Search

Introduction: Globally, gastric cancer is sixth most common cancer and ranks third in mortality, with a 5-year survival rate of 32% for advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (A/MGC). Systemic therapy is often the preferred treatment for A/MGC since it offers survival benefits. Exploration of immunotherapies and/or targeted agents in A/MGC offer more treatment combinations than standard systemic chemotherapies. Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor was approved by United States (US) Food and Drug as a first-line systemic therapy for A/MGC. The purpose of this study is to: to summarize the clinical, safety, and humanistic outcomes of first-line systemic chemotherapy for adult patients with locally A/MGC; quantitatively synthesize outcomes data from identified studies using network meta-analysis (NMA) and, to evaluate cost-effectiveness of nivolumab-chemotherapy combination versus chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy from a US payer perspective. Methods: Systematic literature review was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting library using an English language restriction from inception to March 2022. Specifically, phase II and III randomized control trials (RCTs) conducted among western population diagnosed with metastatic phase III and IV stages of gastric cancer were included if they assessed comparative efficacy, safety, or humanistic outcomes of systemic therapies. Two investigators independently reviewed the studies, conducted data extraction, and assessed risk of bias in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. For the quantitative network meta-analysis, inclusion criteria were trials conducted in western populations and published before March 2022. NMA included regimens recommended in 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment-related adverse even

BACKGROUND: Multiple vision-related quality of life (VRQoL) instruments exist, but questionnaires designed specifically for myopic children that are appropriate for assessing the impact of refractive error are rare. The aim of the study is to assess SREEQ-R validity and to determine if this instrument is appropriate to measure VRQoL related to spectacle utilization in school-aged children sample with myopia in London. METHODS: This study, which utilized prospective questionnaire methodology, was conducted in London. Children up to the age of 18 years who presented for an eye examination with current or previous reported use of eyeglasses and who met the study requirements for spectacle prescription were included. SREEQ consists of 20 specific items divided into two parts with 3 response categories. WithoutGlasses relates to perceptions of uncorrected vision/not wearing glasses and WithGlasses relates to perceptions of corrected vision/wearing glasses followed by demographic and clinician details. Rasch analysis was used to explore the psychometric performance of the questionnaire and scale using WINSTEPS software. Results: A total of 125 eligible children completed the SREEQ-R, with mean age of 12.7±2.9. All items fit the Rasch model and were retained and the scale was unidimensional (as indicated by principal-components analysis of the residuals). All children and item Infit and Outfit MNSQs fell within recommended fit criteria. Without Glasses the item that students were bothered least by was “feeling dizzy” and in contrast the item that affected respondents most was “problems seeing the board, at the movies or other things far away”. While With Glasses, students found the same item “feeling dizzy” to be the least bothering item and “I get headache, or my head or eyes hurt when I read” to be the most problematic symptom. As per the Rasch analysis, person reliability coefficient for the Without Glasses version was 0.84 and 0.91 for the With Glasses version. The ite

BACKGROUND: Multiple vision-related quality of life (VRQoL) instruments exist, but questionnaires designed specifically for myopic children that are appropriate for assessing the impact of refractive error are rare. The aim of the study is to assess SREEQ-R validity and to determine if this instrument is appropriate to measure VRQoL related to spectacle utilization in school-aged children sample with myopia in London. METHODS: This study, which utilized prospective questionnaire methodology, was conducted in London. Children up to the age of 18 years who presented for an eye examination with current or previous reported use of eyeglasses and who met the study requirements for spectacle prescription were included. SREEQ consists of 20 specific items divided into two parts with 3 response categories. WithoutGlasses relates to perceptions of uncorrected vision/not wearing glasses and WithGlasses relates to perceptions of corrected vision/wearing glasses followed by demographic and clinician details. Rasch analysis was used to explore the psychometric performance of the questionnaire and scale using WINSTEPS software. Results: A total of 125 eligible children completed the SREEQ-R, with mean age of 12.7±2.9. All items fit the Rasch model and were retained and the scale was unidimensional (as indicated by principal-components analysis of the residuals). All children and item Infit and Outfit MNSQs fell within recommended fit criteria. Without Glasses the item that students were bothered least by was “feeling dizzy” and in contrast the item that affected respondents most was “problems seeing the board, at the movies or other things far away”. While With Glasses, students found the same item “feeling dizzy” to be the least bothering item and “I get headache, or my head or eyes hurt when I read” to be the most problematic symptom. As per the Rasch analysis, person reliability coefficient for the Without Glasses version was 0.84 and 0.91 for the With Glasses version. The ite