We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Combination chemotherapy versus melphalan plus prednisone as treatment for multiple myeloma: an overview of 6,633 patients from 27 randomized trials. Myeloma Trialists' Collaborative Group.
Journal of Clinical Oncology 1998 December
PURPOSE: To compare combination chemotherapy (CCT) versus melphalan plus prednisone (MP) as treatment for multiple myeloma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a collaborative worldwide overview of randomized trials of CCT versus MP, individual patient data on 4,930 patients from 20 trials were analyzed, with the addition of published data on a further 1,703 patients from seven trials. The main outcome measure was mortality, with response and recurrence rates being subsidiary end points.
RESULTS: Taking all of the trials together, response rates were significantly higher with CCT than with MP (60.0% v 53.2%; P < .00001, two-tailed). There was no evidence of any difference in mortality between CCT and MP, with a nonsignificant 1.5% reduction in death rate in favor of CCT (P = .6, two-tailed). There is heterogeneity of design between the trials, but subgroup analyses by type of CCT or by dose-intensities of CCT, of melphalan, or of prednisone did not identify any particular forms of therapy that were either clearly beneficial or clearly adverse. Similarly, analysis of the presentation features of the patients did not find any categories in which CCT differed significantly from MP in its effects on mortality; in particular, there was no evidence that poor-risk patients benefited more from CCT.
CONCLUSION: This overview found no difference, either overall or within any subgroup, in mortality between CCT and MP. In terms of survival, these therapeutic options, as tested in the trials considered, are approximately equivalent.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a collaborative worldwide overview of randomized trials of CCT versus MP, individual patient data on 4,930 patients from 20 trials were analyzed, with the addition of published data on a further 1,703 patients from seven trials. The main outcome measure was mortality, with response and recurrence rates being subsidiary end points.
RESULTS: Taking all of the trials together, response rates were significantly higher with CCT than with MP (60.0% v 53.2%; P < .00001, two-tailed). There was no evidence of any difference in mortality between CCT and MP, with a nonsignificant 1.5% reduction in death rate in favor of CCT (P = .6, two-tailed). There is heterogeneity of design between the trials, but subgroup analyses by type of CCT or by dose-intensities of CCT, of melphalan, or of prednisone did not identify any particular forms of therapy that were either clearly beneficial or clearly adverse. Similarly, analysis of the presentation features of the patients did not find any categories in which CCT differed significantly from MP in its effects on mortality; in particular, there was no evidence that poor-risk patients benefited more from CCT.
CONCLUSION: This overview found no difference, either overall or within any subgroup, in mortality between CCT and MP. In terms of survival, these therapeutic options, as tested in the trials considered, are approximately equivalent.
Full text links
Trending Papers
A Personalized Approach to the Management of Congestion in Acute Heart Failure.Heart International 2023
Potential Mechanisms of the Protective Effects of the Cardiometabolic Drugs Type-2 Sodium-Glucose Transporter Inhibitors and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Heart Failure.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 Februrary 21
The Effect of Albumin Administration in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Single-Center Analysis.Critical Care Medicine 2024 Februrary 8
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app