Romanian
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Clinical lymphoma & myeloma 2007-Apr

Clinical benefits and economic analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone versus doxorubicin/vincristine/dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Numai utilizatorii înregistrați pot traduce articole
Log In / Înregistrare
Linkul este salvat în clipboard
Christopher A Porter
Robert M Rifkin

Cuvinte cheie

Abstract

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin has reduced toxicity compared with conventional doxorubicin. In a noninferiority trial randomizing patients to receive pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 40 mg/m(2) and vincristine 1.4 mg/m(2) (maximum, 2 mg) intravenously on day 1 plus reduced-dose dexamethasone 40 mg orally on days 1-4 (DVd; n = 97) or conventional doxorubicin 9 mg/m(2) per day and vincristine 0.4 mg per day continuous intravenous infusion on days 1-4 plus reduced-dose dexamethasone (VAd; n = 95) for >/= 4 cycles. Treatment was repeated every 4 weeks until maximal response, disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or until patients underwent transplantation. Treatment cost was estimated by applying standard US costs in 2004 to recorded health-care resource utilization units. Outcome measures included response, toxicity, and treatment cost. Objective response rates (DVd, 44%; VAd, 41%), progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.11; P = 0.69), and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.88; P = 0.67) were similar between treatment groups. DVd was associated with significantly less grade 3/4 neutropenia or neutropenic fever (10% vs. 24%; P = 0.01), less sepsis, antibiotic use, growth factor support, and alopecia, but more hand-foot syndrome. Study drug costs were significantly higher for DVd versus VAd; however, lower costs for drug administration and supportive care more than offset this difference, resulting in nominally lower overall study drug treatment costs for DVd (DVd, $34,442; VAd, $35,846; P = 0.76). The DVd regimen demonstrated similar efficacy and cost with less toxicity and supportive care compared with VAd. This should improve clinical utility and optimize the opportunity for transplantation.

Alăturați-vă paginii
noastre de facebook

Cea mai completă bază de date cu plante medicinale susținută de știință

  • Funcționează în 55 de limbi
  • Cure pe bază de plante susținute de știință
  • Recunoașterea ierburilor după imagine
  • Harta GPS interactivă - etichetați ierburile în locație (în curând)
  • Citiți publicațiile științifice legate de căutarea dvs.
  • Căutați plante medicinale după efectele lor
  • Organizați-vă interesele și rămâneți la curent cu noutățile de cercetare, studiile clinice și brevetele

Tastați un simptom sau o boală și citiți despre plante care ar putea ajuta, tastați o plantă și vedeți boli și simptome împotriva cărora este folosit.
* Toate informațiile se bazează pe cercetări științifice publicate

Google Play badgeApp Store badge