Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Benjamin Djulbegovic

Publications and source records attributed to Benjamin Djulbegovic.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Multicenter phase II study of bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Evaluate response rate, duration of response (DOR), time-to-progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and safety of bortezomib treatment in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) was administered on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle, for up to 17 cycles. Response and progression were determined using International Workshop Response Criteria, both using data from independent radiology review and by the investigators. Primary efficacy analyses were based on data from independent radiology review. RESULTS: In total, 155 patients were treated. Median number of prior therapies was one (range, one to three). Response rate in 141 assessable patients was 33% including 8% complete response (CR)/unconfirmed CR. Median DOR was 9.2 months. Median TTP was 6.2 months. Results by investigator assessments were similar. Median OS has not been reached after a median follow-up of 13.4 months. The safety profile of bortezomib was similar to previous experience in relapsed multiple myeloma. The most common adverse events grade 3 or higher were peripheral neuropathy (13%), fatigue (12%), and thrombocytopenia (11%). Death from causes that were considered to be treatment related was reported for 3% of patients. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the activity of bortezomib in relapsed or refractory MCL, with predictable and manageable toxicities. Bortezomib provides significant clinical activity in terms of durable and complete responses, and may therefore represent a new treatment option for this population with usually very poor outcome. Studies of bortezomib-based combinations in MCL are ongoing.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Recombinant human erythropoietins and cancer patients: updated meta-analysis of 57 studies including 9353 patients.

This is an updated systematic review of 57 trials and 9353 cancer patients from articles, abstracts, and reports published between January 1, 1985, and April 30, 2005, on the effects of epoetin alfa and beta (i.e., epoetin) and darbepoetin alfa (i.e., darbepoetin). We included randomized controlled trials comparing epoetin or darbepoetin plus red blood cell transfusion with red blood cell transfusion alone for prophylaxis or treatment of anemia in cancer patients with or without concurrent antineoplastic therapy. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and conference proceedings were searched. Effect estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with fixed-effects models. Treatment with epoetin or darbepoetin statistically significantly reduced the risk for red blood cell transfusions (relative risk [RR] = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.60 to 0.68; 42 trials and 6510 patients) and improved hematologic response (RR = 3.43, 95% CI = 3.07 to 3.84; 22 trials and 4307 patients). Treatment with epoetin or darbepoetin increased the risk of thrombo-embolic events (RR = 1.67, 95% CI = 1.35 to 2.06; 35 trials and 6769 patients). Uncertainties remain as to whether and how epoetin or darbepoetin affects overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.99 to 1.18; 42 trials and 8167 patients). Caution is advised when using epoetin or darbepoetin in combination with thrombogenic chemotherapeutic agents or for cancer patients who are at high risk for thrombo-embolic events.

Anemia, Hypochromic↗
PubMed2006

Myeloma (multiple).

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adrenal Cortex Hormones↗
PubMed2005

Are experimental treatments for cancer in children superior to established treatments? Observational study of randomised controlled trials by the Children's Oncology Group.

OBJECTIVES: To assess how often new treatments for childhood cancer assessed in phase III randomised trials are superior or inferior to standard treatments and whether the pattern of successes and failures in new treatments is consistent with uncertainty being the ethical basis for enrolling patients in such trials. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: Phase III randomised controlled trials carried out under the aegis of the Children's Oncology Group between 1955 and 1997, regardless of whether they were published. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival, event free survival, and treatment related mortality. RESULTS: 126 trials were included, involving 152 comparisons and 36,567 patients. The odds ratio for overall survival with experimental treatments was 0.96 (99% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.03), indicating that new treatments are as likely to be inferior as they are to be superior to standard treatments. This result was not affected by publication bias, methodological quality, treatment type, disease, or comparator. CONCLUSIONS: New treatments in childhood cancer tested in randomised controlled trials are, on average, as likely to be inferior as they are to be superior to standard treatments, confirming that the uncertainty principle has been operating.

Child↗
PubMed2005

The challenge of systematic reviews of diagnostic and staging studies in cancer.

PURPOSE: Most diagnostic and staging studies focus on test performance characteristics while others may address long term clinical outcomes such as disease-free or overall survival, quality of life or cost. However, controversy remains as to which outcomes to measure and when long term outcomes based on large and costly randomized trials are required. METHODS: The comparative advantages for reviews of diagnostic and staging studies based on test performance characteristics in observational studies versus the assessment of outcomes in randomized controlled trials are presented. RESULTS: The measurement of diagnostic test performance is based on sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, the diagnostic odds ratio and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. Alternatively, the clinical impact of a diagnostic test should consider the overall benefits and harms generally measured in terms of disease-free or overall survival, toxicity or quality of life and costs. Methods are available to systematically summarize these measures across studies, assess clinical and methodological heterogeneity and to evaluate the quality of studies. The advantages and disadvantages of studies of test performance or overall clinical impact are highlighted in the context of two examples: screening mammography and sentinel node biopsy. CONCLUSION: There appears to be an important role for systematic reviews of both studies of test performance and of long-term clinical impact in the evaluation of new diagnostic and staging procedures.

Diagnosis, Differential↗
PubMed2005

Colony-stimulating factors for chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Current treatment for febrile neutropenia (FN) includes hospitalization for evaluation, empiric broad-spectrum antibiotics, and other supportive care. Clinical trials have reported conflicting results when studying whether the colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) improve outcomes in patients with FN. This Cochrane Collaboration review was undertaken to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CSFs in patients with FN. METHODS: An exhaustive literature search was undertaken including major electronic databases (CANCERLIT, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, SCI, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register). All randomized controlled trials that compare CSFs plus antibiotics versus antibiotics alone for the treatment of established FN in adults and children were sought. A meta-analysis of the selected studies was performed. RESULTS: More than 8,000 references were screened, with 13 studies meeting eligibility criteria for inclusion. The overall mortality was not influenced significantly by the use of CSF (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.08; P = .1). A marginally significant result was obtained for the use of CSF in reducing infection-related mortality (OR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26 to 1.00; P = .05). Patients treated with CSFs had a shorter length of hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.82; P = .0006) and a shorter time to neutrophil recovery (HR = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.46; P < .00001). CONCLUSION: The use of the CSFs in patients with established FN caused by cancer chemotherapy reduces the amount of time spent in hospital and the neutrophil recovery period. The possible influence of the CSFs on infection-related mortality requires further investigation.

Antineoplastic Agents↗