European journal of cancer : official journal for European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) [and] European Association for Cancer Research (EACR)
-
There is no Spanish Government agency resembling the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom (UK) that carries out a centralised evaluation and makes decisions about funding. Therefore, we aim to assess the differences between NICE and the Spanish bodies in terms of their respective processes. We compare the decisions concerning cancer drugs in the assessments made by NICE/Single Technology Appraisal with assessments made by MADRE methodology. ⋯ More drugs are assessed in Spain than by NICE because there are more organisations in Spain doing this work and their processes are simpler. NICE rejects more drugs as it uses cost-effectiveness thresholds that lead to a 'not-recommended' decision, and Spanish bodies recommend cancer drugs for subgroups of patients where better results can be obtained. Timelines are better for Spanish Committees, probably because of the greater number of steps in the appraisal process by NICE.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
A randomised, double-blind study comparing the addition of bicalutamide with or without dutasteride to GnRH analogue therapy in men with non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer.
Bicalutamide blocks androgen action and is frequently used in men with non-metastatic, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). By reducing intracellular dihydrotestosterone, dutasteride (dual 5-alpha reductase inhibitor) could increase the effectiveness of bicalutamide in this setting. The objective of the study is therefore to prospectively evaluate dutasteride plus bicalutamide in men with asymptomatic, non-metastatic CRPC with rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA). ⋯ In men with non-metastatic CRPC, adding dutasteride to bicalutamide did not significantly prolong TDP. Prospective data are provided concerning the common practice of using bicalutamide in this setting.
-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Survival prediction for advanced cancer patients in the real world: A comparison of the Palliative Prognostic Score, Delirium-Palliative Prognostic Score, Palliative Prognostic Index and modified Prognosis in Palliative Care Study predictor model.
The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and accuracy of the Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP score), Delirium-Palliative Prognostic Score (D-PaP score), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) and modified Prognosis in Palliative Care Study predictor model (PiPS model). ⋯ The PaP score, D-PaP score, PPI and modified PiPS model provided distinct survival groups for patients in the three palliative care settings and those receiving chemotherapy. The PPI seems to be suitable for routine clinical use for situations where rough estimates of prognosis are sufficient and/or patients do not want invasive procedure. If clinicians can address more items, the modified PiPS-A would be a non-invasive alternative. In cases where blood samples are available or those requiring more accurate prediction, the PaP and D-PaP scores and modified PiPS-B would be more appropriate.
-
Gaining insight in long-term health-related quality of life more than 1year after oesophagectomy will assist clinical decision-making and inform patients about the long-term consequences of surgery. ⋯ Global HRQL more than 1year after oesophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction is comparable to the general Dutch background population, while specific functional and symptom scores are significantly worse. Neoadjuvant therapy and minimally invasive surgery are associated with quality of life benefits in long-term survivors.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Survival benefit of early androgen receptor inhibitor therapy in locally advanced prostate cancer: long-term follow-up of the SPCG-6 study.
The optimal timing of endocrine therapy in non-metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is still an issue of debate. ⋯ Throughout the 14.6year follow-up period the addition of early bicalutamide to standard of care resulted in a significant OS benefit in patients with locally advanced PCa. In contrast, patients with localised PCa and low PSA derived no survival benefit from early bicalutamide. The optimal timing for initiating bicalutamide in non-metastatic PCa patients is dependent on disease stage and baseline PSA.