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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of medical economics 2017-09, Vol.20 (9), p.911-922
Hauptverfasser: Delea, Thomas E., Amdahl, Jordan, Boyko, Diana, Hagiwara, May, Zimmerman, Zachary F., Franklin, Janet L., Cong, Ze, Hechmati, Guy, Stein, Anthony
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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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