• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对于低风险妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤,不同的甲氨蝶呤方案作为一线治疗,是否比妇科肿瘤学组(GOG)0174中使用的放线菌素方案更具成本效益?

Are different methotrexate regimens as first line therapy for low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia more cost effective than the dactinomycin regimen used in GOG 0174?

作者信息

Miller Caela R, Chappell Nicole P, Sledge Caitlin, Leath Charles A, Phippen Neil T, Havrilesky Laura J, Barnett Jason C

机构信息

San Antonio Military Medical Center, Ft Sam Houston, TX, United States.

San Antonio Military Medical Center, Ft Sam Houston, TX, United States.

出版信息

Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Jan;144(1):125-129. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.038. Epub 2016 Nov 3.

DOI:10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.038
PMID:27816248
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5273590/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) 0174 compared weekly intramuscular methotrexate (MTX) with biweekly pulsed intravenous dactinomycin (Act-D) as single-agent chemotherapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN). Act-D had a higher rate of initial complete response (CR) (70% vs. 53%, p=0.01), but multi-day regimens of MTX have higher historic success rates. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of Act-D vs. MTX per GOG 0174 and explored multi-day MTX regimens.

METHODS

A cost effectiveness decision model was constructed with data from GOG 0174. Outcome was cost per first-line treatment success expressed in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Front-line failures were assumed to receive cross-over single agent therapy, second line failures; multi-agent chemotherapy. GOG 0174 had no quality of life (QOL) evaluation, so equal QOL (utility 1.0) was assumed but varied in sensitivity analysis. A second exploratory model included 5-day and 8-day MTX regimens.

RESULTS

Act-D ($18,505) was more expensive compared to weekly MTX ($8950) with an ICER of $56,215 per first-line treatment success compared to weekly MTX. Small decreases in QOL dramatically increased the ICER during sensitivity analysis. Models with multi-day MTX regimens were also more cost-effective than Act-D. If effectiveness was redefined as avoidance of multi-agent chemotherapy, weekly MTX was more effective.

CONCLUSIONS

With a complete cure rate for low-risk GTN regardless of initial agent, our model supports provider hesitation toward first line Act-D for low risk GTN. While Act-D is more effective for first line treatment success, it is more costly, and does not decrease rate of multi-agent chemotherapy use.

摘要

目的

妇科肿瘤学组(GOG)0174研究比较了每周肌肉注射甲氨蝶呤(MTX)与每两周脉冲静脉注射放线菌素D(Act-D)作为低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤(GTN)单药化疗的疗效。Act-D的初始完全缓解(CR)率较高(70%对53%,p = 0.01),但MTX多日疗法有更高的历史成功率。我们评估了GOG 0174中Act-D与MTX的成本效益,并探讨了MTX多日疗法。

方法

利用GOG 0174的数据构建成本效益决策模型。结果以一线治疗成功的成本表示,用增量成本效益比(ICER)衡量。假设一线治疗失败的患者接受交叉单药治疗,二线治疗失败的患者接受多药化疗。GOG 0174未进行生活质量(QOL)评估,因此假设QOL相等(效用值为1.0),但在敏感性分析中有所变化。第二个探索性模型纳入了5天和8天的MTX治疗方案。

结果

与每周MTX(8950美元)相比,Act-D(18505美元)更昂贵,与每周MTX相比,每一线治疗成功的ICER为56215美元。在敏感性分析中,QOL的小幅下降显著增加了ICER。采用MTX多日疗法的模型也比Act-D更具成本效益。如果将有效性重新定义为避免使用多药化疗,每周MTX更有效。

结论

无论初始用药如何,低危GTN的治愈率均较高,我们的模型支持临床医生对低危GTN一线使用Act-D持犹豫态度。虽然Act-D对一线治疗成功更有效,但成本更高,且不能降低多药化疗的使用率。

相似文献

1
Are different methotrexate regimens as first line therapy for low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia more cost effective than the dactinomycin regimen used in GOG 0174?对于低风险妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤,不同的甲氨蝶呤方案作为一线治疗,是否比妇科肿瘤学组(GOG)0174中使用的放线菌素方案更具成本效益?
Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Jan;144(1):125-129. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.038. Epub 2016 Nov 3.
2
Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness Between Actinomycin D Versus Methotrexate-Folinic Acid in the Treatment of Low-Risk Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia.放线菌素D与甲氨蝶呤-亚叶酸在治疗低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤中的成本效益比较
J Reprod Med. 2016 May-Jun;61(5-6):230-4.
3
Comparison of pulsed actinomycin D and 5-day actinomycin D as first-line chemotherapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.脉冲放线菌素 D 与 5 天放线菌素 D 一线化疗低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的比较。
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018 Nov;143(2):225-231. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.12629. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
4
The efficacy and safety of first-line single-agent chemotherapy regimens in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: A network meta-analysis.一线单药化疗方案治疗低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的疗效和安全性:网状 Meta 分析。
Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Feb;148(2):247-253. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.11.031. Epub 2017 Dec 6.
5
First-line chemotherapy in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的一线化疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 9;2016(6):CD007102. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007102.pub4.
6
A cost analysis of first-line chemotherapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤一线化疗的成本分析
J Reprod Med. 2012 May-Jun;57(5-6):211-8.
7
An international randomized phase III trial of pulse actinomycin-D versus multi-day methotrexate for the treatment of low risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia; NRG/GOG 275.一项关于阿霉素脉冲治疗与多日甲氨蝶呤治疗低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的国际随机 III 期试验;NRG/GOG 275。
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Aug;158(2):354-360. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.05.013. Epub 2020 May 24.
8
Five-Day Intravascular Methotrexate Versus Biweekly Actinomycin-D in the Treatment of Low-Risk Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia: A Clinical Randomized Trial.五日血管内注射甲氨蝶呤与每两周一次放线菌素-D治疗低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的临床随机试验
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Jun;26(5):971-6. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000687.
9
Treatment of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia comparing biweekly eight-day Methotrexate with folinic acid versus bolus-dose Actinomycin-D, among Brazilian women.巴西女性中低风险妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的治疗:双周8天甲氨蝶呤联合亚叶酸与大剂量放线菌素D的比较
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2015 Jun;37(6):258-65. doi: 10.1590/SO100-720320150005366.
10
First-line chemotherapy in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的一线化疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jul 11;7(7):CD007102. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007102.pub3.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparing biweekly single-dose actinomycin D with multiday methotrexate therapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (FIGO Score 0-4): study protocol for a prospective, multicentre, randomized trial.比较低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤(FIGO 评分 0-4)中两周一次单次放线菌素 D 与多日甲氨蝶呤治疗的疗效:一项前瞻性、多中心、随机试验的研究方案。
BMC Cancer. 2023 Aug 23;23(1):784. doi: 10.1186/s12885-023-11225-2.
2
Treatments and outcomes in high-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.高危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的治疗和结局:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BJOG. 2023 Apr;130(5):443-453. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17374. Epub 2023 Jan 25.
3

本文引用的文献

1
First-line chemotherapy in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的一线化疗
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jun 9;2016(6):CD007102. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007102.pub4.
2
A cost analysis of first-line chemotherapy for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤一线化疗的成本分析
J Reprod Med. 2012 May-Jun;57(5-6):211-8.
3
Comparison of pulsed actinomycin D versus 5-day methotrexate for the treatment of low-risk gestational trophoblastic disease.比较脉冲放线菌素 D 与 5 天甲氨蝶呤治疗低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤。
Surveillance for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia following molar pregnancy: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
随访葡萄胎妊娠后妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤:成本效益分析。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Nov;225(5):513.e1-513.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.05.031. Epub 2021 May 29.
4
Doppler-based predictive model for methotrexate resistance in low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia with myometrial invasion: prospective study of 147 patients.基于多普勒的低危有肌层浸润的妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤中甲氨蝶呤耐药的预测模型:147 例患者的前瞻性研究。
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2021 May;57(5):829-839. doi: 10.1002/uog.22069.
5
Cost-effectiveness of second curettage for treatment of low-risk non-metastatic gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.二次刮宫治疗低危非转移性妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的成本效益分析。
Gynecol Oncol. 2020 Jun;157(3):711-715. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.03.029. Epub 2020 Apr 8.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012 Jan;116(1):39-42. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.08.003. Epub 2011 Oct 11.
4
Phase III trial of weekly methotrexate or pulsed dactinomycin for low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a gynecologic oncology group study.低危型妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤每周甲氨蝶呤或多柔比星脉冲化疗的 III 期临床试验:一项妇科肿瘤学组研究。
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 1;29(7):825-31. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.30.4386. Epub 2011 Jan 24.
5
Treatment of low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia.低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的治疗
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar 1;29(7):786-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.0151. Epub 2011 Jan 24.
6
Actinomycin d versus methotrexate-folinic acid as the treatment of stage I, low-risk gestational trophoblastic neoplasia: a randomized controlled trial.放线菌素D与甲氨蝶呤-亚叶酸作为I期低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的治疗:一项随机对照试验
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2009 Jul;19(5):985-8. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181a8333d.
7
Relapse rate of patients with low-risk gestational trophoblastic tumor initially treated with single-agent chemotherapy.初始采用单药化疗治疗的低危妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤患者的复发率。
Gynecol Oncol. 2005 Mar;96(3):616-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2004.11.011.
8
FIGO staging for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia 2000. FIGO Oncology Committee.2000年妊娠滋养细胞肿瘤的国际妇产科联盟(FIGO)分期。FIGO肿瘤学委员会。
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002 Jun;77(3):285-7. doi: 10.1016/s0020-7292(02)00063-2.
9
Low-risk persistent gestational trophoblastic disease: outcome after initial treatment with low-dose methotrexate and folinic acid from 1992 to 2000.低风险持续性妊娠滋养细胞疾病:1992年至2000年低剂量甲氨蝶呤和亚叶酸初始治疗后的结局
J Clin Oncol. 2002 Apr 1;20(7):1838-44. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2002.07.166.
10
A retrospective comparison of current and proposed staging and scoring systems for persistent gestational trophoblastic disease.持续性妊娠滋养细胞疾病当前及拟议分期与评分系统的回顾性比较
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2000 Jul;10(4):318-322. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1438.2000.010004318.x.