A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

PrOACT-URL and MCDA for benefit-risk assessment in multiple myeloma: A case study. | LitMetric

PrOACT-URL and MCDA for benefit-risk assessment in multiple myeloma: A case study.

J Oncol Pharm Pract

Departamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina - FMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Published: September 2025


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

IntroductionThe objective of this study was to present the use of the Problem, Objectives, Alternatives, Consequences, Trade-offs, Uncertainty, Risk, and Linked decisions (PrOACT-URL) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) frameworks as a methodological innovation with the potential to support decision-making in the process of incorporating and monitoring technologies in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS).MethodsThe present is a case study that used these frameworks as a basis for the benefit-risk assessment (BRA) of chemotherapy treatment options for multiple myeloma (MM) in the context of a Brazilian public hospital.ResultsThe application of the PrOACT-URL was not sufficient to guide stakeholders in making decisions about the best treatment alternative for MM, making it necessary to complement the qualitative analysis with the MCDA. In general, comparing the average scores for the five treatment options, the overall survival result was higher in four of the five treatments available for MM. The results that presented the lowest score were the risk of thrombosis and the risk of neuropathy. The sensitivity analysis showed that, for most stakeholder groups (managers, academia and clinicians), the treatment with the highest total value in the ranking was treatment with cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone (CTD).ConclusionsThe present case study showed that cyclophosphamide, thalidomide and dexamethasone presented the best benefit-risk balance for the treatment of MM and highlights the importance of the complementarity of these two structured approaches for more transparent decision-making, with an expansion of the deliberative process and the incorporation of preferences from different stakeholders.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10781552251374555DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

case study
12
benefit-risk assessment
8
multiple myeloma
8
analysis mcda
8
treatment options
8
cyclophosphamide thalidomide
8
thalidomide dexamethasone
8
treatment
6
proact-url mcda
4
mcda benefit-risk
4

Similar Publications