Southampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, Southampton, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2011 Dec;15(41):1-204. doi: 10.3310/hta15410.
Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common haematological cancer in the UK. MM is not curable but can be treated with a combination of supportive measures and chemotherapy that aim to extend the duration and quality of survival. The majority of patients are not able to withstand intensive treatment, such as high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (SCT), and so they are offered single-agent or combination chemotherapy. Combination therapies typically include chemotherapy with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid. More recently, combination therapies have incorporated drugs such as thalidomide (Thalidomide Celgene®, Celgene) and bortezomib (Velcade®, Janssen-Cilag).
To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of bortezomib or thalidomide in combination chemotherapy regimens with an alkylating agent and a corticosteroid for the first-line treatment of MM.
Electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library, were searched from 1999 to 2009 for English-language articles. Bibliographies of articles, grey literature sources and manufacturers' submissions were also searched. Experts in the field were asked to identify additional published and unpublished references.
Titles and abstracts were screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently. The inclusion criteria specified in the protocol were applied to the full text of retrieved papers by one reviewer and checked independently by a second reviewer. Data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Differences in opinion were resolved through discussion at each stage. A cost-utility decision-analytic model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness estimates of bortezomib in combination with melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (VMP), thalidomide in combination with cyclophosphamide and attenuated dexamethasone (CTDa), and thalidomide in combination with melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (MPT) versus melphalan and prednisolone/prednisone (MP).
A total of 1436 records were screened and 40 references were retrieved for the systematic review of clinical effectiveness. Five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria for the review: one RCT evaluated VMP, three evaluated MPT and one evaluated CTDa. The comparator in all of the included trials was MP. The review found that VMP and MPT can both be considered more clinically effective than MP for the first-line treatment of MM in people for whom high-dose therapy and SCT would not be appropriate. CTDa was more effective than MP in terms of complete response but data on survival outcomes did not meet the inclusion criteria. Cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that MPT has a greater probability of being cost-effective than either VMP or CTDa.
For most RCTs, details needed to judge study quality were incompletely reported. All studies stated that the analyses followed intention-to-treat principles but none adequately reported data censoring. Only one RCT contributed data on VMP and the published peer-reviewed follow-up data were immature. For MPT, overall survival data from two trials were eligible for inclusion but the doses of thalidomide differed between the trials and the treatment period was not reflective of current UK practice so the generalisability of the findings was uncertain. Two RCTs had a maintenance phase with thalidomide that did not meet the inclusion criteria so some of these results were not eligible for the review. Limited evidence on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was provided by the single trial of VMP versus MP.
Service provision is unlikely to change greatly. As uncertainties remain, further research is needed regarding the use of bortezomib- and thalidomide-containing combination regimens. Head-to-head trials of bortezomib- and thalidomide-containing combination regimes are required, including assessments of patient HRQoL in response to treatment.
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
多发性骨髓瘤(MM)是英国第二大常见的血液系统癌症。MM 无法治愈,但可以通过联合支持措施和化疗来治疗,目的是延长生存时间和提高生存质量。大多数患者无法承受高强度治疗,例如大剂量化疗联合自体干细胞移植(SCT),因此他们会接受单一药物或联合化疗。联合疗法通常包括与烷化剂和皮质类固醇联合的化疗。最近,联合疗法已将沙利度胺(Celgene 的 Thalidomide,Celgene)和硼替佐米(Janssen-Cilag 的 Velcade)等药物纳入其中。
评估硼替佐米或沙利度胺联合烷化剂和皮质类固醇在 MM 一线治疗中的临床疗效和成本效益,这些药物组合用于联合化疗方案。
从 1999 年到 2009 年,电子文献数据库(包括 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 The Cochrane Library)搜索了英文文献,还搜索了文章的参考文献、灰色文献来源和制造商提交的资料。该领域的专家被要求确定其他已发表和未发表的参考文献。
两位评审员独立筛选标题和摘要,以确定是否符合入选标准。由一位评审员应用协议中规定的纳入标准对检索到的论文全文进行评估,并由另一位评审员独立检查。数据提取和质量评估由一位评审员进行,并由另一位评审员进行检查。在每个阶段都通过讨论解决意见分歧。使用成本效用决策分析模型来比较硼替佐米联合美法仑和泼尼松/强的松(VMP)、沙利度胺联合环磷酰胺和减毒地塞米松(CTDa)以及沙利度胺联合美法仑和泼尼松/强的松(MPT)与美法仑和泼尼松/强的松(MP)的成本效益估计。
共筛选出 1436 条记录,对临床疗效进行了系统评价,检索到 40 篇参考文献。有 5 项随机对照试验(RCT)符合纳入标准:一项 RCT 评估了 VMP,三项评估了 MPT,一项评估了 CTDa。所有纳入研究的对照药物均为 MP。该综述发现,VMP 和 MPT 均可被认为比 MP 更有效,适用于不适合高强度治疗和 SCT 的 MM 患者。CTDa 在完全缓解方面比 MP 更有效,但有关生存结果的数据不符合纳入标准。成本效益分析表明,MPT 比 VMP 或 CTDa 更有可能具有成本效益。
对于大多数 RCT,判断研究质量所需的详细信息都未完整报告。所有研究都表明分析遵循意向治疗原则,但都没有充分报告数据删失情况。只有一项 RCT 提供了 VMP 的相关数据,发表的同行评议随访数据还不成熟。对于 MPT,两项试验的总生存数据符合纳入标准,但沙利度胺的剂量在试验之间有所不同,治疗期也不符合英国目前的实践情况,因此结果的推广性不确定。两项 RCT 有一个含沙利度胺的维持阶段,不符合纳入标准,因此这些结果中的部分内容不适合综述。只有一项 VMP 与 MP 的 RCT 提供了关于健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)的有限证据。
服务提供不太可能发生重大变化。由于仍存在不确定性,因此需要进一步研究硼替佐米和沙利度胺联合方案的应用。需要进行硼替佐米和沙利度胺联合方案的头对头试验,包括评估治疗对患者 HRQoL 的反应。
英国国家卫生研究院卫生技术评估计划。