A state-of-the-art multi-criteria model for drug benefit-risk analysis

Drug benefit-risk analysis is based on firm clinical evidence related to various safety and efficacy outcomes, such as tolerability, treatment response, and adverse events. In this paper, we propose a new approach for constructing a supporting multi-criteria model that fully takes into account this evidence. Our approach is based on the Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis (SMAA) methodology, which allows us to compute the typical value judgments that support a decision, to quantify uncertainty, and to compute a comprehensive benefit-risk profile. As an example, we constructed a multi-criteria model for the therapeutic group of second-generation antidepressants. We analyzed Fluoxetine, Paroxetine, Sertraline, and Venlafaxine according to relative efficacy and absolute rates of several common adverse drug reactions using meta-analytical data from the literature. Our model showed that there are clear trade-offs among the four drugs. Based on our experiences from this study, SMAA appears to be a suitable approach for quantifying trade-offs and decision uncertainty in drug benefit-risk analysis.

A phase II study of paclitaxel in heavily pretreated patients with small-cell lung cancer.

The purpose of the study was to delineate the efficacy and toxicity of paclitaxel (Taxol, Bristol Myers Squibb) in the treatment of drug resistant small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients with SCLC relapsing within 3 months of cytotoxic therapy received paclitaxel 175 mg m(-2) intravenously over 3 h every 3 weeks. The dose of paclitaxel was adjusted to the toxicity encountered in the previous cycle. Of 24 patients entered into the study, 24 and 21 were assessable for response and toxicity respectively. There were two early deaths and two toxic deaths. No complete and seven partial responses (29%) (95%CI 12-51%) were observed and five patients had disease stabilization. The median survival (n = 21) was 100 days. Life-threatening toxicity occurred in four patients; in others (non)-haematological toxicity was manageable. Paclitaxel is active in drug-resistant SCLC. Further investigation in combination with other active agents in this poor prognosis group is appropriate

Phase I study of high-dose epirubicin and vinorelbine in previously untreated non-small-cell lung cancer stage IIIB-IV.

The aim of the study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for the combination of high-dose epirubicin and vinorelbine in chemotherapy-naive patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Twenty-one patients with stage IIIB and IV NSCLC were treated in a single-centre study with escalating doses of epirubicin and vinorelbine given on an outpatient basis. The first dose level comprised epirubicin 100 mg m-2 on day 1 and vinorelbine 20 mg m-2 (days 1 and 8) given intravenously every 3 weeks. Escalating doses for epirubicin and vinorelbine were respectively 120 (day 1) and 20 (days 1 and 8), 120 (day 1) and 25 (days 1 and 8) and 135 (day 1) and 25 (days 1 and 8) mg m-2. Inclusion criteria were age < or = 75 years, ECOG performance score < or = 2 and normal renal, hepatic and bone marrow functions. Dose-limiting toxicities were thrombocytopenia grade II and neutropenia grade III on day 8, febrile neutropenia, and neutropenia lasting > 7 days. No dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed at the first dose level; at the 135/25 mg m-2 dose level three out of six patients had a DLT which was considered as unacceptable. The only non-haematological toxicity reaching grade III was nausea/vomiting. One patient showed cardiac toxicity. No neurotoxicity and no treatment-related deaths were seen. The maximum tolerated dose of epirubicin and vinorelbine is 135 mg m-2 (day 1) and 25 mg m-2 (days 1 and 8) respectively, causing mainly haematological toxicity. The recommended dose of epirubicin and vinorelbine for phase II studies is found to be 120 mg m-2 and 20 mg m-2 respectively

1st ESMO Consensus Conference in lung cancer; Lugano 2010: Small-cell lung cancer

The 1st ESMO Consensus Conference on lung cancer was held in Lugano, Switzerland on 21st and 22nd May 2010 with the participation of a multidisciplinary panel of leading professionals in pathology and molecular diagnostics and medical, surgical and radiation oncology. Before the conference, the expert panel prepared clinically relevant questions concerning five areas as follows: early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), first-line metastatic NSCLC, second-/third-line NSCLC, NSCLC pathology and molecular testing, and small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) to be addressed through discussion at the Consensus Conference. All relevant scientific literature for each question was reviewed in advance. During the Consensus Conference, the panel developed recommendations for each specific question. The consensus agreement in SCLC is reported in this article. The recommendations detailed here are based on an expert consensus after careful review of published data. All participants have approved this final updat

A phase II study of high dose epirubicin in unresectable non small cell lung cancer.

Epirubicin (EPI), a doxorubicin analogue, is reported to have equal antitumour activity with lower cardiac and systemic toxicity. Recently, the maximum tolerated dose of this drug has been revised upwards with reported increased response rates in several malignancies. We initiated a phase II study of high-dose EPI as initial treatment for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (stage III and IV). Between May 1988 and November 1989, 25 patients were entered. The starting dose of EPI was 135 mg m-2, with dose attenuations and escalations of 15 mg m-2 based on mid-cycle evaluation of toxicity. Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. Nine partial responses (36%, 95% CI: 18-57.5%) and 11 patients with disease stabilisation (44%) were observed. Median (range) time to progression was 19 (3-70) weeks. Median (range) survival is 32 (9-116+) weeks. There were no treatment related deaths. Major side effects were leukocytopenia WHO grade III/IV (23% of courses) and mucositis WHO grade II/III (15% of courses). In two patients left ventricular ejection fraction decreased greater than 15% compared to baseline values after a cumulative Epirubicin dose of 435 mg m-2, and therefore went off study. In none of the patients clinical signs of congestive heart failure were observed. We conclude from our data that high-dose EPI, contrary to previous negative studies using lower doses of EPI, ranks amongst the most active regimens against advanced NSCLC. Toxicity of high-dose EPI is moderate. Further evaluation of this compound in combination regimens is recommended

Peroxiredoxin 4, a novel circulating biomarker for oxidative stress and the risk of incident cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality

BACKGROUND: Oxidative stress has been suggested to play a key role in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The aim of our study was to investigate the associations of serum peroxiredoxin 4 (Prx4), a hydrogen peroxide-degrading peroxidase, with incident CVD and all-cause mortality. We subsequently examined the incremental value of Prx4 for the risk prediction of CVD compared with the Framingham risk score (FRS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed Cox regression analyses in 8141 participants without history of CVD (aged 28 to 75 years; women 52.6%) from the Prevention of Renal and Vascular End-stage Disease (PREVEND) study in Groningen, The Netherlands. Serum Prx4 was measured by an immunoluminometric assay in baseline samples. Main outcomes were: (1) incident CVD events or CVD mortality and (2) all-cause mortality during a median follow-up of 10.5 years. In total, 708 participants (7.8%) developed CVD events or CVD mortality, and 517 participants (6.3%) died. Baseline serum Prx4 levels were significantly higher in participants with incident CVD events or CVD mortality and in those who died than in participants who remained free of outcomes (both P<0.001). In multivariable models with adjustment for Framingham risk factors, hazard ratios were 1.16 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.27, P<0.001) for incident CVD events or CVD mortality and 1.17 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.29, P=0.003) for all-cause mortality per doubling of Prx4 levels. After the addition of Prx4 to the FRS, the net reclassification improvement was 2.7% (P=0.01) using 10-year risk categories of CVD. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated serum Prx4 levels are associated with a significantly higher risk of incident CVD events or CVD mortality and all-cause mortality after adjustment for clinical risk factors. The addition of Prx4 to the FRS marginally improved risk prediction of future CVD

Applying multiple criteria decision analysis to comparative benefit-risk assessment: choosing among statins in primary prevention

Decision makers in different health care settings need to weigh the benefits and harms of alternative treatment strategies. Such health care decisions include marketing authorization by regulatory agencies, practice guideline formulation by clinical groups, and treatment selection by prescribers and patients in clinical practice. Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is a family of formal methods that help make explicit the tradeoffs that decision makers accept between the benefit and risk outcomes of different treatment options. Despite the recent interest in MCDA, certain methodological aspects are poorly understood. This paper presents 7 guidelines for applying MCDA in benefitrisk assessment and illustrates their use in the selection of a statin drug for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. We provide guidance on the key methodological issues of how to define the decision problem, how to select a set of nonoverlapping evaluation criteria, how to synthesize and summarize the evidence, how to translate relative measures to absolute ones that permit comparisons between the criteria, how to define suitable scale ranges, how to elicit partial preference information from the decision makers, and how to incorporate uncertainty in the analysis. Our example on statins indicates that fluvastatin is likely to be the most preferred drug by our decision maker and that this result is insensitive to the amount of preference information incorporated in the analysis