Dataset Information

Comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer treatments for patient-centered outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA Compliant).

ABSTRACT:

Background

In the context of prostate cancer (PCa) characterized by the multiple alternative treatment strategies, comparative effectiveness analysis is essential for informed decision-making. We analyzed the comparative effectiveness of PCa treatments through systematic review and meta-analysis with a focus on outcomes that matter most to newly diagnosed localized PCa patients.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of literature published in English from 1995 to October 2016. A search strategy was employed using terms "prostate cancer," "localized," "outcomes," "mortality," "health related quality of life," and "complications" to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective, and retrospective studies. For observational studies, only those adjusting for selection bias using propensity-score or instrumental-variables approaches were included. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratio was used to assess all-cause and disease-specific mortality. Funnel plots were used to assess the level of bias.

Results

Our search strategy yielded 58 articles, of which 29 were RCTs, 6 were prospective studies, and 23 were retrospective studies. The studies provided moderate data for the patient-centered outcome of mortality. Radical prostatectomy demonstrated mortality benefit compared to watchful waiting (all-cause HR = 0.63 CI = 0.45, 0.87; disease-specific HR = 0.48 CI = 0.40, 0.58), and radiation therapy (all-cause HR = 0.65 CI = 0.57, 0.74; disease-specific HR = 0.51 CI = 0.40, 0.65). However, we had minimal comparative information about tradeoffs between and within treatment for other patient-centered outcomes in the short and long-term.

Conclusion

Lack of patient-centered outcomes in comparative effectiveness research in localized PCa is a major hurdle to informed and shared decision-making. More rigorous studies that can integrate patient-centered and intermediate outcomes in addition to mortality are needed.

SUBMITTER: Jayadevappa R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5419922 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second-most-common chronic and progressive neurodegenerative disease. The long-term use of levodopa leads to a loss of efficacy and to complications. Therefore, many patients with PD have turned to complementary therapies to help relieve their symptoms. Acupuncture is most commonly used as a complementary therapy in patients with PD. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of acupuncture for patients with PD. This study was performed to summarize and evaluate evidence regarding the effectiveness of acupuncture in the relief of PD symptoms.Seven databases, namely, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], and three Korean medical databases, were searched from their inception through August 2015 without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they contained reports of acupuncture compared with no treatment and conventional treatment alone or acupuncture plus conventional treatment compared with conventional treatment alone for PD symptoms. Assessments were performed with the unified PD rating scales (UPDRS) I, II, III, and IV and the total score, the Webster scale, and effectiveness rating. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and the Cochrane risk of bias (ROB).In all, 982 potentially relevant articles were identified; 25 RCTs met our inclusion criterion, 19 of 25 RCTs were high-quality studies (i.e., a score of 6 or higher). The included RCTs showed favorable results for acupuncture plus conventional treatment compared with conventional treatment alone in the UPDRS II, III, and IV and the total score. Acupuncture was effective in relieving PD symptoms compared with no treatment and conventional treatment alone, and acupuncture plus conventional treatment had a more significant effect than conventional treatment alone.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the use of acupuncture for relief of PD symptoms and found that acupuncture has significant positive effects. Acupuncture can be considered as a combination treatment with conventional treatment for patients with PD. Further studies on this topic should be carried out according to rigorous methodological designs in both the East and the West.

Project description:BackgroundWe used various methods for identifying and prioritizing patient-centered outcomes (PCOs) for comparative effectiveness research (CER).MethodsWe considered potential PCOs ("benefits" and "harms") related to (1) gabapentin for neuropathic pain and (2) quetiapine for bipolar depression. Part 1 (April 2014 to March 2015): we searched for PCO research and core outcome sets (COSs). We conducted electronic searches of bibliographic databases and key websites and examined FDA prescribing information and reports of clinical trials and systematic reviews. We asked patient and clinician co-investigators to identify PCOs. Part 2 (not part of our original study protocol): in 2015, we surveyed members of The TMJ Association, Ltd., a patient group associated with temporomandibular disorders (4130 invitations sent). Participants prioritized (1) the importance of six potential benefits and (2) 21 potential harms selected by the investigators in part 1, using stated preference methods. We calculated descriptive statistics.ResultsIn part 1, we identified a COS for pain, the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations. The COS identified several important benefits, but it lacked specific recommendations about which potential harms to include in CER. We did not identify a COS for bipolar depression. Research reports, prescribing information, and patient co-investigators helped identify but not prioritize outcomes. We abandoned our electronic search for PCO research because we found it would be resource-intensive and yield few relevant reports. In part 2, surveying patients was useful for prioritizing PCOs. Members of The TMJ Association, Ltd., completed the survey (N =?746) and successfully prioritized both benefits and harms. Participants did not identify many benefits other than those we identified in part 1; several participants identified additional harms.ConclusionsThese exploratory results could inform future research about identifying and prioritizing PCOs. We found that stakeholder co-investigators and research reports contributed to identifying PCOs; surveying a patient group contributed to prioritizing PCOs. Prioritizing potential harms was particularly challenging because there are many more potential harms than potential benefits. Methods for identifying and prioritizing potential benefits for CER might not be appropriate for harms. Further research is needed to determine the generalizability of these results.

Project description:Corticosteroid sparing is required in 15% to 40% of adults with persistent or chronic primary immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP). Herein, the efficacy of immunomodulatory drugs (dapsone, interferon alpha, danazol, and hydroxychloroquine as second-third-line therapies in ITP is investigated.MEDLINE was searched for studies that included patients with persistent or chronic primary ITP and published before the end of December 2014. Two investigators independently extracted data regarding study design, patient characteristics, dosage schedule, time to response, and occurrence of adverse events. The pooled overall response rate (ORR; platelet count >30?×?10 L) and the complete response rate (CRR; platelet count >100?×?10 L) were evaluated to determine drug efficacy by calculating weighted mean proportion using a fixed or random-effects model according to heterogeneity (I?>?50%). The study was performed following the MOOSE and PRISMA guidelines.A total of 28 studies (415 patients) were included (dapsone: k?=?7 studies, n?=?80; danazol: k?=?12, n?=?224; interferon alpha: k?=?8, n?=?83; hydroxychloroquine: k?=?1, n?=?28). The mean patient age was 50 years (female sex 70%, splenectomy 47%). The ORR and CRR were 55% (95% CI: 44%-66%, I?=?0%) and 21% (95% CI: 13%-31%, I?=?0%), respectively, for dapsone; 42% (95% CI: 22%-65%, I?=?63%) and 18% (95% CI: 10%-29%, I?=?9%), respectively, for interferon alpha; and 58% (95% CI: 42%-72%, I?=?67%) and 29% (95% CI: 19%-42%, I?=?63%), respectively, for danazol. The ORR was 50% (95% CI: 32%-67%) for hydroxychloroquine (data not available for CRR). Meta-regression analysis found a correlation between the ORR for interferon alpha and the splenectomized status of the patient (P?=?.02) and between the CRR for danazol and disease duration (P?<?.001). In total, 73%, 51%, 30%, and 0% of patients who received danazol, dapsone, interferon alpha, and hydroxychloroquine experienced side effects, respectively.The ORR was equivalent for hydroxychloroquine, danazol, and dapsone in ITP. Regarding their low CRR, patients at high risk of infection or at low risk of bleeding should benefit from these treatments. Thanks to their best efficacy and safety profiles, dapsone and hydroxychloroquine in patients with antinuclear antibodies should be preferred over danazol and interferon alpha.

Project description:BackgroundTriple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) lacks the expression of the estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and receptor tyrosine-protein kinase erbB-2 (HER2/neu), which renders hormone-related endocrine and targeted therapy essentially futile.ObjectiveWe performed a meta-analysis to assess the effects of antitumor regimens in the treatment of TNBC patients.MethodsWe searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, through January 2017 using the following keywords: "triple negative breast cancer," "TNBC," and "random*" without language restrictions. The major outcome in the present analysis was the overall response rate (ORR), and the secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A network meta-analysis and multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression were used to compare antitumor regimens.ResultsWe included 35 articles assessing a total of 8476 TNBC patients in our systematic review. The regimen of Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel (78.2%) was the most likely to improve the ORR in TNBC patients, followed by EndoTAG-1 and Paclitaxel (69.7%), Carboplatin and Paclitaxel (65.0%), and Bevacizumab and Paclitaxel (61.8%). In the patients without metastasis, the regimen of Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel (74.9%) remained the most likely to improve the ORR. We could not analyze the results for patients with metastasis or outcomes of PFS and OS because no >4 regimens formed a network. In the regression analysis, Bevacizumab (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-2.05; P < .001) and Carboplatin (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.62-2.64; P < .001) correlated with superior ORR outcome, and Iniparib (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.11-2.07; P = .009) correlated with superior OS outcome.ConclusionThe regimen including Bevacizumab, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel was the most likely to improve the ORR in TNBC patients and in advanced metastatic TNBC patients. The administration of Bevacizumab and Carboplatin provided greater benefit toward improved patient ORR.