English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

BACKGROUND High quality and value of recommended treatments is of specific importance in cancer care. ESMO, ASCO and NCCN have developed tools intended to help assessing the clinical value of cancer treatments in a standardised way, allowing for a comparative discussion. Tumor treating fields (TTFields) is a novel, device based cancer treatment, that was recently demonstrated to be effective in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). This new modality augments the treatments discussed with glioblastoma patients today. MATERIAL AND METHODS ESMO and ASCO frameworks each calculate a score for the clinical value of a cancer treatment, called Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (MCBS) by ESMO and the Net Health Benefit (NHB) by ASCO. NCCN self reports “evidence blocks” which are assessed by clinician panels and were recently published for the first line treatment of newly diagnosed GBM with TTFields. We apply and compare the ESMO, ASCO and NCCN tools for TTFields treatment of newly diagnosed GBM. RESULTS The resulting ASCO NHB score for TTFields treatment of newly diagnosed GBM is 56. ESMO MCBS scores for TTFields in GBM are resulting in A/5, these being the highest achievable scores for this framework. All frameworks value the increase in overall survival by TTFields and the moderate toxicity profile. ESMO additionally values quality of life, while ASCO values palliation and treatment free intervals. NCCN’s specific focus is on the quality and consistency of the evidence. NCCN evidence blocks also contain an affordability score. CONCLUSION All three frameworks consider the clinical efficacy of a treatment and it’s toxicity profile in their clinical value assessment. Beyond that, their respective focus is on slightly different aspects and their definition of clinical value therefore varies in detail. However, all value scores suggest that TTFields treatment of newly diagnosed GBM provides a substantial clinical benefit. The high ESMO and ASCO scores are based on the significantly extended progression free and overall survival for TTFields treated patients, without adding systemic toxicities. The NCCN evidence blocks strongly support the NCCN category 1 recommendation for the use of TTFields in newly diagnosed GBM.

P08.06 Clinical value scores for treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma with TTFields