Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Rio de Janeiro; s.n; 2019. 131 f p. tab, graf, fig.
Thesis in Portuguese | LILACS | ID: biblio-1048493

ABSTRACT

O câncer de próstata é no mundo e no Brasil. Alguns pacientes são diagnosticados em fase avançada um problema de saúde pública com alta prevalência ou progridem para tal após o tratamento inicial. Na fase do câncer de próstata metastático castração resistente (CPMCR), o emprego do acetato de abiraterona (AA) e enzalutamida (ENZ) surgem como alternativas de tratamento. O objetivo da tese foi sintetizar as evidências científicas disponíveis, através de uma revisão sistemática (RS), sobre a segurança e eficácia do AA e ENZ empregados em homens com CPMCR antes e após a quimioterapia. Procurou-se também avaliar os mesmos atributos das tecnologias em idosos com idade ≥ 75 anos e pacientes com metástase visceral. Foram pesquisadas cinco bases de dados bibliográficas eletrônicas ­ Medline, Embase, Lilacs, Scopus, Web of Science ­ e duas bases de registros de ensaios clínicos - CENTRAL e ClinicalTrials. Foram utilizados descritores do Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) e termos livres correspondentes ao problema de saúde e às tecnologias de interesse, combinados com uso dos operadores booleanos AND e OR, sem restrição inicial de idioma. Foram incluídos artigos no período de janeiro de 2006 a dezembro de 2018. Todas as etapas da RS foram realizadas por dois revisores independentes. A qualidade metodológica foi avaliada utilizando-se a ferramenta da Colaboração Cochrane. Foram identificadas 9.465 referências, sendo que apenas 29 artigos seguiram para fase de análise dos textos completos. Na segunda fase, apenas 12 estudos foram incluídos, com seis correspondentes a ensaios clínicos fase III originais, quatro contemplando o uso da AA (dois utilizando AA antes da QT e outros dois após-QT) e dois com utilização de ENZ (um antes da QT e um após a QT). Outros seis estudos trataram da análise de subgrupos, idade > 75 anos e com presença de metástase visceral. A sobrevida global e o tempo livre de progressão radiológica mostraram resultados favoráveis ao uso de AA e ENZ, inclusive em indivíduos na faixa etária com mais de 75 anos e com presença de metástase visceral com ganho de sobrevida de aproximadamente quatro meses. Os medicamentos evidenciaram baixas taxas de eventos adversos de graus moderados e graves, não havendo diferença estatística em relação ao uso do placebo em relação a eventos adversos grau V (entre 3,5 e 3,7%), e na taxa de descontinuidade do tratamento, ao redor de 6 a 8%. Ambos os medicamentos AA e ENZ evidenciaram benefícios similares. A despeito dos resultados favoráveis, estes apoiam-se em poucos ECCR fase III, o que deve ser levado em conta em decisões de eventual incorporação ao Sistema Único de Saúde


Prostate cancer is a public health problem with high prevalence worldwide and in Brazil. Some patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage or progress to it after initial treatment. In the phase of castration resistant metastatic prostate cancer (CPMCR), the use of abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide (ENZ) appear as treatment alternatives. The aim of the thesis was to synthesize the available scientific evidence through a systematic review (SR) on the safety and efficacy of AA and ENZ employed in men with CPMCR before and after chemotherapy (QT). We also sought to evaluate the same attributes of technologies in the elderly aged ≥ 75 years and patients with visceral metastasis. We searched five electronic bibliographic databases - Medline, Embase, Lilacs, Scopus, Web of Science - and two clinical trial record databases - CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) descriptors and free terms corresponding to the health problem and the technologies of interest were used, combined with the use of AND and OR boolean operators, without initial language restriction. Articles were included from January 2006 to December 2018. All stages of RS were performed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. 9,465 references were identified, and only 29 articles went to the full text analysis phase. In the second phase, only 12 studies were included, with six corresponding to original phase III clinical trials, four contemplating the use of AA (two using AA before QT and two after QT) and two using ENZ (one before QT and one after QT). Another six studies dealt with subgroup analysis, age> 75 years and visceral metastasis. Overall survival and time-free radiological progression showed favorable results for the use of AA and ENZ, even in individuals over 75 years of age and visceral metastasis with a survival gain of approximately four months. The drugs showed low rates of moderate and severe adverse events, with no statistical difference regarding placebo use compared to grade V adverse events (between 3.5 and 3.7%), and treatment discontinuation rate. , around 6 to 8%. Both AA and ENZ drugs showed similar benefits. Despite the favorable results, they are supported by few phase III ECCRs, which should be taken into account in decisions of eventual incorporation into the Unified Health System


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Technology Assessment, Biomedical , Antineoplastic Agents/adverse effects
2.
urol. colomb. (Bogotá. En línea) ; 28(2): 154-160, 2019. ilus, tab, graf
Article in Spanish | LILACS, COLNAL | ID: biblio-1402338

ABSTRACT

Introducción Actualmente se dispone de nuevos medicamentos que aumentan la supervivencia en pacientes con cáncer de próstata resistente a la castración. Entre ellos están la Enzalutamida y la Abiraterona. Actualmente no se dispone de experimentos clínicos comparativos. Este estudio tiene como objetivo identificar las diferencias entre la Enzalutamida y la Abiraterona, a través de un modelo de comparación indirecta de tratamientos en pacientes con cáncer de próstata metastásico resistente a la castración. Materiales y Métodos Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática de la literatura incluyendo ensayos clínicos aleatorizados, en pacientes con cáncer de próstata resistente a la castración que recibieron manejo con Enzalutamida y Abiraterona; tomando como desenlace la supervivencia global y libre de progresión radiológica. Se realizó una comparación de la información y un modelo de Bucher para datos indirectos. Resultados Se incluyeron 2 experimentos clínicos fase 3 de manejo pre quimioterapia y 2 en manejo postquimioterapia. Se involucraron 1418 pacientes en el grupo de estudio prequimioterapia y 1596 en el grupo de estudio postquimioterapia. Al comparar la Enzalutamida versus Abiraterona, no se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas. En la prequimioterapia, la supervivencia global con HR 0,87 (95%IC 0,70­1,09) (p = 0,94), supervivencia libre de progresion radiológica con HR 0,35 (95% IC 0,28­0,44) (p = 0,81) y en postquimioterapia, supervivencia global con HR 0,85 (95% IC 0,67­1,06) (p = 0,82) y supervivencia libre de progresión radiológica con HR 0,60 (95% IC 0,49­0,74) (p = 0,82). Conclusiones No existe una diferencia estadísticamente significativa en la supervivencia global y libre de progresión radiológica entre los dos medicamentos.


Introduction and Objective From translational medicine, development of new drugs that increase survival in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer is obtained. Among these are abiraterone and Enzalutamide, with different mechanisms of action, but with an aplication in the same clinical stage. Currently, there are no comparative clinical trials between these drugs. This study aims to identify the differences between Enzalutamide and Abiraterone through a model of indirect comparison of treatment in patients with castration resistant prostate cancer in pre and post chemotherapy stages. Materials and Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted including randomized phase 3 clinical trials in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving management with Enzalutamide and Abiraterone compared with placebo or corticoid in pre and post chemotherapy stages, taking as outcome overall survival and radiologic progression-free survival. In addition to the demographic analysis, a comparison of information and a modified model of Bucher for indirect data was performed, with the statistical program Stata version 12 and ICT CADTH program. Results 2 Phase III clinical trials were included in the pre chemotherapy stage and 2 in postchemotherapy stage. 1418 patients in the study group prechemotherapy and 1596 in the post- chemotherapy group study were involved. Control groups involved 1387 and 796 cases respectively. When comparing Enzalutamide vs Abiraterone in the pre chemotherapy group, no statistically significant difference was noted in overall survival HR 0.87 (95% CI 0.70 - 1.09) (p = 0.94) and radiologic progression-free survival HR 0.35 (95 % CI 0.28 to 0.44) (p = 0.81). In post-chemotherapy group, overall survival HR 0.85 (95 % CI 0.67 - 1.06) (p = 0.82) and radiologic progression-free survival HR 0.60 (95 % CI 0.49 to 0.74 ) (p = 0.82) no statistically significant difference was noted. Conclusions There is no statistically significant difference in overall survival and radiologic progression-free survival between the two drugs. The indirect comparison of treatments offers a valid alternative in the absence of direct comparative clinical experiences.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms , Pharmaceutical Preparations , Castration , Drug Therapy , Therapeutics , Control Groups , Adrenal Cortex Hormones , Information Technology , Survivorship , Progression-Free Survival
3.
J. bras. econ. saúde (Impr.) ; 8(2): 141-148, ago. 2016.
Article in Portuguese | ECOS, LILACS | ID: biblio-2089

ABSTRACT

Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi estimar o número necessário a tratar (NNT) e custo por evento evitado (COPE) de enzalutamida (ENZ) em comparação com abiraterona+prednisona (AA+P) em 12 e 24 meses sob perspectiva do sistema de saúde suplementar em pacientes com câncer de próstata resistente à castração metastático (CPRCM) sem quimioterapia prévia. Métodos: O NNT é calculado pelo inverso da diferença do risco absoluto de uma intervenção versus placebo; adicionalmente, o COPE representa o NNT multiplicado pelo custo de tratamento total de um período determinado. O risco absoluto de ENZ e AA+P e seus respectivos controles foram obtidos das curvas de sobrevida livre de progressão radiográfica (SLPr) e sobrevida global (SG) dos estudos PREVAIL e COU-AA-302, respectivamente. A duração de tratamento média no horizonte de 24 meses foi estimada utilizando a área sob a curva das respectivas curvas de SLPr. Os resultados foram a comparação entre ENZ e AA+P versus seus respectivos placebos em 12 e 24 meses para NNT e COPE. O custo total de tratamento consistiu em custos de medicamento, monitoramento, e manejo de eventos adversos (≥1%, eventos de interesses especiais). Resultados: A análise de 12 meses resultou em NNTSG/ENZ= 12,79; NNTSLPr/ENZ= 2,59; NNTSG/AA+P= 116,28; NNTSLPr/AA+P= 4,72 e COPESG/ENZ= BRL 1.626.583; COPESLPr/ENZ= BRL 329.701; COPESG/AA+P= BRL 15.144.886; COPESLPr/AA+P= BRL 614.368. Para a análise de 24 meses, os resultados foram: NNTSG/ENZ= 11,00; NNTSLPr/ENZ= 3,58; NNTSG/AA+P= 16,56; NNTSLPr/AA+P= 5,00 e COPESG/ENZ= BRL 1.965.454; COPESLPr/ENZ= BRL 639.327; COPESG/AA+P= BRL 2.833.580; COPESLPr/AA+P= BRL 855.741. Conclusão: Para ambos horizontes de tempo, os resultados foram favoráveis para ENZ vs. AA+P em pacientes com CPRCM.


Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the NNT and COPE of enzalutamide (ENZ) in comparison with abiraterone acetate+prednisone (AA+P) over a 12-month and 24-month period from the Supplementary Health System perspective in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients who are chemotherapy naïve (MCRPC). Methods: The NNT is calculated by the inverse of the absolute risk reduction of an intervention vs. control; additionally, COPE represents the NNT multiplied by total cost of treatment in a pre-defined period. The absolute risk of ENZ and AA+P, and their respective control treatments, were obtained from the Kaplan Meier curves for the co-primary end points of radiographic progression free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS) from the clinical studies PREVAIL and COU-AA-302, respectively. Mean treatment duration was estimated utilizing the area under curve (AUC) technique from the respective intervention rPFS curves. The results analyzed ENZ or AA+P versus its respective placebo at 12 and 24 months for NNT and COPE. Total treatment cost consisted of drug cost, monitoring cost and adverse event (>=1% incidence and special interest adverse events) related cost. Results: The 12 month analysis resulted in NNTOS/ENZ= 12.79; NNTrPFS/ENZ= 2.59; NNTOS/AA+P= 116.28; NNTrPFS/AA+P= 4.72 and COPEOS/ENZ= BRL 1,626,583; COPErPFS/ENZ= BRL 329,701; COPEOS/AA+P= BRL 15,144,886; COPErPFS/AA+P= BRL 614,368. For the 24-month analysis, the results were: NNTOS/ENZ= 11.00; NNTrPFS/ENZ= 3.58; NNTOS/AA+P=16.56; NNTrPFS/AA+P= 5.00 and COPEOS/ENZ= BRL 1,965,454; COPErPFS/ENZ= BRL 639,327; COPEOS/ AA+P= BRL 2,833,580; COPErPFS/AA+P= BRL 855,741. Conclusion: Across the 12- and 24-month time horizons, the NNT and COPE was favorable for ENZ vs. AA+P in patients with MCRPC.


Subject(s)
Humans , Numbers Needed To Treat , Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL