ArticleThe oncologist2023
Prescribing Characteristics of Octreotide Immediate-Release and Long-Acting Release in Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors.
Article in The oncologist, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTreatment recommendations for patients with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) include the use of octreotide long-acting release (LAR) for long-term therapy and immediate-release (IR) as rescue therapy to control the breakthrough symptoms of carcinoid syndrome (CS). High doses of LAR are commonly used in clinical practice. This study aimed to evaluate the real-world utilization of LAR and preceding IR use at the prescription and patient levels.
methodsWe used an administrative claims database (2009-2018) containing privately insured enrollees. We calculated the normalized LAR dose from pharmacy claims and the initial mean IR daily dose at the prescription level. At the patient level, we conducted a retrospective cohort study that included patients continuously enrolled with ≥1 pharmacy claim of LAR and evaluated the frequency and the clinical reason for dose escalation of LAR. The definition of the above-label maximum dose of LAR was ≥30 mg/4 weeks.
resultsNineteen percent of LAR prescriptions had an above-label maximum dose. Only 7% of LAR prescriptions had preceding IR use. There were 386 patients with NETs or CS vs. 570 with an unknown diagnosis. Comparing patients with NETs or CS to those with an unknown diagnosis, 22.3% vs. 11.0 % experienced dose escalations and 29.0% vs. 26.6% had IR use before dose escalation, respectively. LAR dose escalation occurred in 50.9% vs. 39.2% for symptom control, 12.3% vs. 7.1% for tumor progression control, and 16.6% vs. 6.0% for both reasons in NETs/CS and unknown groups, respectively.
conclusionOctreotide LAR dosing above the label-maximum dose is common and IR rescue dosing appears to be underutilized.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.