佐剂环境下的生活质量:2018年至2022年美国食品药品监督管理局批准的抗癌药物的荟萃分析

IF 2 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Journal of Cancer Policy Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jcpo.2023.100426
Timothée Olivier , Claire E.P. Smith , Alyson Haslam , Alfredo Addeo , Vinay Prasad
{"title":"佐剂环境下的生活质量:2018年至2022年美国食品药品监督管理局批准的抗癌药物的荟萃分析","authors":"Timothée Olivier ,&nbsp;Claire E.P. Smith ,&nbsp;Alyson Haslam ,&nbsp;Alfredo Addeo ,&nbsp;Vinay Prasad","doi":"10.1016/j.jcpo.2023.100426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In oncology, quality of life (QoL) questionnaires were historically designed to be used in the advanced or metastatic setting. We sought to determine the effects of contemporary treatments on QoL in the adjuvant setting and to determine if the QoL instruments used in these studies provide a relevant assessment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a systematic identification of all anti-cancer drugs used in the adjuvant setting and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from January 2018 to March 2022. We conducted a quality evaluation and a meta-analysis of reported QoL results. We used the global QoL results when multiple QoL outcomes were reported.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 224 FDA approvals reviewed, of which 12 met the inclusion criteria. The placebo was the control arm in 10 out of 12 trials. Of those, 11 trials (92 %) assessed QoL, and ten (83 %) reported results. In reports with QoL results, a moderate-risk of bias was found in 3 out of 10 (30 %) and a high-risk of bias in 6 out of 10 (60 %) of reports, respectively. No trial reported a meaningful difference between arms. The meta-analysis found an overall detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, though it was not statistically different.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study identified 12 FDA registration trials in the adjuvant setting between 2018 and 2022. We found a moderate- to high-risk of bias in 90 % of the ten trials reporting QoL data. Our meta-analysis suggested a detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, questioning the relevancy, in the adjuvant setting, of thresholds that were mostly developed in the advanced or metastatic setting.</p></div><div><h3>Policy summary</h3><p>Future works should focus on specificities of the adjuvant setting when considering QoL evaluation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":38212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Policy","volume":"37 ","pages":"Article 100426"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of life in the adjuvant setting: A meta-analysis of US Food and Drug Administration approved anti-cancer drugs from 2018 to 2022\",\"authors\":\"Timothée Olivier ,&nbsp;Claire E.P. Smith ,&nbsp;Alyson Haslam ,&nbsp;Alfredo Addeo ,&nbsp;Vinay Prasad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcpo.2023.100426\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In oncology, quality of life (QoL) questionnaires were historically designed to be used in the advanced or metastatic setting. We sought to determine the effects of contemporary treatments on QoL in the adjuvant setting and to determine if the QoL instruments used in these studies provide a relevant assessment.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a systematic identification of all anti-cancer drugs used in the adjuvant setting and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from January 2018 to March 2022. We conducted a quality evaluation and a meta-analysis of reported QoL results. We used the global QoL results when multiple QoL outcomes were reported.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 224 FDA approvals reviewed, of which 12 met the inclusion criteria. The placebo was the control arm in 10 out of 12 trials. Of those, 11 trials (92 %) assessed QoL, and ten (83 %) reported results. In reports with QoL results, a moderate-risk of bias was found in 3 out of 10 (30 %) and a high-risk of bias in 6 out of 10 (60 %) of reports, respectively. No trial reported a meaningful difference between arms. The meta-analysis found an overall detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, though it was not statistically different.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study identified 12 FDA registration trials in the adjuvant setting between 2018 and 2022. We found a moderate- to high-risk of bias in 90 % of the ten trials reporting QoL data. Our meta-analysis suggested a detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, questioning the relevancy, in the adjuvant setting, of thresholds that were mostly developed in the advanced or metastatic setting.</p></div><div><h3>Policy summary</h3><p>Future works should focus on specificities of the adjuvant setting when considering QoL evaluation.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38212,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Policy\",\"volume\":\"37 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213538323000437\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213538323000437","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景在肿瘤学中,生活质量(QoL)问卷历来被设计用于晚期或转移性环境。我们试图确定在辅助治疗中当代治疗对生活质量的影响,并确定这些研究中使用的生活质量工具是否提供了相关评估。方法对2018年1月至2022年3月美国食品药品监督管理局批准的所有用于佐剂设置的抗癌药物进行系统鉴定。我们对报告的生活质量结果进行了质量评估和荟萃分析。当报告多个生活质量结果时,我们使用了全局生活质量结果。结果共审查了224项美国食品药品监督管理局批准,其中12项符合纳入标准。安慰剂是12项试验中的10项试验的对照组。其中,11项试验(92%)评估了生活质量,10项试验(83%)报告了结果。在有生活质量结果的报告中,10份报告中有3份(30%)存在中度偏倚风险,10份中有6份(60%)存在偏倚风险。没有任何试验报告两种武器之间存在有意义的差异。荟萃分析发现,实验组的生活质量总体上受到不利影响,尽管在统计学上没有差异。结论本研究确定了2018年至2022年间在佐剂环境中进行的12项FDA注册试验。在报告生活质量数据的10项试验中,我们发现90%的试验存在中度至高风险的偏倚。我们的荟萃分析表明,这对实验组的生活质量有不利影响,质疑了在辅助治疗中,主要在晚期或转移性治疗中形成的阈值的相关性。政策总结:在考虑生活质量评估时,未来的工作应侧重于佐剂设置的特异性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quality of life in the adjuvant setting: A meta-analysis of US Food and Drug Administration approved anti-cancer drugs from 2018 to 2022

Background

In oncology, quality of life (QoL) questionnaires were historically designed to be used in the advanced or metastatic setting. We sought to determine the effects of contemporary treatments on QoL in the adjuvant setting and to determine if the QoL instruments used in these studies provide a relevant assessment.

Methods

We conducted a systematic identification of all anti-cancer drugs used in the adjuvant setting and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from January 2018 to March 2022. We conducted a quality evaluation and a meta-analysis of reported QoL results. We used the global QoL results when multiple QoL outcomes were reported.

Results

There were 224 FDA approvals reviewed, of which 12 met the inclusion criteria. The placebo was the control arm in 10 out of 12 trials. Of those, 11 trials (92 %) assessed QoL, and ten (83 %) reported results. In reports with QoL results, a moderate-risk of bias was found in 3 out of 10 (30 %) and a high-risk of bias in 6 out of 10 (60 %) of reports, respectively. No trial reported a meaningful difference between arms. The meta-analysis found an overall detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, though it was not statistically different.

Conclusion

This study identified 12 FDA registration trials in the adjuvant setting between 2018 and 2022. We found a moderate- to high-risk of bias in 90 % of the ten trials reporting QoL data. Our meta-analysis suggested a detrimental effect on QoL in the experimental arm, questioning the relevancy, in the adjuvant setting, of thresholds that were mostly developed in the advanced or metastatic setting.

Policy summary

Future works should focus on specificities of the adjuvant setting when considering QoL evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cancer Policy
Journal of Cancer Policy Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.70%
发文量
47
审稿时长
65 days
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to "Cancer research funding in South Asia" [J. Cancer Policy 41 (2024) 100489]. Utilisation Patterns of Radiotherapy Among Older Patients: Insights from Portuguese National Cancer Registry Data. Time in the U.S. and colorectal cancer screening adherence among diverse immigrants Rapid diagnostic pathways for prostate cancer: A realist synthesis Overcoming barriers of cervical cancer elimination in India: A practice to policy level advocacy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1