1
|
Saunders D, Liu M, Vandermeer L, Alzahrani MJ, Hutton B, Clemons M. The Rethinking Clinical Trials (REaCT) Program. A Canadian-Led Pragmatic Trials Program: Strategies for Integrating Knowledge Users into Trial Design. Curr Oncol 2021; 28:3959-3977. [PMID: 34677255 PMCID: PMC8534460 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol28050337] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 09/21/2021] [Accepted: 09/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
We reviewed patient and health care provider (HCP) surveys performed through the REaCT program. The REaCT team has performed 15 patient surveys (2298 respondents) and 13 HCP surveys (1033 respondents) that have addressed a broad range of topics in breast cancer management. Over time, the proportion of surveys distributed by paper/regular mail has fallen, with electronic distribution now the norm. For the patient surveys, the median duration of the surveys was 3 months (IQR 2.5-7 months) and the median response rate was 84% (IQR 80-91.7%). For the HCP surveys, the median survey duration was 3 months (IQR 1.75-4 months), and the median response rate, where available, was 28% (IQR 21.2-49%). The survey data have so far led to: 10 systematic reviews, 6 peer-reviewed grant applications and 19 clinical trials. Knowledge users should be an essential component of clinical research. The REaCT program has integrated surveys as a standard step of their trials process. The COVID-19 pandemic and reduced face-to-face interactions with patients in the clinic as well as the continued importance of social media highlight the need for alternative means of distributing and responding to surveys.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deanna Saunders
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada; (D.S.); (M.L.); (L.V.)
| | - Michelle Liu
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada; (D.S.); (M.L.); (L.V.)
| | - Lisa Vandermeer
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada; (D.S.); (M.L.); (L.V.)
| | - Mashari Jemaan Alzahrani
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and the University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Box 912, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada;
| | - Brian Hutton
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada;
| | - Mark Clemons
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada; (D.S.); (M.L.); (L.V.)
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and the University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Box 912, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada;
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Clemons M, Fergusson D, Joy AA, Thavorn K, Meza-Junco J, Hiller JP, Mackey J, Ng T, Zhu X, Ibrahim MFK, Sienkiewicz M, Saunders D, Vandermeer L, Pond G, Basulaiman B, Awan A, Pitre L, Nixon NA, Hutton B, Hilton JF. A multi-centre study comparing granulocyte-colony stimulating factors to antibiotics for primary prophylaxis of docetaxel-cyclophosphamide induced febrile neutropenia. Breast 2021; 58:42-49. [PMID: 33901921 PMCID: PMC8095051 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.03.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Revised: 03/23/2021] [Accepted: 03/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis with ciprofloxacin or granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSF) is recommended with docetaxel-cyclophosphamide (TC) chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer (EBC). A pragmatic randomised trial compared the superiority of G-CSF to ciprofloxacin and a cost-utility analysis were conducted. METHODS EBC patients receiving TC chemotherapy were randomised to ciprofloxacin or G-CSF. The primary outcome was a composite of FN and non-FN treatment-related hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes included; rates of FN, non-FN treatment-related hospitalisation, chemotherapy dose reductions/delays/discontinuations. Primary analysis was performed with the intention to treat population. Cost-utility analyses were conducted from the Canadian public payer perspective. RESULTS 458 eligible patients were randomised: 228 to ciprofloxacin and 230 to G-CSF. For the primary endpoint there was non-statistically significant difference (Risk difference = -6.7%, 95%CI = -13.5%-0.1%, p = 0.061) between ciprofloxacin patients (46,20.2%) and G-CSF (31,13.5%). Patients receiving ciprofloxacin were more likely to experience FN (36/228, 15.8% vs 13/230, 5.7%) than patients receiving G-CSF (p < 0.001). Non-FN treatment-related hospitalisation occurred in 40/228 (17.5%) of ciprofloxacin patients vs 28/230 (12.2%) of G-CSF patients (p = 0.12). There were no differences in other secondary outcomes. G-CSF was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of C$1,760,796 per one quality-adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSION The primary endpoint of superiority of G-CSF over ciprofloxacin was not demonstrated. While there were reduced FN rates with G-CSF, there were no differences in chemotherapy dose delays/reductions or discontinuations. With the commonly used willingness to pay value of C$50,000/QALY, G-CSF use was not cost-effective compared to ciprofloxacin and deserves scrutiny from the payer perspective.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Clemons
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
| | - Dean Fergusson
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Anil A Joy
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Kednapa Thavorn
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Judith Meza-Junco
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Julie Price Hiller
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - John Mackey
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Terry Ng
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Xiaofu Zhu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Mohammed F K Ibrahim
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Marta Sienkiewicz
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Deanna Saunders
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Lisa Vandermeer
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Gregory Pond
- Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - Bassam Basulaiman
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Arif Awan
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Lacey Pitre
- Department of Oncology, Northeast Cancer Centre, Sudbury, Canada
| | - Nancy A Nixon
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, Calgary, Canada
| | - Brian Hutton
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute and School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - John F Hilton
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Yokoyama M, Kusano Y, Inoue N, Nishimura N, Mishima Y, Nukada T, Hatake K, Terui Y. Factors for the optimal selection of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor preparations and predictors for R-CHOP dose reductions/delays among patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma (STOP FN in NHL 2 subanalysis). BMC Cancer 2021; 21:358. [PMID: 33823836 PMCID: PMC8025521 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08068-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2020] [Accepted: 03/18/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background A classification tree was used to analyze background factors for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) preparation selection for febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in Japanese patients with non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma receiving the first R-CHOP cycle. Methods This was a subanalysis of the retrospective observational study STOP FN in NHL 2 (UMIN000029534). Patient characteristics, changes in neutrophil count, incidence and severity of neutropenia, and risk factors for dose reduction/delay of R-CHOP were assessed by G-CSF formulation. Results Among 234 patients in cycle 1, 25.6% received no G-CSF preparation, 52.1% received daily G-CSF, and 22.2% received pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim use was most frequent among patients aged ≥ 80 years, while that of daily G-CSF was most frequent in patients with lymphocyte count (LC) < 1000 cells/μL. Changes in neutrophil count were more marked with pegfilgrastim compared with daily G-CSF and no G-CSF. Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection in the first R-CHOP cycle were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL; for chemotherapy dose reduction were FN onset in cycle 1 and female sex; and for dose delay was hemoglobin (< 12 g/dL). After cycle 2 and onward, pegfilgrastim use increased markedly (72.6%) compared with cycle 1 (22.2%), with significantly greater proportions continuing pegfilgrastim use and switching from daily G-CSF. Conclusion Relevant factors for G-CSF preparation selection were age ≥ 80 years and LC < 1000 cells/μL. The use of pegfilgrastim increased markedly after cycle 2. These results may be useful for selecting appropriate G-CSF preparations in the first R-CHOP cycle. Trial registration UMIN000029534; registered on 13 October 2017, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000033733. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08068-0.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masahiro Yokoyama
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan.
| | - Yoshiharu Kusano
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| | - Norihito Inoue
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| | - Noriko Nishimura
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| | - Yuko Mishima
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| | | | - Kiyohiko Hatake
- Department of Hematology, International University of Health and Welfare, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Yasuhito Terui
- Division of Hematology Oncology, The Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, 3-8-31 Ariake, Koto-ku, Tokyo, 135-8550, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Clemons M, Fergusson D, Simos D, Mates M, Robinson A, Califaretti N, Zibdawi L, Bahl M, Raphael J, Ibrahim MFK, Fernandes R, Pitre L, Aseyev O, Stober C, Vandermeer L, Saunders D, Hutton B, Mallick R, Pond GR, Awan A, Hilton J. A multicentre, randomised trial comparing schedules of G-CSF (filgrastim) administration for primary prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in early stage breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2020; 31:951-957. [PMID: 32325257 DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2020] [Revised: 04/06/2020] [Accepted: 04/09/2020] [Indexed: 10/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal duration of filgrastim as primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis in early breast cancer patients is unknown, with 5, 7 or 10 days being commonly prescribed. This trial evaluates whether 5 days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomised, open-label trial, early breast cancer patients who were to receive filgrastim as primary FN prophylaxis were randomly allocated to 5 versus 7 versus 10 days of filgrastim for all chemotherapy cycles. A protocol amendment in November 2017 allowed subsequent patients (N = 324) to be randomised to either 5 or 7/10 days. The primary outcome was a composite of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisations. Secondary outcomes included chemotherapy dose reductions, delays and discontinuations. Analyses were carried out by per protocol (primary) and intention-to-treat, and the non-inferiority margin was set at 3% for the risk of having FN and/or hospitalisation per cycle of chemotherapy. RESULTS Patients (N = 466) were randomised to receive 5 (184, 39.5%), or 7/10 (282, 60.5%) days of filgrastim. In our primary analysis, the difference in risk of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation per cycle was -1.52% [95% confidence interval (CI): -3.22% to 0.19%] suggesting non-inferiority of a 5-day filgrastim schedule compared with 7/10-days. The difference in events per cycle for FN was 0.11% (95% CI: -1.05 to 1.27) while for treatment-related hospitalisations it was -1.68% (95% CI: -2.73% to -0.63%). The overall proportions of patients having at least one occurrence of either FN or treatment-related hospitalisation were 11.8% and 14.96% for the 5- and 7/10-day groups, respectively (risk difference: -3.17%, 95% CI: -9.51% to 3.18%). CONCLUSION Five days of filgrastim was non-inferior to 7/10 days. Given the cost and toxicity of this agent, 5 days should be considered standard of care. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV REGISTRATION NCT02428114 and NCT02816164.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Clemons
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
| | - D Fergusson
- Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - D Simos
- The Stronach Regional Cancer Center, Newmarket, Canada
| | - M Mates
- Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Canada
| | - A Robinson
- Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Canada
| | - N Califaretti
- Grand River Regional Cancer Centre, Kitchener, Canada
| | - L Zibdawi
- The Stronach Regional Cancer Center, Newmarket, Canada
| | - M Bahl
- Grand River Regional Cancer Centre, Kitchener, Canada
| | - J Raphael
- Department of Medical Oncology, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University and London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada; Division of Medical Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, Western University, London, Canada
| | - M F K Ibrahim
- Thunder Bay Regional Health Research Institute, Thunder Bay, Canada
| | - R Fernandes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University and London Health Sciences Centre, London, Canada
| | - L Pitre
- The Northeast Cancer Centre, Sudbury, Canada
| | - O Aseyev
- Thunder Bay Regional Health Research Institute, Thunder Bay, Canada
| | - C Stober
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - L Vandermeer
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - D Saunders
- Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - B Hutton
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - R Mallick
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - G R Pond
- McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
| | - A Awan
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - J Hilton
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital and University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Cancer Therapeutics Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Creating a pragmatic trials program for breast cancer patients: Rethinking Clinical Trials (REaCT). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2019; 177:93-101. [DOI: 10.1007/s10549-019-05274-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/24/2019] [Accepted: 05/06/2019] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
|
6
|
Clemons M, Mazzarello S, Hilton J, Joy A, Price-Hiller J, Zhu X, Verma S, Kehoe A, Ibrahim MF, Sienkiewicz M, Stober C, Vandermeer L, Hutton B, Mallick R, Fergusson D. Feasibility of using a pragmatic trials model to compare two primary febrile neutropenia prophylaxis regimens (ciprofloxacin versus G-CSF) in patients receiving docetaxel-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy for breast cancer (REaCT-TC). Support Care Cancer 2018; 27:1345-1354. [PMID: 30099602 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-018-4408-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/27/2018] [Accepted: 08/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Optimal primary febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis (i.e. ciprofloxacin or granulocyte-colony stimulating factors [G-CSF]) for patients receiving docetaxel-cyclophosphamide (TC) chemotherapy is unknown. We assessed the feasibility of using a novel pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial to compare these standard-of-care options. METHODS Early-stage breast cancer patients receiving TC chemotherapy were randomised to either ciprofloxacin or G-CSF. Trial methodology consists of broad eligibility criteria, simply-defined endpoints, integrated consent model incorporating oral consent, and web-based randomisation in the clinic. Primary feasibility endpoints included patient and physician engagement (if > 50% of patients approached agree to participate and if > 50% of physicians approached patients for the study). Secondary clinical endpoints included the following: first occurrence rates of FN, treatment-related hospitalisation, or chemotherapy dose reduction/delay/discontinuation, as well as patient satisfaction with the oral consent process. RESULTS Of 204 patients approached, 91.2% (186/204) agreed to randomisation. Sixteen of twenty (80%) participating medical oncologists randomised patients. Median patient age was 57.7 (range 31.8-84.1). The 186 patients received 557 cycles of chemotherapy. Overall incidences of first events by patient (n = 186) were as follows: FN (18/186, 21.43%), treatment-related hospitalisation (11/186, 13.10%), chemotherapy reduction (19/186, 22.62%), chemotherapy discontinuation (16/186, 19.05%), and chemotherapy delays (5/186, 5.95%). A total of 37.77% (69/186) of patients and 12.39% (69/557) of chemotherapy cycles had at least one of these first events. Patients were highly satisfied with the oral consent process. CONCLUSION This study met its feasibility endpoints. This model offers a means of comparing standard-of-care treatments in a practical and cost-efficient manner. TRIAL REGISTRATION Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02173262.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Clemons
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.
| | - Sasha Mazzarello
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - John Hilton
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Anil Joy
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Julie Price-Hiller
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Xiaofu Zhu
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Alberta, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Canada
| | - Shailendra Verma
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Anne Kehoe
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Mohammed Fk Ibrahim
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, The Ottawa Hospital Cancer Centre, The University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Marta Sienkiewicz
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Carol Stober
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Lisa Vandermeer
- Cancer Research Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Brian Hutton
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Ranjeeta Mallick
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Dean Fergusson
- Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| |
Collapse
|