APPENDICES - NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme

More documents

Recommendations

Info

266 Appendix 18 Study details Population details Treatment details Results Interpretation Authors’ conclusions No conclusions specific to PDT Brief study appraisal This small study was an interim analysis of a RCT presented in abstract form. Although it indicated that updated results would be presented, no further information could be located. Most of the study’s methodological details were not available from the abstract and the majority of the results were not broken down by treatment group Mortality Assessed but not reported per group Morbidity Not assessed AEs Minor haemoptysis in two PDT- ERT patients. Skin photosensitivity was acceptable in patients treated with PDT (no data provided). Other AEs reported but not broken down by group Trial treatments ERT alone vs PDT preceding ERT vs HDR preceding ERT Intervention Photofrin 2 mg/kg, 200 J/cm, 630 nm given 2 wk before ERT. Other PDT parameters not stated Comparator ERT alone: 14 x 2.5 + 8 x 2.5 Gy to the tumour area in 4 wk 2nd comparator HDR + ERT: As above preceded by HDR: 15 Gy at 1-cm distance along the tumour 2 wk before ERT Treatment intention Palliative Type of Lung Cancer and Histology Non-small cell; no further details given Main eligibility criteria Histologically proven inoperable locoregional NSCLC, weight loss < 10% and a PS (sic) > 70% Patient characteristics % Male: 88 Concomitant treatment Not stated Authors Baas et al. (1994) 121 Data source Abstract Country The Netherlands Language English Study design RCT No. of participants Total: 39 Intervention: 15 Comparator: 12 2nd Comparator: 12 No. of Recruiting Centres Not stated Follow-up period and frequency Not stated
DOI: 10.3310/hta14370 Health Technology Assessment 2010; Vol. 14: No. 37 Study details Population details Treatment details Results Interpretation Authors’ conclusions PDT is a valid method of palliation in partially or totally obstructing NSCLC Brief study appraisal Difficult to evaluate results due to important baseline differences (presence of cough, and stage of cancer) between groups. Karnofsky performance and FU after 1 mth assessed but not reported. No details on blinding Mortality Survival significantly longer in PDT group (265 vs 95 d, p = 0.007). 4/14 (PDT) and 4/17 (Nd:YAG) still alive at end of study Morbidity Similar response in both groups: 38.5% PDT vs 23.5% Nd:YAG at 1 mth (p = ns). PR at 1 mth in three PDT and four Nd:YAG patients. CR at 1 mth in one PDT patient. Time elapsed until treatment failure: 50 d (PDT) vs 38 d (Nd:YAG) (p = 0.03) QoL and return to normal activity Assessed but not reported AEs Bronchitis was the most common (four cases in PDT group, one in Nd:YAG group) Photosensitisation in four PDT patients. Five patients had no AEs, all in Nd:YAG group. One death probably related to PDT Trial treatments PDT vs Nd:YAG laser resection Intervention Intravenous DHE at dose of 2 mg/kg with 630-nm argon dye laser, 40–50 hr after injection. Maximum of three doses (six photoradiations). Other parameters not reported Comparator Nd:YAG resection using 15- to 80-W pulses of 0.5–1.5 s. Procedure repeated every 2–4 d as necessary Treatment intention Palliative Types of Lung Cancer and Histology Non-small cell 25 SCC, three adenocarcinoma, three undifferentiated carcinoma Main eligibility criteria Biopsyproven inoperable cancer with totally or partially obstructive endobronchial lesions with or without extrabronchial tumour. Patients > 18 yr, nonpregnant, infertile or postmenopausal. Karnofsky status ≥ 40%, ≥ 4 wk from last chemotherapy cycle and ≥ 3 wk from last radiation dose. Patients who had previous PDT or Nd:YAG were excluded. Further eligibility criteria were reported Patient characteristics % Male: 100 Age range: Not stated Mean age: 65 yr Cancer stage: Stage I, four patients; stage II, one; stage IIIA, six; stage IIIB, 10; stage IV, seven No. with recurrent tumour: three Concomitant treatment Not stated Authors Diaz- Jimenez et al. (1999) 122 Data source Full published paper Country Spain Language English Study Design RCT No. of participants Total: 31 Intervention: 14 Comparator: 17 No. of Recruiting Centres Not stated Follow-up period and frequency FU at 1, 2, 3, 6 and 12 mth (and 18 mth if possible) © 2010 Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO. All rights reserved. 267
Page 1 and 2:
Appendices July 2010 10.3310/hta143
Page 3 and 4:
DOI: 10.3310/hta14370 Health Techno
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9:
Page 12 and 13:
140 Appendix 6 18. Biel MA. Photody
Page 14 and 15:
142 Appendix 6 63. Gonzalez-Perez R
Page 16 and 17:
144 Appendix 6 treated with photody
Page 18 and 19:
146 Appendix 6 aminolevulinic acid
Page 20 and 21:
148 Appendix 6 carcinomas: 5 years
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35:
Page 38 and 39:
166 Appendix 9 photodynamic therapy
Page 40 and 41:
168 Appendix 9 of early-stage lung
Page 42 and 43:
170 Appendix 9 107. Okunaka T, Kato
Page 44 and 45:
172 Appendix 9 152. Kato H, Konaka
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51:
Page 54 and 55:
182 Appendix 12 as salvage treatmen
Page 56 and 57:
184 Appendix 12 63. Lorenz KJ, Maie
Page 58 and 59:
186 Appendix 12 107. Biel MA. Photo
Page 60 and 61:
188 Appendix 13 Study details Popul
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Appendix 13 214 Study details Popul
Page 89 and 90: DOI: 10.3310/hta14370 Health Techno
Page 137: DOI: 10.3310/hta14370 Health Techno
Page 143 and 144: Study details Population details Tr
Page 153: DOI: 10.3310/hta14370 Health Techno
Page 156 and 157: 284 Appendix 21 Study details Popul
Page 158 and 159: Appendix 21 286 Study details Popul
Page 162: Feedback The HTA programme and the
show all

APPENDICES - NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?