RESUMEN
Importance: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) improves local-regional disease control and patient survival. Hypofractionation (HF) regimens have comparable efficacy and complication rates with improved quality of life compared with conventional fractionation (CF) schedules. However, the use of HF after mastectomy in patients undergoing breast reconstruction has not been prospectively examined. Objective: To compare HF and CF PMRT outcomes after implant-based reconstruction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial assessed patients 18 years or older undergoing mastectomy and immediate expander or implant reconstruction for breast cancer (Tis, TX, or T1-3) and unilateral PMRT from March 8, 2018, to November 3, 2021 (median [range] follow-up, 40.4 [15.4-63.0] months), at 16 US cancer centers or hospitals. Analyses were conducted between September and December 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to HF or CF PMRT. Chest wall doses were 4256 cGy for 16 fractions for HF and 5000 cGy for 25 fractions for CF. Chest wall toxic effects were defined as a grade 3 or higher adverse event. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in physical well-being (PWB) domain of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) quality-of-life assessment tool at 6 months after starting PMRT, controlling for age. Secondary outcomes included toxic effects and cancer recurrence. Results: Of 400 women (201 in the CF arm and 199 in the HF arm; median [range] age, 47 [23-79] years), 330 patients had PWB scores at baseline and at 6 months. There was no difference in the change in PWB between the study arms (estimate, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.86 to 1.11; P = .80), but there was a significant interaction between age group and study arm (P = .03 for interaction). Patients younger than 45 years had higher 6-month absolute PWB scores if treated with HF rather than CF regimens (23.6 [95% CI, 22.7-24.6] vs 22.0 [95% CI, 20.7-23.3]; P = .047) and reported being less bothered by adverse effects (mean [SD], 3.0 [0.9] in the HF arm and 2.6 [1.2] in the CF arm; P = .02) or nausea (mean [SD], 3.8 [0.4] in the HF arm and 3.6 [0.8] in the CF arm; P = .04). In the as-treated cohort, there were 23 distant (11 in the HF arm and 12 in the CF arm) and 2 local-regional (1 in the HF arm and 1 in the CF arm) recurrences. Chest wall toxic effects occurred in 39 patients (20 in the HF arm and 19 in the CF arm) at a median (IQR) of 7.2 (1.8-12.9) months. Fractionation was not associated with chest wall toxic effects on multivariate analysis (HF arm: hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.52-2.00; P = .95). Fewer patients undergoing HF vs CF regimens had a treatment break (5 [2.7%] vs 15 [7.7%]; P = .03) or required unpaid time off from work (17 [8.5%] vs 34 [16.9%]; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the HF regimen did not significantly improve change in PWB compared with the CF regimen. These data add to the increasing experience with HF PMRT in patients with implant-based reconstruction. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03422003.
RESUMEN
Clinical ethics consultation services (CECS) can be particularly complex in oncology, and widespread misconceptions exist about their nature. As a result, visibility and accessibility of information regarding CECS is critical. We investigated the availability and content of information regarding CECS on websites of NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and cancer centers (CCs). Each website was reviewed for information on CECS and reviewed for benchmarks partially derived from the American Society of Bioethics and Humanities recommendations for CECS. Our analysis revealed that of 70 NCI-designated center websites, 38 had information on CECS, and 17 were found directly on these sites. When CECS information was available, most websites provided a mission statement (71%) and an explanation of what constitutes an ethics consult (74%). Few provided a description of the consult process (45%) or service membership (39%). Our findings reveal a significant gap in CECS visibility on the websites of NCI-designated CCs.
RESUMEN
Importance: Published research suggests that patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are neither commonly collected nor reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for solid tumors. Little is known about these practices in RCTs for hematological malignant neoplasms. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of PROs as prespecified end points in RCTs of hematological malignant neoplasms, and to assess reporting of PROs in associated trial publications. Evidence Review: All issues of 8 journals known for publishing high-impact RCTs (NEJM, Lancet, Lancet Hematology, Lancet Oncology, Journal of Clinical Oncology, Blood, JAMA, and JAMA Oncology) between January 1, 2018, and December 13, 2022, were searched for primary publications of therapeutic phase 3 trials for adults with hematological malignant neoplasms. Studies that evaluated pretransplant conditioning regimens, graft-vs-host disease treatment, or radiotherapy as experimental treatment were excluded. Data regarding trial characteristics and PROs were extracted from manuscripts and trial protocols. Univariable analyses assessed associations between trial characteristics and PRO collection or reporting. Findings: Ninety RCTs were eligible for analysis. PROs were an end point in 66 (73%) trials: in 1 trial (1%) as a primary end point, in 50 (56%) as a secondary end point, and in 15 (17%) as an exploratory end point. PRO data were reported in 26 of 66 primary publications (39%): outcomes were unchanged in 18 and improved in 8, with none reporting worse PROs with experimental treatment. Trials sponsored by for-profit entities were more likely to include PROs as an end point (49 of 55 [89%] vs 17 of 35 [49%]; P < .001) but were not significantly more likely to report PRO data (20 of 49 [41%] vs 6 of 17 [35%]; P = .69). Compared with trials involving lymphoma (18 of 29 [62%]) or leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (18 of 28 [64%]), those involving plasma cell disorders or multiple myeloma (27 of 30 [90%]) or myeloproliferative neoplasms (3 of 3 [100%]) were more likely to include PROs as an end point (P = .03). Similarly, compared with trials involving lymphoma (3 of 18 [17%]) or leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (5 of 18 [28%]), those involving plasma cell disorders or multiple myeloma (16 of 27 [59%]) or myeloproliferative neoplasms (2 of 3 [67%]) were more likely to report PROs in the primary publication (P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, almost 3 of every 4 therapeutic RCTs for blood cancers collected PRO data; however, only 1 RCT included PROs as a primary end point. Moreover, most did not report resulting PRO data in the primary publication and when reported, PROs were either better or unchanged, raising concern for publication bias. This analysis suggests a critical gap in dissemination of data on the lived experiences of patients enrolled in RCTs for hematological malignant neoplasms.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Neoplasias Hematológicas , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Neoplasias Hematológicas/terapiaRESUMEN
Importance: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from health care are substantial and disproportionately harm persons with cancer. Emissions from a central component of oncology care, outpatient clinician visits, are not well described, nor are the reductions in emissions and human harms that could be obtained through decentralizing this aspect of cancer care (ie, telemedicine and local clinician care when possible). Objective: To assess potential reductions in GHG emissions and downstream health harms associated with telemedicine and fully decentralized cancer care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study and counterfactual analyses using life cycle assessment methods analyzed persons receiving cancer care at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between May 2015 and December 2020 as well as persons diagnosed with cancer over the same period from the Cancer in North America (CiNA) public dataset. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The adjusted per-visit day difference in GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents between 2 periods: an in-person care model period (May 2015 to February 2020; preperiod) and a telemedicine period (March to December 2020; postperiod), and the annual decrease in disability-adjusted life-years in a counterfactual model where care during the preperiod was maximally decentralized nationwide. Results: Of 123â¯890 included patients, 73â¯988 (59.7%) were female, and the median (IQR) age at first diagnosis was 59 (48-68) years. Patients were seen over 1.6 million visit days. In mixed-effects log-linear regression, the mean absolute reduction in per-visit day CO2 equivalent emissions between the preperiod and postperiod was 36.4 kg (95% CI, 36.2-36.6), a reduction of 81.3% (95% CI, 80.8-81.7) compared with the baseline model. In a counterfactual decentralized care model of the preperiod, there was a relative emissions reduction of 33.1% (95% CI, 32.9-33.3). When demographically matched to 10.3 million persons in the CiNA dataset, decentralized care would have reduced national emissions by 75.3 million kg of CO2 equivalents annually; this corresponded to an estimated annual reduction of 15.0 to 47.7 disability-adjusted life-years. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study found that using decentralization through telemedicine and local care may substantially reduce cancer care's GHG emissions; this corresponds to small reductions in human mortality.
RESUMEN
This Viewpoint discusses the ethics of artificial intelligencegenerated compassion in cancer care and outlines 4 main points of concern.
Asunto(s)
Empatía , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Relaciones Médico-Paciente/éticaRESUMEN
Notable treatment advances have been made in recent years for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS), and several new drugs are under development. For example, the emerging availability of oral MDS therapies holds the promise of improving patients' health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Within this rapidly evolving landscape, the inclusion of HRQoL and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is critical to inform the benefit/risk assessment of new therapies or to assess whether patients live longer and better, for what will likely remain a largely incurable disease. We provide practical considerations to support investigators in generating high-quality PRO data in future MDS trials. We first describe several challenges that are to be thoughtfully considered when designing an MDS-focused clinical trial with a PRO endpoint. We then discuss aspects related to the design of the study, including PRO assessment strategies. We also discuss statistical approaches illustrating the potential value of time-to-event analyses and their implications within the estimand framework. Finally, based on a literature review of MDS randomized controlled trials with a PRO endpoint, we note the PRO items that deserve special attention when reporting future MDS trial results. We hope these practical considerations will facilitate the generation of rigorous PRO data that can robustly inform MDS patient care and support treatment decision-making for this patient population.
RESUMEN
Hematologic malignancies most often present in the sixth or seventh decade of life. Even so, many older adults may be unable to tolerate standard chemotherapy or require supplementary care or dose adjustments to do so. Both in community and academic centers, geriatric assessment (GA) can be used to improve the care of older adults with blood cancers. For example, hematologic oncologists can use GA to guide treatment selection, adjusting for patient frailty and goals, as well as prompt initiation of enhanced supportive care. After initial therapy, GA can improve the identification of older adults with aggressive myeloid malignancies who would benefit from hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), inform shared decision making, as well as allow transplanters to tailor conditioning regimen, donor selection, graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis, and pre- and post-HCT treatments. As in HCT, GA can improve the care of older patients with relapsed lymphoma or multiple myeloma eligible for chimeric antigen receptor-T therapy, identifying patients at higher risk for toxicity and providing a baseline for subsequent neurocognitive testing. Here, we review the data supporting GA for the care of older adults with blood cancers, from the community to the academic center. In addition, we explore future directions to optimize outcomes for older adults with hematologic malignancies.
Asunto(s)
Evaluación Geriátrica , Neoplasias Hematológicas , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Hematológicas/terapia , Anciano , Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas/métodos , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Factores de EdadRESUMEN
An anthropocentric scope for clinical medical ethics (CME) has largely separated this area of bioethics from environmental concerns. In this article, we first identify and reconcile the ethical issues imposed on CME by climate change including the dispersion of related causes and effects, the transdisciplinary and transhuman nature of climate change, and the historic divorce of CME from the environment. We then establish how several moral theories undergirding modern CME, such as virtue ethics, feminist ethics, and several theories of justice, promote both a flourishing of human medical practice and the environment. We conclude by defining an expanded the scope of CME as inclusive of not only patients, families, physicians, and other health professionals but other humans, non-humans, and their shared environment. We then apply this scope and theory to a widely used framework for applying CME, the Four Topics model, to construct a climate conscious approach to CME.
RESUMEN
Recursive partitioning of healthy consortia led to the development of the Clonal Hematopoiesis Risk Score (CHRS) for clonal haematopoiesis (CH); however, in the practical setting, most cases of CH are diagnosed after patients present with cytopenias or related symptoms. To address this real-world population, we characterize the clinical trajectories of 94 patients with CH and distinguish CH harbouring canonical DNMT3A/TET2/ASXL1 mutations alone ('sole DTA') versus all other groups ('non-sole DTA'). TET2, rather than DNMT3A, was the most prevalent mutation in the real-world setting. Sole DTA patients did not progress to myeloid neoplasm (MN) in the absence of acquisition of other mutations. Contrastingly, 14 (20.1%) of 67 non-sole DTA patients progressed to MN. CHRS assessment showed a higher frequency of high-risk CH in non-sole DTA (vs. sole DTA) patients and in progressors (vs. non-progressors). RUNX1 mutation conferred the strongest risk for progression to MN (odds ratio [OR] 10.27, 95% CI 2.00-52.69, p = 0.0053). The mean variant allele frequency across all genes was higher in progressors than in non-progressors (36.9% ± 4.62% vs. 24.1% ± 1.67%, p = 0.0064). This analysis in the post-CHRS era underscores the natural history of CH, providing insight into patterns of progression to MN.
Asunto(s)
Hematopoyesis Clonal , Proteínas de Unión al ADN , Dioxigenasas , Mutación , Humanos , Hematopoyesis Clonal/genética , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Proteínas de Unión al ADN/genética , ADN Metiltransferasa 3A , Adulto , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Subunidad alfa 2 del Factor de Unión al Sitio Principal/genética , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas/genética , Proteínas Represoras/genética , ADN (Citosina-5-)-Metiltransferasas/genéticaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Clinical trial participation at Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCC) is inequitable for minoritized racial and ethnic groups with acute leukemia. CCCs care for a high proportion of adults with acute leukemia. It is unclear if participation inequities are due to CCC access, post-access enrollment, or both. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with acute leukemia (2010-2019) residing within Massachusetts, the designated catchment area of the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center (DF/HCC). Individuals were categorized as non-Hispanic Asian (NHA), Black (NHB), White (NHW), Hispanic White (HW), or Other. Decomposition analyses assessed covariate contributions to disparities in (1) access to DF/HCC care and (2) post-access enrollment. RESULTS: Of 3698 individuals with acute leukemia, 85.9% were NHW, 4.5% HW, 4.3% NHB, 3.7% NHA, and 1.3% Other. Access was lower for HW (age- and sex-adjusted OR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.45 to 0.90) and reduced post-access enrollment for HW (aOR = 0.54, 95% CI =0.34 to 0.86) and NHB (aOR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.39 to 0.92) compared to NHW. Payor and socioeconomic status (SES) accounted for 25.2% and 21.2% of the +1.1% absolute difference in HW access. Marital status and SES accounted for 8.0% and 7.0% of the -8.8% absolute disparity in HW enrollment; 76.4% of the disparity was unexplained. SES and marital status accounted for 8.2% and 7.1% of the -9.1% absolute disparity in NHB enrollment; 73.0% of the disparity was unexplained. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of racial and ethnic inequities in acute leukemia trial enrollment at CCCs are from post-access enrollment, the majority of which was not explained by sociodemographic factors.
Asunto(s)
Instituciones Oncológicas , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Instituciones Oncológicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/terapia , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/etnología , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Leucemia/terapia , Leucemia/etnología , Massachusetts/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
The four-meter gait speed (4MGS) is a recommended physical performance test in older adults but is challenging to implement clinically. We developed a smartphone application (App) with a four-meter ribbon for remote 4MGS testing at home. This study aimed to assess the validity and reliability of this smartphone App-based assessment of the home 4MGS. We assessed the validity of the smartphone App by comparing it against a gold standard video assessment of the 4MGS conducted by study staff visiting community-dwelling older adults and against the stopwatch-based measurement. Moreover, we assessed the test-retest reliability in two supervised sessions and three additional sessions performed by the participants independently, without staff supervision. The 4MGS measured by the smartphone App was highly correlated with video-based 4MGS (r = 0.94), with minimal differences (mean = 0.07 m/s, ± 1.96 SD = 0.12) across a range of gait speeds. The test-retest reliability for the smartphone App 4MGS was high (ICC values: 0.75 to 0.93). The home 4MGS in older adults can be measured accurately and reliably using a smartphone in the pants pocket and a four-meter strip of ribbon. Leveraging existing technology carried by a significant portion of the older adult population could overcome barriers in busy clinical settings for this well-established objective mobility test.
RESUMEN
Importance: Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are rapidly integrating into cancer care. Understanding stakeholder views on ethical issues associated with the implementation of AI in oncology is critical to optimal deployment. Objective: To evaluate oncologists' views on the ethical domains of the use of AI in clinical care, including familiarity, predictions, explainability (the ability to explain how a result was determined), bias, deference, and responsibilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional, population-based survey study was conducted from November 15, 2022, to July 31, 2023, among 204 US-based oncologists identified using the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was response to a question asking whether participants agreed or disagreed that patients need to provide informed consent for AI model use during cancer treatment decisions. Results: Of 387 surveys, 204 were completed (response rate, 52.7%). Participants represented 37 states, 120 (63.7%) identified as male, 128 (62.7%) as non-Hispanic White, and 60 (29.4%) were from academic practices; 95 (46.6%) had received some education on AI use in health care, and 45.3% (92 of 203) reported familiarity with clinical decision models. Most participants (84.8% [173 of 204]) reported that AI-based clinical decision models needed to be explainable by oncologists to be used in the clinic; 23.0% (47 of 204) stated they also needed to be explainable by patients. Patient consent for AI model use during treatment decisions was supported by 81.4% of participants (166 of 204). When presented with a scenario in which an AI decision model selected a different treatment regimen than the oncologist planned to recommend, the most common response was to present both options and let the patient decide (36.8% [75 of 204]); respondents from academic settings were more likely than those from other settings to let the patient decide (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.19-5.51). Most respondents (90.7% [185 of 204]) reported that AI developers were responsible for the medico-legal problems associated with AI use. Some agreed that this responsibility was shared by physicians (47.1% [96 of 204]) or hospitals (43.1% [88 of 204]). Finally, most respondents (76.5% [156 of 204]) agreed that oncologists should protect patients from biased AI tools, but only 27.9% (57 of 204) were confident in their ability to identify poorly representative AI models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional survey study, few oncologists reported that patients needed to understand AI models, but most agreed that patients should consent to their use, and many tasked patients with choosing between physician- and AI-recommended treatment regimens. These findings suggest that the implementation of AI in oncology must include rigorous assessments of its effect on care decisions as well as decisional responsibility when problems related to AI use arise.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Oncólogos , Humanos , Masculino , Inteligencia Artificial , Estudios Transversales , Neoplasias/terapia , Instituciones de Atención AmbulatoriaRESUMEN
AbstractThere is societal consensus that cancer clinical trial participation is unjust because some sociodemographic groups have been systematically underrepresented. Despite this, neither a definition nor an ethical explication for the justice norm of equity has been clearly articulated in this setting, leading to confusion over its application and goals. Herein we define equity as acknowledging sociodemographic circumstances and apportioning resource and opportunity allocation to eliminate disparities in outcomes, and we explore the issues and tensions this norm generates through practical examples. We assess how equality-based enrollment structures in clinical cancer research have perpetuated historical disparities and what equity-based alternatives are necessary to achieve representativeness and an expansive conception of participatory justice in clinical cancer research. This framework addresses the breadth from normative to applied by defining the justice norm of equity and translating it into practical strategies for addressing participation disparities in clinical cancer research.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Justicia Social , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Ensayos Clínicos como AsuntoRESUMEN
CONTEXT: Patients with blood cancers have low rates of hospice use. While lack of transfusion access in hospice is posited to substantially contribute to these low rates, little is known about the perspectives of hospice providers regarding transfusion access in hospice. OBJECTIVES: To characterize hospice providers' perspectives regarding care for patients with blood cancers and transfusions in the hospice setting. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of a sample of hospices in the United States regarding their experience caring for patients with blood cancers, perceived barriers to hospice use, and interventions to increase enrollment. RESULTS: We received 113 completed surveys (response rate = 23.5%). Of the cohort, 2.7% reported that their agency always offers transfusions, 40.7% reported sometimes offering transfusions, and 54.9% reported never offering transfusions. In multivariable analyses, factors associated with offering transfusions included nonprofit ownership (OR 5.93, 95% CI, 2.2-15.2) and daily census >50 patients (OR 3.06, 95% CI, 1.19-7.87). Most respondents (76.6%) identified lack of transfusion access in hospice as a barrier to hospice enrollment for blood cancer patients. The top intervention considered as "very helpful" for increasing enrollment was additional reimbursement for transfusions (72.1%). CONCLUSION: In this national sample of hospices, access to palliative transfusions was severely limited and was considered a significant barrier to hospice use for blood cancer patients. Moreover, hospices felt increased reimbursement for transfusions would be an important intervention. These data suggest that hospice providers are supportive of increasing transfusion access and highlight the critical need for innovative hospice payment models to improve end-of-life care for patients with blood cancers.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Hematológicas , Cuidados Paliativos al Final de la Vida , Hospitales para Enfermos Terminales , Neoplasias , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Estudios Transversales , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Clinical trial eligibility criteria can unfairly exclude patients or unnecessarily expose them to known risks if criteria are not concordant with drug safety. There are few data evaluating the extent to which acute leukemia eligibility criteria are justified. We analyzed criteria and drug safety data for front-line phase II and/or III acute leukemia trials with start dates 1/1/2010-12/31/2019 registered on clinicaltrials.gov. Multivariable analyses assessed concordance between criteria use and safety data (presence of criteria with a safety signal, or absence of criteria without a signal), and differences between criteria and safety-based limits. Of 250 eligible trials, concordant use of ejection fraction criteria was seen in 34.8%, corrected QT level (QTc) in 22.4%, bilirubin in 68.4%, aspartate transaminase/alanine aminotransferase (AST/ALT) in 58.8%, renal function in 68.4%, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in 54.8%, and hepatitis B and C in 42.0% and 41.2%. HIV and hepatitis B and C criteria use was concordant with safety data (adjusted Odds Ratios 2.04 [95%CI: 1.13, 3.66], 2.64 [95%CI: 1.38, 5.04], 2.27 [95%CI: 1.20, 4.32]) but organ function criteria were not (all P>0.05); phase III trials were not more concordant. Bilirubin criteria limits were the same as safety-based limits in 16.0% of trials, AST/ALT in 18.1%, and renal function in 13.9%; in 75.7%, 51.4%, and 56.5% of trials, criteria were more restrictive, respectively, by median differences of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.5 times the upper limits of normal. We found limited drug safety justifications for acute leukemia eligibility criteria. These data define criteria use and limits that can be rationally modified to increase patient inclusion and welfare.
Asunto(s)
Infecciones por VIH , Hepatitis B , Leucemia , Humanos , Bilirrubina , Enfermedad Aguda , Leucemia/diagnóstico , Leucemia/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Ethical considerations for patient-facing AI for oncology: dignity, autonomy, safety, equity, inclusivity.
Asunto(s)
Inteligencia Artificial , Neoplasias , Humanos , Salud Digital , Respeto , Oncología MédicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: First-line treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) achieves durable remission in approximately 60% of patients. In relapsed or refractory disease, only about 20% achieve durable remission with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). The ZUMA-7 (axicabtagene ciloleucel [axi-cel]) and TRANSFORM (lisocabtagene maraleucel [liso-cel]) trials demonstrated superior event-free survival (and, in ZUMA-7, overall survival) in primary-refractory or early-relapsed (high-risk) DLBCL with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T) compared with salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT; however, list prices for CAR-T exceed $400 000 per infusion. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of second-line CAR-T versus salvage chemoimmunotherapy and consolidative ASCT. DESIGN: State-transition microsimulation model. DATA SOURCES: ZUMA-7, TRANSFORM, other trials, and observational data. TARGET POPULATION: "High-risk" patients with DLBCL. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Health care sector. INTERVENTION: Axi-cel or liso-cel versus ASCT. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB) in 2022 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $200 000 per QALY. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: The increase in median overall survival was 4 months for axi-cel and 1 month for liso-cel. For axi-cel, the ICER was $684 225 per QALY and the iNMB was -$107 642. For liso-cel, the ICER was $1 171 909 per QALY and the iNMB was -$102 477. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: To be cost-effective with a WTP of $200 000, the cost of CAR-T would have to be reduced to $321 123 for axi-cel and $313 730 for liso-cel. Implementation in high-risk patients would increase U.S. health care spending by approximately $6.8 billion over a 5-year period. LIMITATION: Differences in preinfusion bridging therapies precluded cross-trial comparisons. CONCLUSION: Neither second-line axi-cel nor liso-cel was cost-effective at a WTP of $200 000 per QALY. Clinical outcomes improved incrementally, but costs of CAR-T must be lowered substantially to enable cost-effectiveness. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: No research-specific funding.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Células Madre Hematopoyéticas , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso , Receptores Quiméricos de Antígenos , Humanos , Análisis de Costo-Efectividad , Receptores Quiméricos de Antígenos/uso terapéutico , Trasplante Autólogo , Linfoma de Células B Grandes Difuso/terapiaRESUMEN
Inequitable uptake of novel therapies (NT) in non-cancer settings are known for patients with lower socioeconomic status (SES), People of Color (POC), and older adults. NT uptake equity in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is not well known. We performed a retrospective cohort study (1/2014-8/2022) of the United States nationwide Flatiron HealthTM electronic health record-derived, de-identified database. We estimated sociodemographic associations with AML NT receipt using incidence rate ratios (IRR). Odds ratios (OR) assessed differences in venetoclax (the most common NT) receipt at community sites and between site characteristics and NT adoption. Of 8081 patients (139 sites), 3102 (38%) received a NT. NT use increased annually (IRR 1.14, 95% confidence interval [1.07, 1.22]). NT receipt was similar between Non-Hispanic-Whites and POC (IRR 1.03, [0.91, 1.17]) and as age increased (IRR 1.02 [0.97, 1.07]). At community sites, Non-Hispanic-Whites were less likely to receive venetoclax (OR 0.77 [0.66, 0.91]); older age (OR 1.05 [1.04, 1.05]) and higher area-level SES were associated with venetoclax receipt (OR 1.23 [1.05, 1.43]). Early NT adopting sites had more prescribing physicians (OR 1.25 [1.13, 1.43]) and higher SES strata patients (OR 2.81 [1.08, 7.66]). Inequities in AML NT uptake were seen by SES; for venetoclax, differential uptake reflects its label indication for older adults and those with comorbidities.
Asunto(s)
Leucemia Mieloide Aguda , Humanos , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Leucemia Mieloide Aguda/epidemiología , Compuestos Bicíclicos Heterocíclicos con Puentes , Sulfonamidas/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Although randomized controlled trial data suggest that the more intensive triplet bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRd) is superior to the less intensive doublet lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) in patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM), guidelines have historically recommended Rd over VRd for patients who are frail and may not tolerate a triplet. We identified 2573 patients (median age, 69.7 years) newly diagnosed with MM who were initiated on VRd (990) or Rd (1583) in the national US Veterans Affairs health care System from 2004 to 2020. We measured frailty using the Veterans Affairs Frailty Index. To reduce imbalance in confounding, we matched patients for MM stage and 1:1 based on a propensity score. Patients who were moderate-severely frail had a higher prevalence of stage III MM and myeloma-related frailty deficits than patients who were not frail. VRd vs Rd was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.94) in the overall matched population. Patients who were moderate-severely frail demonstrated the strongest association (HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.97), whereas the association weakened in those who were mildly frail (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.05) and nonfrail (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.67-1.10). VRd vs Rd was associated with a modestly higher incidence of hospitalizations in the overall population, but this association weakened in patients who were moderate-severely frail. Our findings confirm the benefit of VRd over Rd in US veterans and further suggest that this benefit is strongest in patients with the highest levels of frailty, arguing that more intensive treatment of myeloma may be more effective treatment of frailty itself.