A cancer diagnosis can have significant financial impacts for patients, often resulting from unexpected out-of-pocket expenses and a reduced capacity to work. These financial implications have been well characterised quantitatively in common cancers. However, less is known about the lived experience of financial stress, particularly outside the United States and in rarer cancers. This study aimed to explore the perceived financial impact of acute myeloid leukaemia (AML)—a rare haematological malignancy where patients may be particularly vulnerable to financial stress due to the lengthy, specialised and centralised care. The findings provide insight into the patients' lived experience of the personal financial impact of the disease. This Australian qualitative study was undertaken with 11 adults in remission from AML and recruited from their treating hospital. Semi-structured interviews were transcribed, and data were managed using NVivo. Themes were identified through inductive and deductive analysis using open, axial and thematic coding. Four themes were identified: burden of AML-attributable costs (e.g. out-of-pocket parking and medication expenses); accommodating the AML-impact on paid work (e.g. early retirement and modifying job tasks); the consequence of financial strain from AML (e.g. using savings and accessing Government welfare) and concerns about the future and future familial financial burden (e.g. securing finances and worry about depleting financial resources). A reduction in or stopping work was perceived as the most burdensome to their current and future finances. The findings demonstrate people with AML experience financial difficulty even within a publically funded healthcare system. Opportunities exist for health services to alleviate some financial burden through reducing or abolishing parking fees for oncology patients and ensuring adequate access to social workers to facilitate access to Government welfare. Improving patients' financial difficulties contributes to improved quality of life, which is congruent to cancer survivorship.
Abstract Background The recently published trial, SELECT (Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People with Overweight or Obesity) [1], was the first study to demonstrate that the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, semaglutide, was superior to placebo in reducing the risk of major cardiovascular events in people with existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) and a body mass index of ≥27kg/m² but without diabetes. Despite the promising clinical benefits, the high cost of the medication has raised concerns about its financial viability and accessibility within healthcare systems. Purpose To explore whether use of semaglutide in addition to standard care (background use of lipid lowering, anti-hypertensive and/or anti-platelet therapies) for the secondary prevention of CVD in people with overweight or obesity is cost effective from the Australian healthcare perspective. Methods A Markov model was developed based on the SELECT trial, to evaluate the clinical outcomes and costs of a hypothetical population treated with semaglutide versus placebo over 20 years. With each annual cycle, subjects were at risk of having non-fatal CVD events (MI or stroke) or dying. Treatment efficacy, transition probabilities, and utilities were derived from the SELECT trial and published literature. Costs were obtained from Australian sources. The cost of semaglutide at a dosage of 2.4 mg/week (in line with SELECT) was estimated to be ~A$80 per week or A$4175 per year. The main outcome of interest was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per year of life saved (YoLS) and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. All outcomes and costs were discounted by 5% per year. Costs are reported in 2023 Australian dollars (A$). Results Over a 20 year time horizon, treatment of 1000 hypothetical subjects with overweight or obesity and existing CVD with semaglutide compared to placebo prevented 126 non-fatal CVD events and 81 deaths, and yielded an additional 0.46 discounted life years and 0.48 discounted QALYs per person. The difference in total discounted costs was A$43,955 per person. This equated to ICERs of A$99,853 per YoLS and A$96,055 per QALY gained. Conclusions Assuming a willingness-to-pay-threshold of A$50,000 per QALY gained, semaglutide would not be considered cost-effective for the secondary prevention of CVD in people with overweight or obesity in Australia at current prices. A price reduction of 52% to less than A$2000 per year would be required for it to be considered a cost-effective treatment strategy in this setting. Given the modest event rates reported in SELECT, cost-effectiveness is likely to improve if use of semaglutide is targeted to higher risk groups. Moreover, SELECT primarily focused on cardiovascular benefits, however data supporting the impact of semaglutide on a number of other weight-related complications are anticipated and will inform a more holistic understanding of its cost effectiveness.
Objectives To estimate the impact of smoking in the working-age Indonesian population in terms of costs, years of life, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and productivity-adjusted life years (PALYs) lost. Methods Life table modelling of Indonesian smokers aged 15–54 years, followed up until 55 years (retirement age). Contemporary data on demographics, all-cause mortality, population attributable fractions and prevalence of smoking were derived from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The quality of life and reduction in productivity due to smoking were derived from published sources. The analysis was repeated but with the assumption that the cohorts were non-smokers. The differences in results represented the losses incurred due to smoking. Gross domestic product (GDP) per equivalent full-time worker (US$11 765) was used for estimation of the cost of each PALY, and an annual discount rate of 3.0% was applied to all costs and outcomes. Results The prevalences of smoking among Indonesian working-age men and women were 67.2% and 2.16%, respectively. This study estimated that smoking caused 846 123 excess deaths, 2.9 million years of life lost (0.40%), 41.6 million QALYs lost (5.9%) and 15.6 million PALYs lost (2.3%). The total cost of productivity loss due to smoking amounted to US$183.7 billion among the working-age population followed up until retirement. Healthcare cost was predicted to be US$1.8 trillion. Over a 1-year time horizon, US$10.2 billion was lost in GDP and 117 billion was lost in healthcare costs. Conclusion Smoking imposes significant health and economic burden in Indonesia. The findings stress the importance of developing effective tobacco control strategies at the macro and micro levels, which would benefit the country both in terms of health and wealth.
'/%3e%3c/defs%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0h10080v5040H0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='.6' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23b)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='.4' d='m0 0 6 3m0-3L0 3' clip-path='url(%23c)' transform='scale(840)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='840' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23e4002b' stroke-width='504' d='M2520 0v2520M0 1260h5040'/%3e%3cg fill='%23fff'%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23d' x='2520' y='3780'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='4200'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='6300' y='2205'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='7560' y='840'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23a' x='8680' y='1869'/%3e%3cuse xlink:href='%23e' x='8064' y='2730'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)
