http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Cancer genetics for the general Gynecologist
( David E. Cohn ) 대한산부인과학회 2022 대한산부인과학회 학술대회 Vol.108 No.-
As the cancer genome has been mapped, the genetic basis of disease has been progressively elucidated. This has led to a greater understanding of inherited cancer syndromes that result from germline mutations to somatic acquisition of mutations in cancers. Preventative or early detection strategies in people with inherited cancer susceptibility genes has led to a reduction in the death from certain cancers. Somatic cancer analysis has led to improved prognostic and predictive biomarkers as well as novel approaches to cancer therapy that result in improved outcomes. This presentation will review our current understanding of cancer genetics and will identify practical applications of this knowledge for general gynecologists.
Jhalak Dholakia,David E. Cohn,Michael Straughn, Jr,Sarah E. Dilley 대한부인종양학회 2021 Journal of Gynecologic Oncology Vol.32 No.6
Objective: To assess the potential cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation in medically frail patients undergoing surgery for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). Methods: We created a cost-effectiveness model evaluating the impact of prehabilitation on a cohort of medically frail women undergoing primary surgical intervention for EOC. Cost was assessed from the healthcare system perspective via (1) inpatient charges from 2018–2019 institutional Diagnostic Related Grouping data for surgeries with and without major complications; (2) nursing facility costs from published market surveys. Major complication and non-home discharge rates were estimated from the literature. Based on published pilot studies, prehabilitation was determined to decrease these rates. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for cost per life year saved utilized a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/life year. Modeling was performed with TreeAge software. Results: In a cohort of 4,415 women, prehabilitation would cost $371.1 Million (M)versus $404.9 M for usual care, a cost saving of $33.8 M/year. Cost of care per patient with prehabilitation was $84,053; usual care was $91,713. When analyzed for cost-effectiveness, usual care was dominated by prehabilitation, indicating prehabilitation was associated with both increased effectiveness and decreased cost compared with usual care. Sensitivity analysis showed prehabilitation was more cost effective up to a cost of intervention of $9,418/patient. Conclusion: Prehabilitation appears to be a cost-saving method to decrease healthcare system costs via two improved outcomes: lower complication rates and decreased care facility requirements. It represents a novel strategy to optimize healthcare efficiency. Prospective studies should be performed to better characterize these interventions in medically frail patients with EOC.