Quality-adjusted survival in a crossover trial of letrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase III study of postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer demonstrated longer time to disease progression for patients taking letrozole versus tamoxifen. This analysis compares the trade-offs between progression-free survival and toxicity. DESIGN: Quality-adjusted survival was calculated using Q-TWiST (quality-adjusted time without symptoms or toxicity). Survival curves were partitioned into three health states: toxicity (TOX), disease progression (PROG) and periods without toxicity or disease progression (TWiST). The utility-weighted sum of the health state durations was derived and compared. RESULTS: There was not a significant difference in mean duration of serious adverse events prior to progression between the letrozole (n=453) and tamoxifen (n=454) groups (2.2 and 2 months, respectively). For TWiST, the mean duration for letrozole was 11.5 months, versus 8.5 months for tamoxifen (P <0.001). The mean duration of PROG was 11.5 months for letrozole and 12.7 months for tamoxifen (P=0.047). Using utility weights of 0.5 for TOX and PROG resulted in a 2.5-month difference in quality-adjusted survival favoring letrozole (P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The longer time to disease progression with letrozole versus tamoxifen was achieved without increased time with adverse events and resulted in more quality-adjusted survival for patients on letrozole.

The significance of skeletal-related events for the health-related quality of life of patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We examined the clinical relevance of skeletal-related events (SREs) for health state preferences, pain and health-related quality of life in patients with advanced prostate cancer and a history of bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were from a clinical trial of zoledronic acid versus placebo in the treatment of SREs associated with advanced prostate cancer metastatic to bone. Patients (n=248) were included if they experienced an SRE during the study. Outcome measures were assessed at fixed intervals. We used mixed-effects models to estimate changes in outcomes after each patient's first SRE. RESULTS: There were clinically meaningful and statistically significant declines in physical well-being after: radiation and pathologic fractures; functional well-being after radiation; and emotional well-being after radiation and pathologic fractures. There also were meaningful and significant declines in preference and utility scores after radiation and fracture. Pain intensity declined after radiation, but not after other SREs; no other pain measure changed substantively. CONCLUSIONS: SREs have important and significant effects on measures of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer. Treatments that prevent SREs may not demonstrate corresponding effects on outcomes if the effects of SREs occur between scheduled outcome assessments. Implications for trial design are discussed.

Dose equivalence and bronchoprotective effects of salmeterol and salbutamol in asthma.

BACKGROUND: Salbutamol is the most widely prescribed short acting beta 2 agonist and salmeterol is the first long acting inhaled beta 2 agonist. The dose equivalence of salmeterol and salbutamol is disputed. Estimates of weight-for-weight dose ratio have ranged from 1:2 to 1:16. A study was undertaken to clarify the true dose ratio. METHODS: The bronchoprotection afforded against repeated methacholine challenge by inhaled salmeterol 25 micrograms and 100 micrograms and salbutamol 100 micrograms and 400 micrograms was compared in a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover trial. Subjects were 16 stable asthmatics with a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) of > or = 65% predicted, screening concentration provoking a fall in FEV1 of 20% (PC20FEV1) of < or = 8mg/ml, and a shift in PC20FEV1 of more than two doubling concentration steps following inhalation of salbutamol 400 micrograms. On five separate occasions subjects underwent methacholine challenge before and 30 and 120 minutes after drug administration. PD20FEV1 was calculated for each challenge. FEV1 at 90 minutes after drug administration was also recorded. RESULTS: Bronchoprotection afforded by salmeterol was increased at 120 minutes compared with 30 minutes and protection by salbutamol was decreased. Protection by both doses of salmeterol was similar to salbutamol 100 micrograms at 30 minutes but significantly greater at 120 minutes. FEV1 at 90 minutes was significantly greater after salmeterol 100 micrograms than after placebo, but there were no other significant differences between treatments. Maximal observed protection was equivalent for salmeterol 100 micrograms and salbutamol 400 micrograms. CONCLUSIONS: The data are compatible with a weight-for-weight dose ratio for salmeterol:salbutamol of < or = 1:4.