Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2) (remove)
Keywords
- ESMO-MCBS (1)
- clinical benefit (1)
- haematologic malignancies (1)
- value frameworks (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2) (remove)
Objective: Value frameworks in oncology have not been validated for the assessment of treatments in haematological malignancies, but to avoid overlaps and duplications it appears reasonable to build up experience on existing value frameworks, such as the European Society for Medical Oncology—Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS).
Methods: Here we present the results of the first feasibility testing of the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 for haematological malignancies based on the grading of 80 contemporary studies for acute leukaemia, chronic leukaemia, lymphoma, myeloma and myelodysplastic syndromes. The aims were (1) to evaluate the scorability of data, (2) to evaluate the reasonableness of the generated grades for clinical benefit using the current version and (3) to identify shortcomings in the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 that require amendments to improve the efficacy and validity of the scale in grading new treatments in the management of haematological malignancies.
Results: In general, the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 was found to be widely applicable to studies in haematological malignancies, generating scores that were judged as reasonable by European Hematology Association (EHA) experts. A small number of studies could either not be graded or were not appropriately graded. The reasons, related to the differences between haematological and solid tumour malignancies, are identified and described.
Conclusions: Based on the findings of this study, ESMO and EHA are committed to develop a version of the ESMO-MCBS that is validated for haematological malignancies. This development process will incorporate all of the usual stringencies for accountability of reasonableness that have characterised the development of the ESMO-MCBS including field testing, statistical modelling, evaluation for reasonableness and openness to appeal and revision. Applying such a scale will support future public policy decision-making regarding the value of new treatments for haematological malignancies and will provide insights that could be helpful in the design of future clinical trials.
Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) represents a relatively rare group of heterogeneous non-Hodgkin lymphomas with a very poor prognosis. Current therapies, based on historical regimens for aggressive B-cell lymphomas, have resulted in insufficient patient outcomes. The majority of patients relapse rapidly, and current 5-year overall survival rates are only 10–30%. It is evident that new approaches to treat patients with PTCL are required. In recent years, prospective studies in PTCL have been initiated, mainly in patients with relapsed/refractory disease. In some of these, selected histologic subtypes have been evaluated in detail. As a consequence, numerous new therapies have been developed and shown activity in PTCL, including: agents targeting the immune system (e.g. brentuximab vedotin, alemtuzumab, lenalidomide); histone deacetylase inhibitors (romidepsin, belinostat); antifolates (pralatrexate); fusion proteins (denileukin diftitox); nucleoside analogs (pentostatin, gemcitabine); and other agents (e.g. alisertib, plitidepsin, bendamustine, bortezomib). A variety of interesting novel combinations is also emerging. It is hoped that these innovative approaches, coupled with a greater understanding of the clinicopathologic features, pathogenesis, molecular biology, and natural history of PTCL will advance the field and improve outcomes in this challenging group of diseases. This review summarizes the currently available clinical evidence on the various approaches to treating relapsed/refractory PTCL, including the role of stem cell transplantation, with an emphasis on potential new drug therapies.