Notice

This is not the latest version of this item. The latest version can be found at:https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/131911.2

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSilberholz, John
dc.contributor.authorBertsimas, Dimitris
dc.contributor.authorVahdat, Linda
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-20T17:30:55Z
dc.date.available2021-09-20T17:30:55Z
dc.date.issued2019-05-14
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131911
dc.description.abstractAbstract Purpose Oncologists, clinical trialists, and guideline developers need tools that enable them to efficiently review the settings and results of previous studies testing metastatic breast cancer (MBC) drug therapies. Methods We searched the literature to identify clinical trials testing MBC drug therapies. Key eligibility criteria included at least 90% of patients enrolled in the trial having MBC, therapeutic clinical trials, and Phase II–III studies. Studies were stratified based on patients’ tumor receptor statuses and prior exposure to therapy. Survival and toxicity of each drug therapy were estimated from randomized controlled trials using network meta-analysis and from all studies using meta-analysis. These results, along with estimated drug costs, are presented in a web-based visualization tool. Results We included 1865 studies containing 2676 treatment arms and 184,563 patients in the tool ( http://www.cancertrials.info ). Meta-analysis-based efficacy and toxicity estimates are available for 85 HER-2-directed therapies, 84 hormonal therapies, and 442 undirected therapies. Network meta-analysis-based estimates are available for 16 HER-2-directed therapies, 26 hormonal therapies, and 131 undirected therapies. Conclusions In this era of increasing choices of MBC therapeutic agents and no superior approach to choosing a treatment regimen, the ability to compare multiple therapies based on survival, toxicity and cost would enable treating physicians to optimize therapeutic choices for patients. For investigators, it can point them in research directions that were previously non-obvious and for guideline designers, enable them to efficiently review the MBC clinical trial literature and visualize how regimens compare in the key dimensions of clinical benefit, toxicity, and cost.en_US
dc.publisherSpringer USen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05208-wen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alikeen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceSpringer USen_US
dc.titleClinical benefit, toxicity and cost of metastatic breast cancer therapies: systematic review and meta-analysisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's final manuscripten_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2020-09-24T21:35:31Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderSpringer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
dspace.embargo.termsY
dspace.date.submission2020-09-24T21:35:31Z
mit.licenseOPEN_ACCESS_POLICY
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Needed


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

VersionItemDateSummary

*Selected version