ﺑﺎﺯﮔﺸﺖ ﺑﻪ ﺻﻔﺤﻪ ﻗﺒﻠﯽ
خرید پکیج
تعداد آیتم قابل مشاهده باقیمانده : 1 مورد

Risk benefit tradeoffs of curative versus medical therapies for sickle cell disease

Risk benefit tradeoffs of curative versus medical therapies for sickle cell disease
Benefits Risks
Pursuing curative therapy
  • Potential for reduced or eliminated complications of SCD (severe pain, strokes, acute chest syndrome) and improved quality of life, without ongoing medical therapy.
  • Better outcomes with myeloablative conditioning and matched sibling donors in children, and with haploidentical donors, thiotepa, and post-transplant cyclophosphamide in adults.
  • Possible reduced health care usage and burdens long-term.
  • Some SCD-related complications may improve after transplantation, although some symptoms or findings may not completely resolve:
    • Chronic pain (multifactorial including AVN of the hip)
    • Organ dysfunction (some may worsen due to transplant toxicities)
    • Quality of life
  • Potential for improved life-expectancy.
  • Risk of GVHD or graft failure.
  • Risk of myeloid malignancy, especially in case of graft failure.
  • Potential for decisional regret later in life about lost fertility or other complications of curative therapy.
  • For children, the ultimate disease course is not known.
  • Increased risk of regimen-related toxicities, especially if myeloablative conditioning was used and especially in adults.
  • For myeloablative conditioning, loss of fertility if tissue cryopreservation or gamete banking is not used.
  • High up-front costs.
  • Up-front mortality rate of 2 to 5%.
Continuing medical therapy
  • New disease-modifying medical therapies continue to be developed.
  • Improved transplantation and gene therapy protocols continue to be developed and might be available at a later time.
  • Potential for chronic disease complications including severe pain, strokes, acute chest syndrome, avascular osteonecrosis, loss of fertility, and others.
  • Potential for reduced life expectancy, especially for severe disease.
  • High long-term health costs and burdens of therapy.
This table does not distinguish among curative options, which differ in their risks.
  • Pursuing curative therapy should be the result of a thorough and careful discussion about all available curative options, including options not offered at the transplant center where the patient is being evaluated.
  • The physicians should distinguish between standard care and the type of clinical trial being conducted, which may include phase 1, 2, or 3 trials and best available care at a single institution.
  • Shared decision-making must consider the patient's values and preferences, physical and mental burden of the disease, local and regional expertise and experience with available options, potential challenges at home to ensure adherence, and morbidity and mortality risks associated with transplantation. These decisions are especially challenging due to ongoing advances in curative and medical therapies and the lack of comparative trials.
  • For clinical trials, oversight is required with registration in clinicaltrials.gov, and a DSMB with stopping rules for safety and futility. These processes are necessary to ensure that patients are well informed about risks and benefits and that trials meet appropriate safety criteria.
  • Transplantation should be conducted at specialized centers with expertise in both transplantation and nontransplantation care for SCD ideally embedded in international collaborations, with an expected minimum of 2 years regular follow up with the transplant team to evaluate for transplant-associated morbidities and mortality.
AVN: avascular necrosis; DSMB: data safety monitoring board; GVHD: graft-versus-host disease; SCD: sickle cell disease.
Graphic 146338 Version 1.0