1
|
Pöhlmann J, Weller M, Marcellusi A, Grabe-Heyne K, Krott-Coi L, Rabar S, Pollock RF. High costs, low quality of life, reduced survival, and room for improving treatment: an analysis of burden and unmet needs in glioma. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1368606. [PMID: 38571509 PMCID: PMC10987841 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1368606] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 02/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Gliomas are a group of heterogeneous tumors that account for substantial morbidity, mortality, and costs to patients and healthcare systems globally. Survival varies considerably by grade, histology, biomarkers, and genetic alterations such as IDH mutations and MGMT promoter methylation, and treatment, but is poor for some grades and histologies, with many patients with glioblastoma surviving less than a year from diagnosis. The present review provides an introduction to glioma, including its classification, epidemiology, economic and humanistic burden, as well as treatment options. Another focus is on treatment recommendations for IDH-mutant astrocytoma, IDH-mutant oligodendroglioma, and glioblastoma, which were synthesized from recent guidelines. While recommendations are nuanced and reflect the complexity of the disease, maximum safe resection is typically the first step in treatment, followed by radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy using temozolomide or procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine. Immunotherapies and targeted therapies currently have only a limited role due to disappointing clinical trial results, including in recurrent glioblastoma, for which the nitrosourea lomustine remains the de facto standard of care. The lack of treatment options is compounded by frequently suboptimal clinical practice, in which patients do not receive adequate therapy after resection, including delayed, shortened, or discontinued radiotherapy and chemotherapy courses due to treatment side effects. These unmet needs will require significant efforts to address, including a continued search for novel treatment options, increased awareness of clinical guidelines, improved toxicity management for chemotherapy, and the generation of additional and more robust clinical and health economic evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michael Weller
- Department of Neurology, University Hospital and University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Andrea Marcellusi
- Economic Evaluation and HTA (EEHTA)-Centre for Economic and International Studies (CEIS), Faculty of Economics, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy
| | | | | | - Silvia Rabar
- Covalence Research Ltd, Harpenden, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Retzer A, Ciytak B, Khatsuria F, El-Awaisi J, Harris IM, Chapman L, Kelly T, Richards J, Lam E, Newsome PN, Calvert M. A toolkit for capturing a representative and equitable sample in health research. Nat Med 2023; 29:3259-3267. [PMID: 38066209 PMCID: PMC10719102 DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02665-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Accepted: 10/24/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023]
Abstract
Research participants often do not represent the general population. Systematic exclusion of particular groups from research limits the generalizability of research findings and perpetuates health inequalities. Groups considered underserved by research include those whose inclusion is lower than expected based on population estimates, those with a high healthcare burden but limited research participation opportunities and those whose healthcare engagement is less than others. The REP-EQUITY toolkit guides representative and equitable inclusion in research. The toolkit was developed through a methodological systematic review and synthesis and finalized in a consensus workshop with 24 participants. The REP-EQUITY toolkit describes seven steps for investigators to consider in facilitating representative and equitable sample selection. This includes clearly defining (1) the relevant underserved groups, (2) the aims relating to equity and representativeness, (3) the sample proportion of individuals with characteristics associated with being underserved by research, (4) the recruitment goals, (5) the strategies by which external factors will be managed, (6) the methods by which representation in the final sample will be evaluated and (7) the legacy of having used the toolkit. Using the REP-EQUITY toolkit could promote trust between communities and research institutions, increase diverse participation in research and improve the generalizability of health research. National Institute for Health and Care Research PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022355391.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ameeta Retzer
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
- Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, Birmingham, UK.
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
| | - Bircan Ciytak
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Foram Khatsuria
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Juma El-Awaisi
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Isobel M Harris
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Laura Chapman
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Tony Kelly
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jenny Richards
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Emily Lam
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Philip N Newsome
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Centre for Liver and Gastrointestinal Research, Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Melanie Calvert
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, Birmingham, UK
- NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Birmingham Health Partners Centre for Regulatory Science and Innovation, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Midlands Health Data Research UK, Birmingham, UK
- NIHR Blood and Transplant Research Unit (BTRU) in Precision Transplant and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|