Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective
Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab (Blincyto) vs standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) Philadelphia-chromosome-negative (Ph−) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the results of the phase 3 TOWER study from a US...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of medical economics 2017-09, Vol.20 (9), p.911-922 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 922 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 911 |
container_title | Journal of medical economics |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Delea, Thomas E. Amdahl, Jordan Boyko, Diana Hagiwara, May Zimmerman, Zachary F. Franklin, Janet L. Cong, Ze Hechmati, Guy Stein, Anthony |
description | Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab (Blincyto) vs standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) Philadelphia-chromosome-negative (Ph−) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the results of the phase 3 TOWER study from a US healthcare payer perspective.
Methods: The Blincyto Global Economic Model (B-GEM), a partitioned survival model, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of blinatumomab vs SOC. Response rates, event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), numbers of cycles of blinatumomab and SOC, and transplant rates were estimated from TOWER. EFS and OS were estimated by fitting parametric survival distributions to failure-time data from TOWER. Utility values were based on EORTC-8D derived from EORTC QLQ-C30 assessments in TOWER. A 50-year lifetime horizon and US payer perspective were employed. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per year.
Results: The B-GEM projected blinatumomab to yield 1.92 additional life years and 1.64 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with SOC at an incremental cost of $180,642. The ICER for blinatumomab vs SOC was estimated to be $110,108/QALY gained in the base case. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the number and cost of inpatient days for administration of blinatumomab and SOC, and was more favorable in the sub-group of patients who had received no prior salvage therapy. At an ICER threshold of $150,000/QALY gained, the probability that blinatumomab is cost-effective was estimated to be 74%.
Limitations: The study does not explicitly consider the impact of adverse events of the treatment; no adjustments for long-term transplant rates were made.
Conclusions: Compared with SOC, blinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment option for adults with R/R Ph − B-precursor ALL from the US healthcare perspective at an ICER threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. The value of blinatumomab is derived from its incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) benefit over SOC. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/13696998.2017.1344127 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_13696998_2017_1344127</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1911712502</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c366t-8f322adaaf0979284706554499933d6f69994021fe4724fa532e31e728a1a9333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhSMEolXpI4C8ZJOp_yaJd8CIn0qVQIJK7KI7znVjsGNjJ4PycjwbHs2UJd7cu_iOz9U5VfWS0Q2jHb1holGNUt2GU9ZumJCS8fZJdcmUZHUn2u9Py16Y-ghdVNc5_6DlCcFoy55XF7xrBJOqvaz-7EKeazQG9WwPOGHOJBiyd3aCefHBw54cMOUlkwzuAA9I9Ig-zCMmiCuxE0noIGYcSEhlNwn0HNJKvozWwYAujhZqPabgQw4e6wkf4GhF3tUxoV5SLjrQy4zErT6OYe8gz1YTh8tP9BaIKVoC5P4ribBiIrHcE0_3vqieGXAZr8_zqrr_8P7b7lN99_nj7e7tXa1F08x1ZwTnMAAYqlrFO9nSZruVUiklxNCYEpOSlDODsuXSwFZwFAxb3gGDgoir6vXp35jCrwXz3HubNToHE4Yl90wx1jK-pbyg2xOqU8i5BNLHZD2ktWe0P7bXP7bXH9vrz-0V3auzxbL3OPxTPXZVgDcnwE4mJA-_Q3JDP8PqQiqpT9rmXvzf4y9rza37</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1911712502</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Delea, Thomas E. ; Amdahl, Jordan ; Boyko, Diana ; Hagiwara, May ; Zimmerman, Zachary F. ; Franklin, Janet L. ; Cong, Ze ; Hechmati, Guy ; Stein, Anthony</creator><creatorcontrib>Delea, Thomas E. ; Amdahl, Jordan ; Boyko, Diana ; Hagiwara, May ; Zimmerman, Zachary F. ; Franklin, Janet L. ; Cong, Ze ; Hechmati, Guy ; Stein, Anthony</creatorcontrib><description>Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab (Blincyto) vs standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) Philadelphia-chromosome-negative (Ph−) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the results of the phase 3 TOWER study from a US healthcare payer perspective.
Methods: The Blincyto Global Economic Model (B-GEM), a partitioned survival model, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of blinatumomab vs SOC. Response rates, event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), numbers of cycles of blinatumomab and SOC, and transplant rates were estimated from TOWER. EFS and OS were estimated by fitting parametric survival distributions to failure-time data from TOWER. Utility values were based on EORTC-8D derived from EORTC QLQ-C30 assessments in TOWER. A 50-year lifetime horizon and US payer perspective were employed. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per year.
Results: The B-GEM projected blinatumomab to yield 1.92 additional life years and 1.64 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with SOC at an incremental cost of $180,642. The ICER for blinatumomab vs SOC was estimated to be $110,108/QALY gained in the base case. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the number and cost of inpatient days for administration of blinatumomab and SOC, and was more favorable in the sub-group of patients who had received no prior salvage therapy. At an ICER threshold of $150,000/QALY gained, the probability that blinatumomab is cost-effective was estimated to be 74%.
Limitations: The study does not explicitly consider the impact of adverse events of the treatment; no adjustments for long-term transplant rates were made.
Conclusions: Compared with SOC, blinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment option for adults with R/R Ph − B-precursor ALL from the US healthcare perspective at an ICER threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. The value of blinatumomab is derived from its incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) benefit over SOC.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1369-6998</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1941-837X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2017.1344127</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28631497</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Taylor & Francis</publisher><subject>acute lymphoblastic leukemia ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Antibodies, Bispecific - economics ; Antibodies, Bispecific - therapeutic use ; Antineoplastic Agents - economics ; Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use ; Blinatumomab ; cost effectiveness ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Female ; Health Expenditures - statistics & numerical data ; Humans ; ICER ; Interatrial Block ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Models, Econometric ; Philadelphia Chromosome ; Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - drug therapy ; Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - genetics ; Quality-Adjusted Life Years ; Salvage Therapy - economics ; Time Factors ; TOWER ; United States ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of medical economics, 2017-09, Vol.20 (9), p.911-922</ispartof><rights>2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c366t-8f322adaaf0979284706554499933d6f69994021fe4724fa532e31e728a1a9333</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c366t-8f322adaaf0979284706554499933d6f69994021fe4724fa532e31e728a1a9333</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28631497$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Delea, Thomas E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amdahl, Jordan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyko, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hagiwara, May</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmerman, Zachary F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franklin, Janet L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cong, Ze</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hechmati, Guy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Anthony</creatorcontrib><title>Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective</title><title>Journal of medical economics</title><addtitle>J Med Econ</addtitle><description>Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab (Blincyto) vs standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) Philadelphia-chromosome-negative (Ph−) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the results of the phase 3 TOWER study from a US healthcare payer perspective.
Methods: The Blincyto Global Economic Model (B-GEM), a partitioned survival model, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of blinatumomab vs SOC. Response rates, event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), numbers of cycles of blinatumomab and SOC, and transplant rates were estimated from TOWER. EFS and OS were estimated by fitting parametric survival distributions to failure-time data from TOWER. Utility values were based on EORTC-8D derived from EORTC QLQ-C30 assessments in TOWER. A 50-year lifetime horizon and US payer perspective were employed. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per year.
Results: The B-GEM projected blinatumomab to yield 1.92 additional life years and 1.64 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with SOC at an incremental cost of $180,642. The ICER for blinatumomab vs SOC was estimated to be $110,108/QALY gained in the base case. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the number and cost of inpatient days for administration of blinatumomab and SOC, and was more favorable in the sub-group of patients who had received no prior salvage therapy. At an ICER threshold of $150,000/QALY gained, the probability that blinatumomab is cost-effective was estimated to be 74%.
Limitations: The study does not explicitly consider the impact of adverse events of the treatment; no adjustments for long-term transplant rates were made.
Conclusions: Compared with SOC, blinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment option for adults with R/R Ph − B-precursor ALL from the US healthcare perspective at an ICER threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. The value of blinatumomab is derived from its incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) benefit over SOC.</description><subject>acute lymphoblastic leukemia</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Antibodies, Bispecific - economics</subject><subject>Antibodies, Bispecific - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antineoplastic Agents - economics</subject><subject>Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Blinatumomab</subject><subject>cost effectiveness</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health Expenditures - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>ICER</subject><subject>Interatrial Block</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Models, Econometric</subject><subject>Philadelphia Chromosome</subject><subject>Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - drug therapy</subject><subject>Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - genetics</subject><subject>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</subject><subject>Salvage Therapy - economics</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>TOWER</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1369-6998</issn><issn>1941-837X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAUhSMEolXpI4C8ZJOp_yaJd8CIn0qVQIJK7KI7znVjsGNjJ4PycjwbHs2UJd7cu_iOz9U5VfWS0Q2jHb1holGNUt2GU9ZumJCS8fZJdcmUZHUn2u9Py16Y-ghdVNc5_6DlCcFoy55XF7xrBJOqvaz-7EKeazQG9WwPOGHOJBiyd3aCefHBw54cMOUlkwzuAA9I9Ig-zCMmiCuxE0noIGYcSEhlNwn0HNJKvozWwYAujhZqPabgQw4e6wkf4GhF3tUxoV5SLjrQy4zErT6OYe8gz1YTh8tP9BaIKVoC5P4ribBiIrHcE0_3vqieGXAZr8_zqrr_8P7b7lN99_nj7e7tXa1F08x1ZwTnMAAYqlrFO9nSZruVUiklxNCYEpOSlDODsuXSwFZwFAxb3gGDgoir6vXp35jCrwXz3HubNToHE4Yl90wx1jK-pbyg2xOqU8i5BNLHZD2ktWe0P7bXP7bXH9vrz-0V3auzxbL3OPxTPXZVgDcnwE4mJA-_Q3JDP8PqQiqpT9rmXvzf4y9rza37</recordid><startdate>20170902</startdate><enddate>20170902</enddate><creator>Delea, Thomas E.</creator><creator>Amdahl, Jordan</creator><creator>Boyko, Diana</creator><creator>Hagiwara, May</creator><creator>Zimmerman, Zachary F.</creator><creator>Franklin, Janet L.</creator><creator>Cong, Ze</creator><creator>Hechmati, Guy</creator><creator>Stein, Anthony</creator><general>Taylor & Francis</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170902</creationdate><title>Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective</title><author>Delea, Thomas E. ; Amdahl, Jordan ; Boyko, Diana ; Hagiwara, May ; Zimmerman, Zachary F. ; Franklin, Janet L. ; Cong, Ze ; Hechmati, Guy ; Stein, Anthony</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c366t-8f322adaaf0979284706554499933d6f69994021fe4724fa532e31e728a1a9333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>acute lymphoblastic leukemia</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Antibodies, Bispecific - economics</topic><topic>Antibodies, Bispecific - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antineoplastic Agents - economics</topic><topic>Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Blinatumomab</topic><topic>cost effectiveness</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health Expenditures - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>ICER</topic><topic>Interatrial Block</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Models, Econometric</topic><topic>Philadelphia Chromosome</topic><topic>Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - drug therapy</topic><topic>Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - genetics</topic><topic>Quality-Adjusted Life Years</topic><topic>Salvage Therapy - economics</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>TOWER</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Delea, Thomas E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amdahl, Jordan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boyko, Diana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hagiwara, May</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zimmerman, Zachary F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Franklin, Janet L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cong, Ze</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hechmati, Guy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Anthony</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of medical economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Delea, Thomas E.</au><au>Amdahl, Jordan</au><au>Boyko, Diana</au><au>Hagiwara, May</au><au>Zimmerman, Zachary F.</au><au>Franklin, Janet L.</au><au>Cong, Ze</au><au>Hechmati, Guy</au><au>Stein, Anthony</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective</atitle><jtitle>Journal of medical economics</jtitle><addtitle>J Med Econ</addtitle><date>2017-09-02</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>911</spage><epage>922</epage><pages>911-922</pages><issn>1369-6998</issn><eissn>1941-837X</eissn><abstract>Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab (Blincyto) vs standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in adults with relapsed or refractory (R/R) Philadelphia-chromosome-negative (Ph−) B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the results of the phase 3 TOWER study from a US healthcare payer perspective.
Methods: The Blincyto Global Economic Model (B-GEM), a partitioned survival model, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of blinatumomab vs SOC. Response rates, event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), numbers of cycles of blinatumomab and SOC, and transplant rates were estimated from TOWER. EFS and OS were estimated by fitting parametric survival distributions to failure-time data from TOWER. Utility values were based on EORTC-8D derived from EORTC QLQ-C30 assessments in TOWER. A 50-year lifetime horizon and US payer perspective were employed. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per year.
Results: The B-GEM projected blinatumomab to yield 1.92 additional life years and 1.64 additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with SOC at an incremental cost of $180,642. The ICER for blinatumomab vs SOC was estimated to be $110,108/QALY gained in the base case. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to the number and cost of inpatient days for administration of blinatumomab and SOC, and was more favorable in the sub-group of patients who had received no prior salvage therapy. At an ICER threshold of $150,000/QALY gained, the probability that blinatumomab is cost-effective was estimated to be 74%.
Limitations: The study does not explicitly consider the impact of adverse events of the treatment; no adjustments for long-term transplant rates were made.
Conclusions: Compared with SOC, blinatumomab is a cost-effective treatment option for adults with R/R Ph − B-precursor ALL from the US healthcare perspective at an ICER threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. The value of blinatumomab is derived from its incremental survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) benefit over SOC.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis</pub><pmid>28631497</pmid><doi>10.1080/13696998.2017.1344127</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1369-6998 |
ispartof | Journal of medical economics, 2017-09, Vol.20 (9), p.911-922 |
issn | 1369-6998 1941-837X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1080_13696998_2017_1344127 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | acute lymphoblastic leukemia Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Antibodies, Bispecific - economics Antibodies, Bispecific - therapeutic use Antineoplastic Agents - economics Antineoplastic Agents - therapeutic use Blinatumomab cost effectiveness Cost-Benefit Analysis Female Health Expenditures - statistics & numerical data Humans ICER Interatrial Block Kaplan-Meier Estimate Male Middle Aged Models, Econometric Philadelphia Chromosome Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - drug therapy Precursor B-Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma - genetics Quality-Adjusted Life Years Salvage Therapy - economics Time Factors TOWER United States Young Adult |
title | Cost-effectiveness of blinatumomab versus salvage chemotherapy in relapsed or refractory Philadelphia-chromosome-negative B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia from a US payer perspective |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T21%3A05%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost-effectiveness%20of%20blinatumomab%20versus%20salvage%20chemotherapy%20in%20relapsed%20or%20refractory%20Philadelphia-chromosome-negative%20B-precursor%20acute%20lymphoblastic%20leukemia%20from%20a%20US%20payer%20perspective&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20medical%20economics&rft.au=Delea,%20Thomas%20E.&rft.date=2017-09-02&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=911&rft.epage=922&rft.pages=911-922&rft.issn=1369-6998&rft.eissn=1941-837X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/13696998.2017.1344127&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1911712502%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1911712502&rft_id=info:pmid/28631497&rfr_iscdi=true |