Literature DB >> 1941063

The calculation of actual or received dose intensity: a comparison of published methods.

D L Longo1, P L Duffey, V T DeVita, M N Wesley, S M Hubbard, R C Young.   

Abstract

Two recent reports of the same combination chemotherapy program, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, etoposide, methotrexate, cytarabine, vincristine, bleomycin, and prednisone (ProMACE-CytaBOM), in similar subsets of patients with advanced-stage aggressive-histology lymphoma used two different methods to report the actual dose-intensity (DI) data. One method treats DI as a property of a particular cycle of treatment within the entire population that received that cycle. The other treats DI as a characteristic of a particular patient's entire treatment course. We have applied both methods to the same set of data and provide evidence that the latter method is preferable for at least two reasons: (1) it more accurately reflects actual DI by clearly incorporating the duration of the actual treatment course and, thus, can be used to compare the administration of same or related regimens to distinct patient populations; and (2) it allows assignment of a numerical value to an individual patient's treatment course or a group of patients' treatment courses such that DI can be examined for its impact on treatment outcome just like any other prognostic factor. The observed differences in treatment outcome between the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) and National Cancer Institute (NCI) studies are not clearly related to differences in distribution of clinical prognostic factors in the two study populations. The differences in methods of reporting DI prohibit evaluation of the influence of dose-related variables on outcome in the two studies. Adoption of a standard method of calculating and reporting DI data would facilitate evaluation of the prognostic significance of DI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1941063     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1991.9.11.2042

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  26 in total

1.  Prevalence and incidence of anemia in Japanese cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy.

Authors:  Toshiyuki Kitano; Harue Tada; Tsutomu Nishimura; Satoshi Teramukai; Masashi Kanai; Takafumi Nishimura; Akiko Misawa; Kiyotsugu Yoshikawa; Hiroyasu Yasuda; Hiroshi Ishiguro; Shigemi Matsumoto; Kazuhiro Yanagihara; Masanori Fukushima
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 2.490

2.  Phase 2 study of rituximab-ABVD in classical Hodgkin lymphoma.

Authors:  Yvette L Kasamon; Heather A Jacene; Christopher D Gocke; Lode J Swinnen; Douglas E Gladstone; Brandy Perkins; Brian K Link; Leslie L Popplewell; Thomas M Habermann; Joseph M Herman; William H Matsui; Richard J Jones; Richard F Ambinder
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2012-02-16       Impact factor: 22.113

3.  Design of the Physical exercise during Adjuvant Chemotherapy Effectiveness Study (PACES): a randomized controlled trial to evaluate effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of physical exercise in improving physical fitness and reducing fatigue.

Authors:  Hanna van Waart; Martijn M Stuiver; Wim H van Harten; Gabe S Sonke; Neil K Aaronson
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  Retrospective analysis of bendamustine and rituximab use in indolent and mantle cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma based on initial starting dose.

Authors:  David A Bond; Ying Huang; Amy S Ruppert; Alison R Walker; Emily K Dotson; Julianna Roddy; Kristie A Blum; Beth A Christian
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2016-11-14

5.  A phase II trial of erlotinib in combination with gemcitabine and capecitabine in previously untreated metastatic/recurrent pancreatic cancer: combined analysis with translational research.

Authors:  Do-Youn Oh; Keun Wook Lee; Kyung-Hee Lee; Chang-Hak Sohn; Young Suk Park; Dae Young Zang; Hun-Mo Ryoo; Hong-Suk Song; Jin-Soo Kim; Hye-Jin Kang; Bong-Seog Kim; Yung-Jue Bang
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.850

6.  Biweekly gemcitabine plus vinorelbine in first-line metastatic breast cancer: efficacy and correlation with HER2 extracellular domain.

Authors:  R Colomer; A Llombart-Cussac; I Tusquets; J Rifà; J I Mayordomo; B Ojeda; E Ciruelos; J Hornedo; D Vicente; H Cortés-Funes
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.405

7.  Prohibitive toxicity of a dose-intense regime for metastatic neuroblastoma containing ifosfamide, doxorubicin and cisplatin.

Authors:  S P Lowis; A D Pearson; M M Reid; A W Craft
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

8.  Impact of chemotherapy relative dose intensity on cause-specific and overall survival for stage I-III breast cancer: ER+/PR+, HER2- vs. triple-negative.

Authors:  Lu Zhang; Qingzhao Yu; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Mei-Chin Hsieh; Michelle Loch; Vivien W Chen; Elizabeth Fontham; Tekeda Ferguson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-01-24       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Exercise and health-related fitness predictors of chemotherapy completion in breast cancer patients: pooled analysis of two multicenter trials.

Authors:  Ki-Yong An; Fernanda Z Arthuso; Dong-Woo Kang; Andria R Morielli; Stephanie M Ntoukas; Christine M Friedenreich; Donald C McKenzie; Karen Gelmon; John R Mackey; Kerry S Courneya
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Association of relative dose intensity with BMI and pathologic complete response in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ilana Usiskin; Fangyong Li; Melinda L Irwin; Brenda Cartmel; Tara Sanft
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 4.872

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.