Literature DB >> 11438417

Evaluating treatment strategies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: use of quality-adjusted survival analysis.

V Levy1, R Porcher, F Delabarre, M Leporrier, B Cazin, S Chevret.   

Abstract

To assess comparatively, in terms of quality-adjusted survival, three front-line treatments in patients with stage B- or C-chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). To describe better and compare the survival after randomization of patients from the CLL90 trial that randomly compared ChOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, oncovin, prednisone), CAP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, prednisone) and fludarabine in advanced CLL, we performed a quality-adjusted survival analysis. This consisted of defining four clinical states (toxicity, treatment free of toxicity, no treatment nor symptoms, relapse), then summing up the average times spent in each state weighted by utility coefficients that reflect relative value according to quality of life. The resulting quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity (Q-TWIST) was compared between randomized groups, and sensitivity (threshold) analyses to the choice of utility coefficients was performed. Over 73 months after randomization, the fludarabine group gained a mean of 45 days of toxicity-free survival at CAP, and 61 days over ChOP. The mean TWIST was 27.05 months with CAP, 31.5 months with ChOP and 32.95 months with fludarabine. The threshold analyses showed that, whatever the utility weights, the mean Q-TWIST was always greater with ChOP or fludarabine as compared to CAP. Fludarabine was consistently a better treatment than ChOP, except in the unlikely case of high utility weights attributed to toxicity and low utility weights attributed to treatment. Nevertheless, from a clinical point of view, differences between ChOP and fludarabine were moderate or event slight (mean difference in TWIST of 1.45 months). We conclude that patients with advanced CLL have a moderate benefit in terms of Q-TWIST when treated with fludarabine over ChOP. These two treatments are always superior to CAP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11438417     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00359-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  7 in total

Review 1.  Modelling and simulation in the development and use of anti-cancer agents: an underused tool?

Authors:  Ferdinand Rombout; Leon Aarons; Mats Karlsson; Anthony Man; France Mentré; Peter Nygren; Amy Racine; Hans Schaefer; Jean-Louis Steimer; Iñaki Troconiz; Achiel van Peer
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.745

2.  Health-related quality of life and cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  David Osoba
Journal:  Ther Adv Med Oncol       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 8.168

3.  Population preference values for treatment outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a cross-sectional utility study.

Authors:  Kathleen M Beusterien; John Davies; Michael Leach; David Meiklejohn; Jessica L Grinspan; Alison O'Toole; Steve Bramham-Jones
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2010-05-18       Impact factor: 3.186

4.  Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a report from the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia updating the National Cancer Institute-Working Group 1996 guidelines.

Authors:  Michael Hallek; Bruce D Cheson; Daniel Catovsky; Federico Caligaris-Cappio; Guillaume Dighiero; Hartmut Döhner; Peter Hillmen; Michael J Keating; Emili Montserrat; Kanti R Rai; Thomas J Kipps
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 22.113

5.  The physician-patient relationship and quality of life: lessons from chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Authors:  Tait D Shanafelt; Deborah A Bowen; Chaya Venkat; Susan L Slager; Clive S Zent; Neil E Kay; Megan Reinalda; Han Tun; Jeff A Sloan; Timothy G Call
Journal:  Leuk Res       Date:  2008-07-25       Impact factor: 3.156

6.  [Anticancer therapy for symptom relief? : A systematic review of clinical trials in oncology].

Authors:  B Alt-Epping; A-L Haas; M Jansky; F Nauck
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.107

7.  A quality-adjusted survival time without symptoms or toxicities analysis of glasdegib plus low-dose cytarabine versus low-dose cytarabine as initial therapy for acute myeloid leukemia in patients who are not considered candidates for intensive chemotherapy.

Authors:  Caitlyn T Solem; Timothy J Bell; Youngmin Kwon; Joseph C Cappelleri; Courtney Johnson; Helen Bhattacharyya; Caroline J Hoang; Jorge E Cortes
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 6.860

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.