OpenAlexaffabout
Winson Y. Cheung, Marion Feuilly, Callahan Laforty, A Liovas, Heather McKechnie, Jonathan M. Loree

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersIpsen
KeywordsLanreotideOctreotideMedicineSomatostatinInternal medicineAcromegalyMedical prescriptionGastroenterologySurgeryGrowth hormoneHormonePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

608 Background: Somatostatin analogue (SSA) use is indicated in acromegaly and neuroendocrine tumours for symptomatic relief and tumour control. Two long-acting SSAs (lanreotide and octreotide) are currently available, but comparative real-world data on their use are limited. This study evaluated SSA use and costs in Canada. Methods: Claims data from the IQVIA Private Drug Plan (PDP), Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) program and Régie de l’assurance-maladie du Québec (RAMQ) were compiled. Injection burden, rescue medication use and costs were compared (using unpaired t-test or Wilcoxon test) over a 12-month period from first SSA prescription. Patients (pts) were eligible if the first prescription was dispensed Sept. 2015–Jun. 2018. Results: 908 pts were included: lanreotide 120 mg, N=375; octreotide long-acting release (LAR) 30 mg, N=533. Lanreotide treatment was associated with a lower weighted average injection burden for 12 months when compared to octreotide (12.54 vs 13.44 injections/pt, respectively; p<0.0001). Pts receiving lanreotide also had lower mean use of rescue medications than those treated with octreotide (0.01 vs 0.05 claims/pt/year), although this difference was greatest during the first month of treatment (mean difference: 0.19; p<0.0001), after which differences in rescue medication use were only significant (p<0.05) at Months 5 and 6. Mean total annual costs (rescue medication + LAR) were lower for lanreotide than octreotide ($27,829.35/pt [N=373] vs $31,255.49/pt [N=530], respectively, p<0.0001). Conclusions: In the absence of clinical trials directly comparing the SSAs, factors driving treatment selection are unclear. Findings from our real-world observational study suggest treatment with lanreotide to be less burdensome and costly than octreotide and may inform treatment discussions with pts. References1. Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals. Somatuline Autogel Product Monograph. 2018. Available at: https://cnetscanada.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Somatuline-Product-Monograph.pdf; 2. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc. Sandostatin LAR Product Monograph. 2018. Available at: http://www.ask.novartispharma.ca/download.htm?res=sandostatin_scrip_e.pdf&resTitleId=789.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.308
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.156 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207