PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

C C Earle

Publications and source records attributed to C C Earle.

20 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

A comparison of the costs of paclitaxel and best supportive care in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the expenditures associated with single-agent paclitaxel (Taxol) with those of best supportive care as treatment for stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: The primary data sets of 2 phase II trials of paclitaxel in advanced NSCLC were obtained. Paclitaxel delivery costs were estimated at the Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre using the mean paclitaxel dose from the 2 phase II trials, 214 mg/m2, a 3-week schedule and a median of 3 treatment cycles. Data regarding dosage, costs and survival were incorporated into the Statistics Canada POpulation HEalth Model (POHEM), which generated hypothetical cohorts of patients treated either with best supportive care or paclitaxel. The POHEM model assigned diagnostic workup, treatment, disease progression and survival characteristics to each of these cohorts and tabulated the costs associated with each. RESULTS: The total cost of administering 3 cycles of chemotherapy was Can$8143 per patient. The strategy of treating NSCLC patients with paclitaxel cost $3375 more per patient than best supportive care. On the basis of the difference in survival duration between stage IV patients treated in the best supportive care arm of a previous National Cancer Institute of Canada trial and those represented in the pooled phase II survival results, the cost per life-year saved was $4778. For sensitivity analyses, the days of hospitalization for terminal care, number of cycles given and survival benefit produced were varied. The sensitivity analysis produced a cost per life-year saved of up to $21,377 under the least favourable assumptions. CONCLUSION: If large phase III trials confirm the survival benefits observed in the phase II trials, paclitaxel can be considered to be a cost-effective agent in the management of advanced NSCLC.

Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic↗

An assessment of methods to combine published survival curves.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracies of different techniques for combining published survival curves, for use in disease modeling applications. METHODS: Five methods were identified: 1) iterative generalized least-squares (IGLS), 2) meta-analysis of failure-time data with adjustment for covariates (MFD), 3) nonlinear regression (NLR), 4) log relative risk (LRR), and 5) weighted LRR (w-LRR). Each method was used to combine the survival curves from eight single-arm Phase II trials of chemotherapy in 918 patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The resulting summary curves were compared with the curve calculated from the corresponding individual patient data (IPD). RESULTS: All methods were able to produce accurate summary survival curves statistically similar to the IPD-derived curve. Maximum discrepancies ranged from 1.8% to 4.7%. MFD appeared to be the most accurate when censoring information was complete. Characteristics of the component trials that adversely affected the accuracies of the different techniques were 1) a high proportion of censored observations (MFD); 2) variability in the length of follow-up (IGLS, NLR, LRR, w-LRR); and 3) the heterogeneity of the treatment results (NLR, w-LRR). CONCLUSIONS: All methods were able to accurately reproduce summary survival curves from the published literature. The best method depends on characteristics of the data and the purpose of the analysis.

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung↗