| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Blystad, A K, et al.
(författare)
-
High-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with peripheral T cell lymphomas.
- 2001
-
Ingår i: Bone Marrow Transplantation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0268-3369 .- 1476-5365. ; 27:7, s. 711-6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Peripheral T cell lymphomas (PTCL) have a poorer prognosis after conventional treatment than do high-grade B cell lymphomas. The place for high-dose therapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell support in these patients is still not clear. Forty patients, 10 women and 30 men, median age 41.5 years (range 16-61) with PTCL were treated with HDT and autologous stem cell support at The Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway and The University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden, between February 1990 and September 1999. The histologic subtypes were: PTCL unspecified, 20 patients; intestinal, two patients; angioimmunoblastic (AILD), two patients; angiocentric, two patients and anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), 14 patients. All patients had chemosensitive disease and had received anthracycline-containing regimens prior to transplantation. At the time of HDT, 17 patients were in first PR or CR and 23 were in second or third PR or CR. Conditioning regimens were BEAM in 15 patients, BEAC in 14 patients, cyclophosphamide and total body irradiation (TBI) in eight patients, BEAC, without etoposide and TBI in one patient and mitoxantrone and melphalan in two patients. There were three (7.5%) treatment-related deaths. The estimated overall survival (OS) at 3 years was 58%, the event-free survival (EFS) 48% and the relapse-free survival (RFS) 56%, with a median follow-up of 36 months (range 7-100) for surviving patients. The patients with ALCL tended to have a better prognosis compared to those with other PTCL subtypes, OS 79% vs 44%, respectively. In conclusion, patients with chemosensitive PTCL who are failing to achieve CR with first-line chemotherapy or are in relapse can successfully be treated with HDT and autologous stem cell support.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Byskov, Jens, et al.
(författare)
-
A systems perspective on the importance of global health strategy developments for accomplishing today’s Sustainable Development Goals
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Health Policy and Planning. - : Oxford University Press. - 0268-1080 .- 1460-2237. ; 34:9, s. 635-645
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Priority setting within health systems has not led to accountable, fair and sustainable solutions to improving population health. Providers, users and other stakeholders each have their own health and service priorities based on selected evidence, own values, expertise and preferences. Based on a historical account, this article analyses if contemporary health systems are appropriate to optimize population health within the framework of cross cutting targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). We applied a scoping review approach to identify and review literature of scientific databases and other programmatic web and library-based documents on historical and contemporary health systems policies and strategies at the global level. Early literature supported the 1977 launching of the global target of Health for All by the year 2000. Reviewed literature was used to provide a historical overview of systems components of global health strategies through describing the conceptualizations of health determinants, user involvement and mechanisms of priority setting over time, and analysing the importance of historical developments on barriers and opportunities to accomplish the SDGs. Definitions, scope and application of health systems-associated priority setting fluctuated and main health determinants and user influence on global health systems and priority setting remained limited. In exploring reasons for the identified lack of SDG-associated health systems and priority setting processes, we discuss issues of accountability, vested interests, ethics and democratic legitimacy as conditional for future sustainability of population health. To accomplish the SDGs health systems must engage beyond their own sector boundary. New approaches to Health in All Policies and One Health may be conducive for scaling up more democratic and inclusive priority setting processes based on proper process guidelines from successful pilots. Sustainable development depends on population preferences supported by technical and managerial expertise.
|
|
| 9. |
- Byskov, Jens, et al.
(författare)
-
Accountable priority setting for trust in health systems : the need for research into a new approach for strengthening sustainable health action in developing countries
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Health Research Policy and Systems. - : BioMed Central. - 1478-4505. ; 7, s. 23-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Despite multiple efforts to strengthen health systems in low and middle income countries, intended sustainable improvements in health outcomes have not been shown. To date most priority setting initiatives in health systems have mainly focused on technical approaches involving information derived from burden of disease statistics, cost effectiveness analysis, and published clinical trials. However, priority setting involves value-laden choices and these technical approaches do not equip decision-makers to address a broader range of relevant values - such as trust, equity, accountability and fairness - that are of concern to other partners and, not least, the populations concerned. A new focus for priority setting is needed. Accountability for Reasonableness (AFR) is an explicit ethical framework for legitimate and fair priority setting that provides guidance for decision-makers who must identify and consider the full range of relevant values. AFR consists of four conditions: i) relevance to the local setting, decided by agreed criteria; ii) publicizing priority-setting decisions and the reasons behind them; iii) the establishment of revisions/appeal mechanisms for challenging and revising decisions; iv) the provision of leadership to ensure that the first three conditions are met. REACT - "REsponse to ACcountable priority setting for Trust in health systems" is an EU-funded five-year intervention study started in 2006, which is testing the application and effects of the AFR approach in one district each in Kenya, Tanzania and Zambia. The objectives of REACT are to describe and evaluate district-level priority setting, to develop and implement improvement strategies guided by AFR and to measure their effect on quality, equity and trust indicators. Effects are monitored within selected disease and programme interventions and services and within human resources and health systems management. Qualitative and quantitative methods are being applied in an action research framework to examine the potential of AFR to support sustainable improvements to health systems performance. This paper reports on the project design and progress and argues that there is a high need for research into legitimate and fair priority setting to improve the knowledge base for achieving sustainable improvements in health outcomes.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
