关于转移性乳腺癌全身治疗的最佳顺序的广泛共识:来自西班牙医学肿瘤学家调查的结果。

IF 2.4
Journal of Drug Assessment Pub Date : 2019-04-08 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375
Pedro Sánchez-Rovira, Pilar Zamora, Javier Salvador-Bofill, Serafín Morales, Noelia Martínez-Jáñez, Eduardo Martínez-de-Dueñas, Ana Lluch, José Juan Illarramendi, Patricia Gómez-Pardo, Joaquín Gavilá Gregori, Andrés García-Palomo, Jesús García-Mata, Yolanda Fernández, Sonia Del Barco, Ana de Juan, Eva Ciruelos, José Ignacio Chacón, Lourdes Calvo, Agustí Barnadas, Joan Albanell
{"title":"关于转移性乳腺癌全身治疗的最佳顺序的广泛共识:来自西班牙医学肿瘤学家调查的结果。","authors":"Pedro Sánchez-Rovira,&nbsp;Pilar Zamora,&nbsp;Javier Salvador-Bofill,&nbsp;Serafín Morales,&nbsp;Noelia Martínez-Jáñez,&nbsp;Eduardo Martínez-de-Dueñas,&nbsp;Ana Lluch,&nbsp;José Juan Illarramendi,&nbsp;Patricia Gómez-Pardo,&nbsp;Joaquín Gavilá Gregori,&nbsp;Andrés García-Palomo,&nbsp;Jesús García-Mata,&nbsp;Yolanda Fernández,&nbsp;Sonia Del Barco,&nbsp;Ana de Juan,&nbsp;Eva Ciruelos,&nbsp;José Ignacio Chacón,&nbsp;Lourdes Calvo,&nbsp;Agustí Barnadas,&nbsp;Joan Albanell","doi":"10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The aim of this survey conducted by 20 leading Spanish oncologists was to analyze the concurrence between Spanish clinical practice and the recently published definition of the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) according to patient profiles. <b>Methods:</b> A self-administered questionnaire was developed, divided into five sections comprising 34 specific questions related to sequential treatments, plus three additional general questions. Respondents were asked to justify negative answers. Participants were recruited randomly by invitation out of a total of 619 oncologists. The questionnaire was sent and collected via e-mail between October 2015 and May 2016. A total of 191 completed questionnaires were received. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 70% of oncologists would keep the three patient profiles exactly as proposed (hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, HER2-positive, and triple negative breast cancer). Affirmative answers to questions regarding treatment sequences for these patient profiles (1-34) ranged from 77.8-99.5%, with an average of 90.9% of oncologists being in agreement with the recommended sequential treatments. The lowest degree of consensus was observed for endocrine treatments in pre-menopausal women and for chemotherapy options in hormone-resistant patients, whilst the highest degree of consensus was reached for targeted therapies in HER2-positive patients and for endocrine therapy in post-menopausal women. In their comments, participants revealed a number of economic constraints that prevented them from implementing some of the best treatment options. <b>Conclusions:</b> In conclusion, despite the complexity of MBC treatment, there is general agreement on the optimal treatment sequences.</p>","PeriodicalId":15631,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Drug Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.\",\"authors\":\"Pedro Sánchez-Rovira,&nbsp;Pilar Zamora,&nbsp;Javier Salvador-Bofill,&nbsp;Serafín Morales,&nbsp;Noelia Martínez-Jáñez,&nbsp;Eduardo Martínez-de-Dueñas,&nbsp;Ana Lluch,&nbsp;José Juan Illarramendi,&nbsp;Patricia Gómez-Pardo,&nbsp;Joaquín Gavilá Gregori,&nbsp;Andrés García-Palomo,&nbsp;Jesús García-Mata,&nbsp;Yolanda Fernández,&nbsp;Sonia Del Barco,&nbsp;Ana de Juan,&nbsp;Eva Ciruelos,&nbsp;José Ignacio Chacón,&nbsp;Lourdes Calvo,&nbsp;Agustí Barnadas,&nbsp;Joan Albanell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> The aim of this survey conducted by 20 leading Spanish oncologists was to analyze the concurrence between Spanish clinical practice and the recently published definition of the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) according to patient profiles. <b>Methods:</b> A self-administered questionnaire was developed, divided into five sections comprising 34 specific questions related to sequential treatments, plus three additional general questions. Respondents were asked to justify negative answers. Participants were recruited randomly by invitation out of a total of 619 oncologists. The questionnaire was sent and collected via e-mail between October 2015 and May 2016. A total of 191 completed questionnaires were received. <b>Results:</b> Overall, 70% of oncologists would keep the three patient profiles exactly as proposed (hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, HER2-positive, and triple negative breast cancer). Affirmative answers to questions regarding treatment sequences for these patient profiles (1-34) ranged from 77.8-99.5%, with an average of 90.9% of oncologists being in agreement with the recommended sequential treatments. The lowest degree of consensus was observed for endocrine treatments in pre-menopausal women and for chemotherapy options in hormone-resistant patients, whilst the highest degree of consensus was reached for targeted therapies in HER2-positive patients and for endocrine therapy in post-menopausal women. In their comments, participants revealed a number of economic constraints that prevented them from implementing some of the best treatment options. <b>Conclusions:</b> In conclusion, despite the complexity of MBC treatment, there is general agreement on the optimal treatment sequences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Drug Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Drug Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Drug Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21556660.2019.1604375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:这项由20位西班牙顶尖肿瘤学家进行的调查的目的是分析西班牙临床实践与最近发表的根据患者资料对转移性乳腺癌(MBC)全身治疗的最佳顺序的定义之间的一致性。方法:设计了一份自我管理的问卷,分为5个部分,包括34个与顺序治疗相关的具体问题,外加3个额外的一般问题。受访者被要求给出否定的答案。参与者是通过邀请从总共619名肿瘤学家中随机招募的。问卷于2015年10月至2016年5月通过电子邮件发送和收集。共收到191份填妥的问卷。结果:总体而言,70%的肿瘤学家会完全按照建议保留三种患者资料(激素受体阳性和her2阴性,her2阳性和三阴性乳腺癌)。对这些患者资料(1-34)的治疗顺序问题的肯定回答范围为77.8-99.5%,平均90.9%的肿瘤学家同意推荐的顺序治疗。在绝经前妇女的内分泌治疗和激素抵抗患者的化疗选择方面,共识程度最低,而在her2阳性患者的靶向治疗和绝经后妇女的内分泌治疗方面,共识程度最高。在他们的评论中,与会者透露了一些经济限制,使他们无法实施一些最好的治疗方案。结论:尽管MBC治疗复杂,但最佳治疗顺序是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.

Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.

Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.

Broad consensus on the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer: results from a survey of Spanish medical oncologists.

Objective: The aim of this survey conducted by 20 leading Spanish oncologists was to analyze the concurrence between Spanish clinical practice and the recently published definition of the optimal sequence for the systemic treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC) according to patient profiles. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was developed, divided into five sections comprising 34 specific questions related to sequential treatments, plus three additional general questions. Respondents were asked to justify negative answers. Participants were recruited randomly by invitation out of a total of 619 oncologists. The questionnaire was sent and collected via e-mail between October 2015 and May 2016. A total of 191 completed questionnaires were received. Results: Overall, 70% of oncologists would keep the three patient profiles exactly as proposed (hormone receptor-positive and HER2-negative, HER2-positive, and triple negative breast cancer). Affirmative answers to questions regarding treatment sequences for these patient profiles (1-34) ranged from 77.8-99.5%, with an average of 90.9% of oncologists being in agreement with the recommended sequential treatments. The lowest degree of consensus was observed for endocrine treatments in pre-menopausal women and for chemotherapy options in hormone-resistant patients, whilst the highest degree of consensus was reached for targeted therapies in HER2-positive patients and for endocrine therapy in post-menopausal women. In their comments, participants revealed a number of economic constraints that prevented them from implementing some of the best treatment options. Conclusions: In conclusion, despite the complexity of MBC treatment, there is general agreement on the optimal treatment sequences.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Drug Assessment
Journal of Drug Assessment PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信