PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S Trippoli

Publications and source records attributed to S Trippoli.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Survival in patients with intermediate or high grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: meta-analysis of randomized studies comparing third generation regimens with CHOP.

In patients with intermediate or high grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), third generation chemotherapy regimens have been introduced to improve survival in comparison with the standard CHOP regimen. However, most studies have found no difference between these two treatments. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of third generation regimens as compared with CHOP. Our study included the randomized controlled trials published in English from 1970 to 1999. After a Medline search, 5 trials were found to meet our inclusion criteria. A total of 1982 patients, that were enrolled in these trials, were included in the survival meta-analysis. Our methodology retrieved patient-level information from all of these subjects; survival up to 9 years after randomization was compared between the two treatment options. The results of our meta-analysis showed that, in comparison with CHOP, third generation chemotherapy did not prolong survival at levels of statistical significance (chi-square by log-rank test = 1.44, P = 0.23). The relative death risk for third generation regimens vs. CHOP was 0.92 (95%CI: 0.80 to 1.06;P = 0.26). We conclude that, on the basis of our meta-analysis, third generation regimens do not confer any survival benefit to patients with intermediate or high grade NHL as compared with CHOP.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗
PubMed2001

Quality of life and utility in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Quality-of-life Study Group of the Master 2 Project in Pharmacoeconomics.

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have determined quality of life in patients with lung cancer, there is still little information about the use of generic questionnaires [e.g. the 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36)] and utility questionnaires [e.g. the EuroQOL instrument (EQ-5D)] in this disease. OBJECTIVES: To (i) measure quality of life and utility in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using the SF-36 and the EuroQOL questionnaires; (ii) to evaluate the impact of some clinical variables on quality of life and utility; (iii) to assess the correlation between the measurements produced by the 2 questionnaires. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: 95 patients from 15 Italian hospitals with NSCLC (93% male, mean age 62 years) completed both questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean scores for the 8 domains of the SF-36 ranged from 20.8 (physical role) to 63.0 (social functioning). The mean physical and mental summed scores of the SF-36 were 36.8 [standard deviation (SD) 9.8] and 43.0 (SD 11.5), respectively. The EuroQOL mean score was 0.58 (SD 0.32) in the self-classifier (SC) version and 0.58 (SD 0.20) in the visual analogue scale (VAS) version. Among the clinical variables that affected quality of life and utility, the presence of metastasis had the greatest impact: patients with metastasis had statistically significantly lower scores for 2 domains of the SF-36 (physical functioning, p = 0.009; bodily pain, p = 0.016), for the physical component summed score of the SF-36 (p = 0.015) and for both utility estimates (EuroQOL-SC, p = 0.027; EuroQOL-VAS, p = 0.038) than patients without metastasis. Both the SC and VAS EuroQOL scores showed a statistically significant correlation with each of the 8 domains of the SF-36. The scores for both the SF-36 and the EuroQOL in patients with NSCLC were considerably worse (relative differences ranging from -8 to -73%) than the corresponding values (normative data) previously reported for healthy individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Our study quantified the degree to which quality of life is impaired in patients with NSCLC, showed that the presence of metastasis had an important role, and indicated a strong correlation between the measurements produced by the 2 questionnaires. The EuroQOL measurements obtained from these patients will aid evaluation of the cost-utility ratio for NSCLC therapies.

Aged↗
PubMed2001

Multivariate analysis of factors influencing quality of life and utility in patients with haemophilia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Although several studies have determined quality of life (QOL) in patients with hemophilia, generic questionnaires have rarely been used. The objectives of our study were; 1) to measure QOL and utility in patients with hemophilia using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) and the EuroQOL questionnaires; 2) to evaluate the influence of some clinical variables on QOL and utility; 3) to assess the correlation between the two questionnaires. DESIGN AND METHODS: All consecutive patients with hemophilia were asked to complete the SF-36 and the EuroQOL questionnaires. The following information was recorded from each patient: age, type of hemophilia, severity of disease, HCV and HIV infection, number of bleeding episodes and cumulative dose of coagulation factors over the previous year. These items were entered into a multivariate analysis to assess their effect on QOL. Correlation analyses were conducted to evaluate the relationship between the EuroQOL and SF-36. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients completed the SF-36 and the EuroQOL questionnaires. The mean scores of the SF-36 ranged from 55.2 (general health) to 74.7 (social functioning). The EuroQOLself-classifier and the EuroQOLvas showed a mean score of 0.67 (SD=0.26) and 0.66 (SD=0.17), respectively. Among the clinical variables, age significantly influenced both the EuroQOL and the SF-36 scores. The EuroQOL indices showed a statistically significant correlation with each dimension of the SF-36. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Our study quantified the degree to which QOL is impaired in patients with hemophilia by using both a generic questionnaire and a utility-based approach.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Bleeding and pneumonia in intensive care patients given ranitidine and sucralfate for prevention of stress ulcer: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of ranitidine and sucralfate in the prevention of stress ulcer in critical patients and to assess if these treatments affect the risk of nosocomial pneumonia. DESIGN: Published studies retrieved through Medline and other databases. Five meta-analyses evaluated effectiveness in terms of bleeding rates (A: ranitidine v placebo; B: sucralfate v placebo) and infectious complications in terms of incidence of nosocomial pneumonia (C: ranitidine v placebo; D: sucralfate v placebo; E: ranitidine v sucralfate). Trial quality was determined with an empirical ad hoc procedure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding and nosocomial pneumonia (compared between the two study arms and expressed with odds ratios specific for individual studies and meta-analytic summary odds ratios). RESULTS: Meta-analysis A (five studies) comprised 398 patients; meta-analysis C (three studies) comprised 311 patients; meta-analysis D (two studies) comprised 226 patients: and meta-analysis E (eight studies) comprised 1825 patients. Meta-analysis B was not carried out as the literature search selected only one clinical trial. In meta-analysis A ranitidine was found to have the same effectiveness as placebo (odds ratio of bleeding 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.30 to 1.70, P=0.46). In placebo controlled studies (meta-analyses C and D) ranitidine and sucralfate had no influence on the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia. In comparison with sucralfate, ranitidine significantly increased the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia (meta-analysis E: 1.35, 1.07 to 1.70, P=0.012). The mean quality score in the four analyses (on a 0 to 10 scale) ranged from 5.6 in meta-analysis E to 6.6 in meta-analysis A. CONCLUSIONS: Ranitidine is ineffective in the prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients in intensive care and might increase the risk of pneumonia. Studies on sucralfate do not provide conclusive results. These findings are based on small numbers of patients, and firm conclusions cannot presently be proposed.

Anti-Ulcer Agents↗
PubMed2000

Survival in patients with metastatic breast cancer: analysis of randomized studies comparing oral aromatase inhibitors versus megestrol.

In patients with metastatic breast cancer, second-line therapy with aromatase inhibitors can improve survival in comparison with megestrol. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of aromatase inhibitors versus megestrol. After a Medline search, three trials (evaluating letrozole, anastrozole or exemestane versus megestrol) were included in the survival meta-analysis. Our methodology retrieved patient-level information on survival. In comparison with megestrol, aromatase inhibitors prolonged survival at levels of statistical significance (relative death risk for oral aromatase inhibitors=0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.91; p=0.0011). A lifetime analysis of the pooled survival curves of aromatase inhibitors versus megestrol found a mean survival gain of 4.1 months per patient. Aromatase inhibitors confer a significant survival benefit to patients with metastatic breast cancer as compared with megestrol. A preliminary calculation of the cost per life year gained shows that the pharmacoeconomic profile of these drugs is favorable.

Anastrozole↗
PubMed1999

Retrospective survival analysis and cost-effectiveness evaluation of second allogeneic bone marrow transplantation in patients with acute leukemia. Gruppo Italiano Trapianto di Midollo Osseo.

The therapeutic options for patients with acute leukemia who relapse after the initial transplant include second bone marrow transplantation (2BMT) and conventional chemotherapy (CC). In this work, we conducted an analysis of published survival data and we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of 2BMT in comparison with CC. We retrieved survival information on 167 patients treated with 2BMT and 299 patients treated with CC. Survival figures were derived from individual patient data and were compared between 2BMT and CC. The mean lifetime survival (MLS) was estimated for each of the two patient cohorts using standard techniques of survival-curve extrapolation. The cost data of patients given 2BMT or CC were estimated from published data. Our analysis of individual survival data showed that 2BMT improved survival at levels of statistical significance (survival gain = 19.6 months per patient). Using an incremental cost of $90000 per patient, the cost-effectiveness ratio of 2BMT in comparison with CC was calculated as $52215 discounted dollars per discounted life year gained. Our results indicate that, in patients with acute leukemia who relapse after their first transplant, 2BMT significantly prolongs survival in comparison with CC and seems to have an acceptable cost-effectiveness profile.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1999

Cost effectiveness of riluzole in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Italian Cooperative Group for the Study of Meta-Analysis and the Osservatorio SIFO sui Farmaci.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, long term treatment with riluzole has been reported to improve survival or tracheostomy-free survival in comparison with placebo. We conducted a pharmacoeconomic analysis for estimating the cost per life-year gained using this drug. DESIGN: This study was an incremental cost-effectiveness lifetime analysis. SETTING: The clinical material was derived from 2 placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials comparing riluzole versus usual care without riluzole, which were identified through a literature search based on the IOWA and the Medline systems. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: The study included 633 patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Patient-level information was retrieved from 313 patients treated with riluzole and 320 patients assigned to placebo. Survival after randomisation was compared between the 2 groups using standard statistics (log-rank test and Cox analysis), whereas the lifetime survival gain was estimated using Gompertz extrapolation. Cost data relative to the expenditure for healthcare resources were obtained from published information (using the US average wholesale price for the acquisition cost of riluzole). Sensitivity testing assessed the impact of different cost-of-illness assumptions for treated and untreated patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: Our primary analysis showed that treatment with riluzole significantly prolonged survival [death risk = 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62 to 0.96; p = 0.022]. The lifetime survival gain (including 3% annual discounting) was, on average, 2.3 months per patient, while the incremental cost was around $US12,000 per patient. Hence, the cost-effectiveness ratio of riluzole versus usual care without riluzole was $US62,609 per life-year gained (discounted dollars per discounted years; 95% CI: $US13,458 to $US205,714). The sensitivity analysis, considering different values of national cost for riluzole, suggested an interval for this parameter ranging from $US45,048 to $US62,609. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, riluzole has an unfavourable cost-effectiveness ratio or, at best, a borderline pharmacoeconomic profile.

Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis↗
PubMed1998

Adjunctive lamotrigine therapy in patients with refractory seizures: a lifetime cost-utility analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Lamotrigine as add-on treatment (500 mg per day) is effective in patients with refractory epilepsy, but its high cost requires a pharmacoeconomic analysis. We conducted a retrospective lifetime cost utility study in which clinical data were derived from a recent placebo-controlled clinical trial, cost-of-illness data were drawn from a previous ad-hoc study, and quality-of-life values were obtained by prospectively interviewing a separate group of 81 patients referred to our institution with epilepsy. RESULTS: Our analysis showed that chronic lamotrigine treatment implies an incremental lifetime cost of about $1,600,000 for every 100 patients. Incremental lifetime utility was around 40 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for every 100 patients. On the basis of these data, adjunctive lamotrigine was estimated to cost approximately $41,000 per QALY gained. Sensitivity testing suggested a range of $25,000-$85,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive lamotrigine (500 mg per day) in refractory epilepsy seems to have a worse pharmacoeconomic profile than many pharmacological treatments commonly used in areas other than epilepsy. Further data are needed to determine if lamotrigine can be equally effective at lower (and less costly) daily doses which could markedly improve its pharmacoeconomic characteristics.

Adjuvants, Pharmaceutic↗
PubMed1998

Pharmacoeconomic profile of taxanes in advanced ovarian cancer.

This article reviews the information currently available on the pharmacoeconomic profile of taxanes in ovarian cancer. Because paclitaxel is the only taxene approved for this clinical indication, our overview is almost entirely focused on the cost-effectiveness profile of this drug. In advanced ovarian cancer, first-line regimens based on paclitaxel have been reported to be more effective than standard therapy based on cyclophosphamide + cisplatin. The improved survival with paclitaxel and the increased cost induced by this drug have prompted a series of pharmacoeconomic analyses, the results of which are summarized and discussed. Three studies, published between 1996 and 1997, calculated the cost per life-year gained using paclitaxel + cisplatin as opposed to cyclophosphamide + cisplatin. The estimates of survival gain and increased expenditure using paclitaxel were very similar; consequently, the results produced by these three analyses were homogeneous with values of cost per life-year gained around $20000. Because this value is below the conventional limit of $50000, the pharmacoeconomic results on paclitaxel suggest a favorable cost-effectiveness profile. Docetaxel is another taxane proposed for the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer; however, the drug has not yet been approved for this clinical indication and so a pharmacoeconomic assessment on this agent is still premature.

Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic↗
PubMed1998

Treatments for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer: analysis of survival data and cost-effectiveness evaluation.

The main therapeutic options currently available for patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer include: (i) cisplatin-based chemotherapy at conventional doses without paclitaxel, (ii) paclitaxel+cisplatin at conventional doses and (iii) high-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic rescue. After conducting a literature search to identify large-scale clinical trials based on these three therapeutic modalities, we carried out an analysis of the survival data and evaluated the cost-effectiveness ratio where appropriate. Cost data were obtained from published information. Effectiveness was estimated by determining the values of mean lifetime survival (MLS). Our analysis included a total of 15 clinical trials. The values of MLS were 3.05 years per patient for cisplatin-based chemotherapy at conventional doses without paclitaxel (1931 patients), 2.95 years per patient for chemotherapy with paclitaxel+cisplatin at conventional doses (184 patients) and 5.76 years per patient for high-dose chemotherapy with autologous hematopoietic rescue (53 patients). As compared with cisplatin-based chemotherapy without paclitaxel, high-dose treatments with hematopoietic rescue yielded a significantly better survival. Using cisplatin-based chemotherapy as a reference term, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for high-dose treatments was $25641 per life year gained (discounted dollars per discounted life year gained). Sensitivity testing suggested that the ratio remained below $50000 under most circumstances. We conclude that in the treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer, high-dose chemotherapy with hematopoietic rescue seems to be more effective and more cost-effective than standard treatments with cisplatin-based regimens at conventional doses.

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols↗