Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 10 de 10
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
2.
Expert Rev Hematol ; 10(10): 933-939, 2017 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28885063

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) face poor treatment options by the time third-line therapy is required, despite advances in overall survival in recent years. Treatment free interval (TFI) and opportunities to maintain quality of life (QoL) have been cited as additional measures of efficacy that can be utilized in personalized treatment decisions. METHODS: The clinical health outcomes data from PANORAMA-1, the pivotal phase-3 trial comparing panobinostat-bortezomib-dexamethasone (PAN-BTZ-DEX) with placebo (PBO)-BTZ-DEX in RRMM patients treated with 1 to 3 prior regimens, retrospectively assessed TFI as a health outcome measure and metric of patient treatment experience relevant to the RRMM population. RESULTS: PAN-BTZ-DEX shows promise for prolonged TFI (mean TFI, 7.49 months; 95% CI, 6.02 to 8.71) compared to PBO-BTZ-DEX (mean TFI, 3.86 months; 95% CI, 3.08 to 4.60) for heavily pre-treated advanced RRMM patients), due to the short duration of therapy and extended progression free-survival. Further, QoL during the TFI was similar to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: PAN-BTZ-DEX provides a treatment regimen with prolonged TFI benefits previously not available for RRMM patients. TFI has not been traditionally measured in clinical trials, but should be assessed in prospective data collection given its value to payers, providers, and patients.


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Inibidores de Histona Desacetilases/uso terapêutico , Ácidos Hidroxâmicos/uso terapêutico , Indóis/uso terapêutico , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/patologia , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , Bortezomib/administração & dosagem , Dexametasona/administração & dosagem , Esquema de Medicação , Resistencia a Medicamentos Antineoplásicos , Inibidores de Histona Desacetilases/administração & dosagem , Inibidores de Histona Desacetilases/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Ácidos Hidroxâmicos/administração & dosagem , Ácidos Hidroxâmicos/efeitos adversos , Indóis/administração & dosagem , Indóis/efeitos adversos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Panobinostat , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Recidiva , Resultado do Tratamento
4.
Lancet Oncol ; 17(8): e328-e346, 2016 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27511158

RESUMO

Treatment of multiple myeloma has substantially changed over the past decade with the introduction of several classes of new effective drugs that have greatly improved the rates and depth of response. Response criteria in multiple myeloma were developed to use serum and urine assessment of monoclonal proteins and bone marrow assessment (which is relatively insensitive). Given the high rates of complete response seen in patients with multiple myeloma with new treatment approaches, new response categories need to be defined that can identify responses that are deeper than those conventionally defined as complete response. Recent attempts have focused on the identification of residual tumour cells in the bone marrow using flow cytometry or gene sequencing. Furthermore, sensitive imaging techniques can be used to detect the presence of residual disease outside of the bone marrow. Combining these new methods, the International Myeloma Working Group has defined new response categories of minimal residual disease negativity, with or without imaging-based absence of extramedullary disease, to allow uniform reporting within and outside clinical trials. In this Review, we clarify several aspects of disease response assessment, along with endpoints for clinical trials, and highlight future directions for disease response assessments.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasia Residual/diagnóstico , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Consenso , Humanos , Neoplasia Residual/induzido quimicamente
5.
Cancer Med ; 5(7): 1425-35, 2016 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27119422

RESUMO

Health maintenance (HM) practices are essential to prevent illness, promote well-being, and maximize health. Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease and cancers, yet, research on HM practices and preventative care of MM survivors has limited report. The study comprised a descriptive, correlational, and cross-sectional online survey design. Survey of patients with MM was carried out through the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF) and the Association of Cancer Online Resources (ACOR) e-mail list services. The members of the IMF and ACOR e-mail list services were surveyed, of which 237 patients responded. The modified Medical Expenditure Preventive Survey-Preventive Care questionnaire was used; it included items that ask patients regarding their healthcare practices that relate to dental care, cancer prevention, addiction, lifestyles, sensory screening, immunizations, cardiovascular, endocrine, psychosocial, and bone health. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's chi-square, and Spearman's rho correlation coefficient were obtained. In this study, men had statistically significant inferior global health maintenance scores than women (P = 0.002). Being employed (P = 0.054) and married or partnered (P = 0.017) were significantly correlated with better health maintenance patterns among male respondents. In contrast, no statistically significant correlations between sociodemographic factors and health maintenance patterns were found in women. Patients with MM, particularly men, require continued education and close monitoring of health maintenance practices. These findings are consistent with publications looking at gender disparities in healthcare utilization in the United States. Studies show that men, in general, are less likely to seek preventative healthcare screenings. Healthcare providers must incorporate health maintenance promotion during clinic visits.


Assuntos
Mieloma Múltiplo/epidemiologia , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Vigilância em Saúde Pública , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Transversais , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Feminino , Educação em Saúde , Promoção da Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/prevenção & controle , Cooperação do Paciente , Risco , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Sobreviventes
6.
Blood ; 125(13): 2068-74, 2015 03 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25628469

RESUMO

We conducted a pooled analysis of 869 individual newly diagnosed elderly patient data from 3 prospective trials. At diagnosis, a geriatric assessment had been performed. An additive scoring system (range 0-5), based on age, comorbidities, and cognitive and physical conditions, was developed to identify 3 groups: fit (score = 0, 39%), intermediate fitness (score = 1, 31%), and frail (score ≥2, 30%). The 3-year overall survival was 84% in fit, 76% in intermediate-fitness (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; P = .042), and 57% in frail (HR, 3.57; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 nonhematologic adverse events at 12 months was 22.2% in fit, 26.4% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.23; P = .217), and 34.0% in frail (HR, 1.74; P < .001) patients. The cumulative incidence of treatment discontinuation at 12 months was 16.5% in fit, 20.8% in intermediate-fitness (HR, 1.41; P = .052), and 31.2% in frail (HR, 2.21; P < .001) patients. Our frailty score predicts mortality and the risk of toxicity in elderly myeloma patients. The International Myeloma Working group proposes this score for the measurement of frailty in designing future clinical trials. These trials are registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01093136 (EMN01), #NCT01190787 (26866138MMY2069), and #NCT01346787 (IST-CAR-506).


Assuntos
Antineoplásicos/efeitos adversos , Idoso Fragilizado , Avaliação Geriátrica , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico , Mieloma Múltiplo/mortalidade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antineoplásicos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Prognóstico , Suspensão de Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos
7.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant ; 20(6): 852-857, 2014 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24607557

RESUMO

Trials have shown benefits of palifermin in reducing the incidence and severity of oral mucositis in patients with hematological malignancies undergoing autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with total body irradiation (TBI)-based conditioning regimens. Similar outcome data are lacking for patients receiving non-TBI-based regimens. We performed a retrospective evaluation on the pharmacoeconomic benefit of palifermin in the setting of non-TBI-based conditioning and autologous HSCT. Between January 2002 and December 2010, 524 patients undergoing autologous HSCT for myeloma (melphalan 200 mg/m²) and lymphoma (high-dose busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide) as preparative regimen were analyzed. Use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) was significantly lower in the palifermin-treated groups (myeloma: 13% versus 53%, P < .001; lymphoma: 46% versus 68%, P < .001). Median total transplant charges were significantly higher in the palifermin-treated group, after controlling for inflation (myeloma: $167,820 versus $143,200, P < .001; lymphoma: $168,570 versus $148,590, P < .001). Palifermin treatment was not associated with a difference in days to neutrophil engraftment, length of stay, and overall survival and was associated with an additional cost of $5.5K (myeloma) and $14K (lymphoma) per day of PCA avoided. Future studies are suggested to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of palifermin compared with other symptomatic treatments to reduce transplant toxicity using validated measures for pain and quality of life.


Assuntos
Fator 7 de Crescimento de Fibroblastos/economia , Fator 7 de Crescimento de Fibroblastos/uso terapêutico , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/métodos , Mucosite/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Farmacoeconomia , Feminino , Transplante de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Linfoma/terapia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mucosite/economia , Mucosite/etiologia , Mieloma Múltiplo/terapia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Condicionamento Pré-Transplante/efeitos adversos , Condicionamento Pré-Transplante/métodos , Transplante Autólogo , Adulto Jovem
8.
Transfusion ; 51(10): 2175-82, 2011 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21492180

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Plerixafor is a recently Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved CXCR4 antagonist, which is combined with granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to facilitate stem cell mobilization of lymphoma and myeloma patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To evaluate the effectiveness and the related costs of a "just-in-time" strategy of plerixafor administration, we performed a retrospective cohort study comparing 148 consecutive lymphoma and myeloma patients in whom mobilization was attempted during 2008 before the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of plerixafor with 188 consecutive patients mobilized during 2009 after FDA approval. RESULTS: Plerixafor was administered to 64 of 188 patients considered to be at risk for mobilization failure due to either their medical history ("high risk," n = 23) or the occurrence of peripheral blood CD34+ count of fewer than 15 × 10(6) cells/L with a white blood cell count of greater than 10 × 10(9) cells/L after at least 5 days of G-CSF administration (just-in-time, n = 41). The success rates of collecting a minimum transplant CD34+ cell dose (≥2 × 10(6) cells/kg) or target cell dose (≥5 × 10(6) lymphoma or ≥10 × 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg myeloma) in the just-in-time patients compared favorably with the 36 poor mobilizers collected with G-CSF alone: 93% versus 72% and 42% versus 22%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The use of plerixafor in selected high-risk patients and poor mobilizers did not increase the total charges associated with stem cell collection when compared with poor mobilizers treated with G-CSF alone. The targeted use of plerixafor increased the overall success rate of mobilizing a minimum number of CD34+ cells from 93% to 98% in patients with hematologic malignancies scheduled for autotransplant and increased the overall charges associated with stem cell collection in all patients by an average of 17%.


Assuntos
Mobilização de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/métodos , Compostos Heterocíclicos/administração & dosagem , Linfoma/terapia , Mieloma Múltiplo/terapia , Transplante de Células-Tronco de Sangue Periférico/métodos , Receptores CXCR4/antagonistas & inibidores , Terapia de Salvação , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Antígenos CD34/sangue , Benzilaminas , Remoção de Componentes Sanguíneos , Estudos de Coortes , Análise Custo-Benefício , Ciclamos , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Fator Estimulador de Colônias de Granulócitos/administração & dosagem , Mobilização de Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/economia , Células-Tronco Hematopoéticas/efeitos dos fármacos , Compostos Heterocíclicos/farmacologia , Humanos , Linfoma/sangue , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mieloma Múltiplo/sangue , Transplante de Células-Tronco de Sangue Periférico/economia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Tempo , Transplante Autólogo , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA