Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Survivorship Care for Survivors of Hodgkin Lymphoma (INSIGHT Study): Protocol for a Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study With a Quasi-Experimental Design
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) occurs at young ages, with the highest incidence between 20 and 40 years. While cure rates have improved to 80%-90% over the past decades, survivors of HL are at substantial risk of late treatment-related complications, such as cardiovascular diseases, breast cancer, severe infections, and hypothyroidism. To reduce morbidity and mortality from late treatment effects, the Dutch Better care after lymphoma, Evaluation of long-term Treatment Effects and screening Recommendations (BETER) consortium developed a survivorship care program for 5-year survivors of HL that includes risk-based screening for and treatment of (risk factors for) late adverse events. Even though several cancer survivorship care programs have been established worldwide, there is a lack of knowledge about their effectiveness in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: The Improving Nationwide Survivorship care Infrastructure and Guidelines after Hodgkin lymphoma Treatment (INSIGHT) study evaluates whether Dutch BETER survivorship care for survivors of HL decreases survivors' burden of disease from late adverse events after HL treatment and associated health care costs and improves their quality of life. METHODS: The INSIGHT study is a multicenter retrospective cohort study with a quasi-experimental design and prospective follow-up, embedded in the national BETER survivorship care infrastructure. The first BETER clinics started in 2013-2016 and several other centers started or will start BETER clinics in 2019-2024. This allows us to compare survivors who did and those who did not receive BETER survivorship care in the last decade. Survivors in the intervention group are matched to controls (n=450 per group) based on sex, age at diagnosis (±5 years), age in 2013 (±5 years), and treatment characteristics. The primary outcome is the burden of disease in disability-adjusted life years from cardiovascular disease, breast cancer, severe infections, and hypothyroidism. In a cost-effectiveness analysis, we will assess the cost of BETER survivorship care per averted or gained disability-adjusted life year and quality-adjusted life year. Secondary outcomes are BETER clinic attendance, adherence to screening guidelines, and knowledge and distress about late effects among survivors of HL. Study data are collected from a survivor survey, a general practitioner survey, medical records, and through linkages with national disease registries. RESULTS: The study was funded in November 2020 and approved by the institutional review board of the Netherlands Cancer Institute in July 2021. We expect to finalize recruitment by October 2024, data collection by early 2025, and data analysis by May 2025. CONCLUSIONS: INSIGHT is the first evaluation of a comprehensive survivorship program using real-world data; it will result in new information on the (cost-)effectiveness of survivorship care in survivors of HL in clinical practice. The results of this study will be used to improve the BETER program where necessary and contribute to more effective evidence-based long-term survivorship care for lymphoma survivors. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/55601.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,052 | 0,046 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,042 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».