Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cancers (Basel) ; 16(8)2024 Apr 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38672610

RESUMEN

The objective of this single-center retrospective study was to describe the clinical characteristics of adult patients with solid tumors enrolled in cancer clinical trials over a 10-year period (2010-2019) and to assess drug cost avoidance (DCA) associated with sponsors' contributions. The sponsors' contribution to pharmaceutical expenditure was calculated according to the actual price (for each year) of pharmaceutical specialties that the Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (HUVH) would have had to bear in the absence of sponsorship. A total of 2930 clinical trials were conducted with 10,488 participants. There were 140 trials in 2010 and 459 in 2019 (228% increase). Clinical trials of high complexity phase I and basket trials accounted for 34.3% of all trials. There has been a large variation in the pattern of clinical research over the study period, whereas, in 2010, targeted therapy accounted for 79.4% of expenditure and cytotoxic drugs for 20.6%; in 2019, immunotherapy accounted for 68.4%, targeted therapy for 24.4%, and cytotoxic drugs for only 7.1%. A total of four hundred twenty-one different antineoplastic agents were used, the variability of which increased from forty-seven agents in 2010, with only seven of them accounting for 92.8% of the overall pharmaceutical expenditure) to three hundred seventeen different antineoplastic agents in 2019, with thirty-three of them accounting for 90.6% of the overall expenditure. The overall expenditure on antineoplastic drugs in clinical care patients not included in clinical trials was EUR 120,396,096. The total cost of antineoplastic drugs supplied by sponsors in a clinical trial setting was EUR 107,306,084, with a potential DCA of EUR 92,662,609. Overall, clinical trials provide not only the best context for the progress of clinical research and healthcare but also create opportunities for reducing cancer care costs.

2.
Neurology ; 100(3): e308-e323, 2023 01 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36192175

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), aquaporin-4 antibody-positive neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (AQP4-NMOSD), and myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody-associated disease (MOGAD) may have overlapping clinical features. There is an unmet need for imaging markers that differentiate between them when serologic testing is unavailable or ambiguous. We assessed whether imaging characteristics typical of MS discriminate RRMS from AQP4-NMOSD and MOGAD, alone and in combination. METHODS: Adult, nonacute patients with RRMS, APQ4-NMOSD, and MOGAD and healthy controls were prospectively recruited at the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (London, United Kingdom) and the Walton Centre (Liverpool, United Kingdom) between 2014 and 2019. They underwent conventional and advanced brain, cord, and optic nerve MRI and optical coherence tomography (OCT). RESULTS: A total of 91 consecutive patients (31 RRMS, 30 APQ4-NMOSD, and 30 MOGAD) and 34 healthy controls were recruited. The most accurate measures differentiating RRMS from AQP4-NMOSD were the proportion of lesions with the central vein sign (CVS) (84% vs 33%, accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 91/88/93%, p < 0.001), followed by cortical lesions (median: 2 [range: 1-14] vs 1 [0-1], accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 84/90/77%, p = 0.002) and white matter lesions (mean: 39.07 [±25.8] vs 9.5 [±14], accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 78/84/73%, p = 0.001). The combination of higher proportion of CVS, cortical lesions, and optic nerve magnetization transfer ratio reached the highest accuracy in distinguishing RRMS from AQP4-NMOSD (accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 95/92/97%, p < 0.001). The most accurate measures favoring RRMS over MOGAD were white matter lesions (39.07 [±25.8] vs 1 [±2.3], accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 94/94/93%, p = 0.006), followed by cortical lesions (2 [1-14] vs 1 [0-1], accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 84/97/71%, p = 0.004), and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFL) (mean: 87.54 [±13.83] vs 75.54 [±20.33], accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 80/79/81%, p = 0.009). Higher cortical lesion number combined with higher RNFL thickness best differentiated RRMS from MOGAD (accuracy/specificity/sensitivity: 84/92/77%, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Cortical lesions, CVS, and optic nerve markers achieve a high accuracy in distinguishing RRMS from APQ4-NMOSD and MOGAD. This information may be useful in clinical practice, especially outside the acute phase and when serologic testing is ambiguous or not promptly available. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that selected conventional and advanced brain, cord, and optic nerve MRI and OCT markers distinguish adult patients with RRMS from AQP4-NMOSD and MOGAD.


Asunto(s)
Esclerosis Múltiple Recurrente-Remitente , Esclerosis Múltiple , Neuromielitis Óptica , Humanos , Esclerosis Múltiple/diagnóstico por imagen , Acuaporina 4 , Glicoproteína Mielina-Oligodendrócito , Retina/patología , Esclerosis Múltiple Recurrente-Remitente/diagnóstico por imagen , Autoanticuerpos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...