Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 7 de 7
Filtrar
1.
Oncologist ; 28(9): 780-789, 2023 09 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37014080

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Continuous androgen deprivation therapy ± first-generation non-steroidal antiandrogen was previously the standard-of-care for patients with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Treatment intensification with novel hormonal therapy (NHT) or taxane chemotherapy is now approved and guideline-recommended for these patients. METHODS: Physician-reported data on adult patients with mCSPC from the Adelphi Prostate Cancer Disease Specific Programme were analyzed descriptively. We evaluated real-world treatment trends for patients with mCSPC in 5 European countries (United Kingdom, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy) and the United States (US), looking at differences between patients initiating treatment in 2016-2018 and in 2019-2020. We also investigated treatment trends by ethnicity and insurance status in the US. RESULTS: This study found that most patients with mCSPC do not receive treatment intensification. However, greater use of treatment intensification with NHT and taxane chemotherapy was observed in 2019-2020 than in 2016-2018 across 5 European countries. In the US, greater use of treatment intensification with NHT in 2019-2020 than in 2016-2018 was observed for all ethnicity groups and those with Medicare and commercial insurance status. CONCLUSIONS: As the number of patients with mCSPC who receive treatment intensification increases, more patients who progress to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) will have been exposed to intensified treatments. Treatment options for patients with mCSPC and mCRPC overlap, suggesting that an unmet need will emerge for new therapies. Further studies are needed to understand optimal treatment sequencing in mCSPC and mCRPC.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Masculino , Adulto , Humanos , Anciano , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Medicare , Taxoides/uso terapéutico , Castración , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Oncologist ; 28(9): e737-e747, 2023 09 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37014097

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: There is limited real-world evidence on how increasing use of treatment intensification in metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) has influenced treatment decisions in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). The study objective was to evaluate the impact of novel hormonal therapy (NHT) and docetaxel use in mCSPC on first-line treatment patterns among patients with mCRPC in 5 European countries and the United States (US). METHODS: Physician-reported data on patients with mCRPC from the Adelphi Prostate Cancer Disease Specific Program were descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 215 physicians provided data on 722 patients with mCRPC. Across 5 European countries and the US, 65% and 75% of patients, respectively, received NHT, and 28% and 9% of patients, respectively, received taxane chemotherapy as first-line mCRPC treatment. In Europe, patients who had received NHT in mCSPC (n = 76) mostly received taxane chemotherapy in mCRPC (55%). Patients who had received taxane chemotherapy, or who did not receive taxane chemotherapy or NHT in mCSPC (n = 98 and 434, respectively) mostly received NHT in mCRPC (62% and 73%, respectively). In the US, patients who had received NHT, taxane chemotherapy, or neither in mCSPC (n = 32, 12, and 72, respectively) mostly received NHT in mCRPC (53%, 83%, and 83%, respectively). Two patients in Europe were rechallenged with the same NHT. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that physicians consider mCSPC treatment history when making first-line treatment decisions in mCRPC. Further studies are needed to better understand optimal treatment sequencing, especially as new treatments emerge.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración , Masculino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata Resistentes a la Castración/patología , Docetaxel/uso terapéutico , Taxoides/uso terapéutico , Antagonistas de Andrógenos/uso terapéutico , Resultado del Tratamiento , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos
3.
Contact Dermatitis ; 78(1): 33-40, 2018 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29076574

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Fragrances are well known to cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Occupationally related cases occur, with certain groups being at higher risk. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of occupationally related cases of cutaneous fragrance allergy and to evaluate trends. METHOD: Data on incident cases of occupational ACD caused by fragrances between 1996 and 2015 (inclusive) reported to the EPIDERM surveillance scheme were analysed. RESULTS: Of the cases reported to EPIDERM during the study period, 5.2% had ACD attributed to fragrances. The highest annual incidence rates were observed in women. Hairdressers, beauticians and people working in related occupations had a 47-fold higher incidence rate ratio than the reference category (the average of all other occupations combined). Trends analysis suggested a non-significant increase in fragrance allergy over the study period among all occupations, and beauty and food workers, and a slight decrease in healthcare workers. CONCLUSIONS: Fragrance allergy is a significant problem in an occupational setting. Although there was no significant change in the incidence of fragrance-related allergic occupational contact dermatitis (OCD) during the 20-year study period, this does not mirror the trend in OCD, which is falling. Fragrance allergy continues to be a major contributor to OCD, and contributes to a greater proportion of cases.


Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/epidemiología , Dermatitis Profesional/epidemiología , Perfumes/efectos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Peluquería , Industria de la Belleza , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Dermatitis Profesional/etiología , Monitoreo Epidemiológico , Femenino , Manipulación de Alimentos , Sector de Atención de Salud , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reino Unido/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
4.
Clin Genitourin Cancer ; 22(1): e136-e147.e1, 2024 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37945404

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The global treatment landscape for metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC) is evolving, with the recent approval of several new therapeutics. To enable informed treatment decisions, a need exists to understand both treatment patterns and how physicians determine platinum-based treatment eligibility status. This study investigated physicians' current approaches to first-line (1L) chemotherapy, treatment patterns, and assessment of platinum-based treatment eligibility of patients with mUC in real-world clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were derived from the Adelphi mUC Disease Specific Programme™, a large, independent, multinational, cross-sectional survey of physicians and their consulting patients with mUC presenting in a real-world clinical setting, conducted in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom between November 2020 and April 2021. Physicians completed record forms for their next 8 consecutively consulting patients (≤3 1L, ≤2 second-line, and ≤3 third-line) with a physician-confirmed diagnosis of mUC, reporting data on demographics, clinical characteristics, eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy, and treatments received. RESULTS: Overall, 232 physicians provided data for 1922 patients. Renal function impairment (72%), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (59%), and age (38%) were the most commonly reported criteria physicians used to determine eligibility for platinum-based chemotherapy. At 1L, 82% of patients received platinum-based chemotherapy (cisplatin, 51%; carboplatin, 31%) and 10% received immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. At second-line, 12% received platinum-based chemotherapy, 63% ICI therapy, and 21% non-platinum-based chemotherapy. At third-line, 4% received platinum-based chemotherapy, 41% best supportive care only, and 36% other non-platinum-based chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this real-world study indicate that in accordance with European guidelines, the majority of patients with mUC received standard-of-care 1L platinum-based chemotherapy and use of ICIs was limited. Future research should assess how physicians' perceptions toward determining platinum eligibility status evolve with newer guideline recommendations and the introduction of new therapy options for mUC.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales , Humanos , Platino (Metal)/uso terapéutico , Estudios Transversales , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Transicionales/patología , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/farmacología , Europa (Continente)
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA