Allergy immunotherapies for allergic rhinitis: systematic review and assessment of evolving quality

Summary

Background. Heterogeneity in the design and quality of trials evaluating allergy immunotherapies (AITs) limits their comparability, making it difficult for physicians, patients, and payers to select the best treatment option. Methods. This systematic review evaluated the quality of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of registered grass AITs using the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence checklist. Results. 17 of 44 unique RCTs (38.6%) (sample size range: 18-1,501 subjects) were subcutaneous grass immunotherapy trials and 27 (61.4%) were sublingual grass immunotherapy trials (Allergovit, 5 trials; Alutard, 8; Grazax, 13; Oralair, 6; Staloral, 8; Pollinex, 2; Phostal and Purethal, 1 each). Three trials (6.8%; all Grazax) fulfilled every quality criterion. Quality assessments revealed inconsistencies in study quality and reporting. Study quality trended towards improvement over time, particularly after 2009. Conclusions. When as-sessing grass AIT, it is important to focus not only on endpoints but also on the quality of evidence.

Evaluation of the chemotherapy patient monitor: an interactive tool for facilitating communication between patients and oncologists during the cancer consultation

Effective communication between oncologists and patients with cancer is of paramount importance. The Chemotherapy Patient Monitor (CPM) is a novel tool designed to assist doctor-patient communication regarding patient concerns and side-effects. Initially, the CPM was assessed in a primary evaluation study of its use during consultations with 26 patients with advanced colorectal cancer (one consultation without, followed by two with, the CPM per patient). This led to a further dissemination/audit of 34 patients attending oncology centres in the UK, who had completed the survey prior to three consultations. The CPM contains a checklist of common side-effects of chemotherapy regimens used in advanced colorectal cancer, and other common concerns of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. The CPM records the presence of side-effects/concerns, the distress caused, whether patients wish to discuss them further, and actions taken as a result. Questionnaires explored the views of patients and oncologists in the UK and Spain regarding the effectiveness of consultations during a baseline visit conducted without the CPM, and then with the CPM in subsequent visits. These data were then complemented by the dissemination/audit study of the CPM across nine centres in the UK. All patients understood the CPM. The CPM was rated as useful by oncologists in 83% of consultations, and did not lengthen 82% of visits. Patients felt it had improved the visit in 95% of cases. Responses from patients (100%) and oncologists (84%) indicated willingness to use the CPM for at least some consultations in the future. The results of the dissemination/audit study supported these conclusions. We conclude that the CPM appears to be a useful new tool for improving patient-doctor communication during cancer consultations.

Costs incurred by patients undergoing advanced colorectal cancer therapy. A comparison of raltitrexed and fluorouracil plus folinic acid

BACKGROUND

To assess the cost effectiveness of healthcare interventions from a societal perspective, it is necessary to include costs such as patients' travel costs and the opportunity cost of patients' time spent consuming healthcare.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse patients' travel and time costs associated with 2 alternative drug therapies for advanced colorectal cancer: raltitrexed and fluorouracil plus folinic acid (leucovorin) [5FU + FA].

DESIGN AND SETTING

The analysis is based on a prospective substudy within a multinational randomised controlled trial of raltitrexed versus 5FU + FA.

PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS

495 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were enrolled in the trial, 270 of whom completed the questionnaire on costs.

METHODS

Data were collected within the trial to estimate the numbers of journeys made to and from hospital by patients and the time lost from usual activities over the period of therapy. A subset of patients were asked to complete a questionnaire to provide the information necessary to value time and travel costs in monetary terms. These data, together with UK transport costs and forgone time values, were used to value the transport and opportunity costs of time of all patients in the trial.

RESULTS

The total travel cost per patient was statistically significantly higher in the 5FU + FA group (p < 0.001; median of 31.50 Pounds with raltitrexed, 96.00 Pounds with 5FU + FA; 1997 prices). Overall time cost per patient was also higher in the 5FU + FA group (p = 0.005; median of 168.80 Pounds with raltitrexed, 224.04 Pounds with 5FU + FA). Adding the two gives a median total cost per patient of 206.08 Pounds [interquartile range (IQR) 108 Pounds to 482 Pounds] among patients randomised to raltitrexed and 342.25 Pounds (IQR 214 Pounds to 555 Pounds) for those in the 5FU + FA group (p < 0.001). The sensitivity analysis showed that, even under extreme assumptions, raltitrexed imposed fewer time and travel costs on patients. These cost differences are likely, in part, to reflect the longer treatment times for 5FU + FA patients (median 16.9 vs 12.7 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

Different chemotherapy regimens for advanced colorectal cancer can impose different travel and time costs on patients. Over the period of treatment in a randomised controlled trial of 495 patients, those randomised to 5FU + FA were found to have a median travel plus time cost 136 Pounds per patient higher than those randomised to raltitrexed.

Mobility of people with retinitis pigmentosa as a function of vision and psychological variables

We investigated the mobility performance of subjects with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) as a function of clinical measures of residual vision and psychological variables. We found a highly significant correlation between clinical measures of residual vision and mobility. Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity and residual visual field together explained 64% of the variance in mobility performance in an indoor shopping mall. We suggest a simple new clinical method of scoring the visual field for predicting mobility performance, the RP Concentric Field Rating. The RP Concentric Field Rating alone explained 60% of the variance in mobility performance. In spite of expectations derived from reading the recent literature, we did not find a significant correlation between psychological variables and mobility performance in a group of subjects with RP.

Comparison of functional mobility performance with clinical vision measures in simulated retinitis pigmentosa

Simulations of retinitis pigmentosa (RP) under various conditions of retinal illuminance were designed and investigated in order that they might be used in the mobility training of clients with early RP. Goggles incorporating a 2.5 neutral density (ND) filter with a 0.5-mm diameter pinhole were found to be a potentially useful simulation device for this purpose. This investigation also compared mobility performance with clinical vision measures under photopic, mesopic, and scotopic conditions of retinal illuminance. Although none of the clinical vision measures we used was entirely predictive of mobility performance, some measures were better predictors than others. For a severe constriction of the visual field and decreasing retinal illuminance, both edge contrast sensitivity and visual acuity, measured outdoors, accounted for a greater proportion of the variance in mobility performance than did low contrast visual acuity measured under the same circumstances. The same clinical vision measures, taken indoors, were of no value in predicting outdoor mobility performance.