Table 1.
Timeline of the Major Evaluations of HDC/HCT Through 1999
| Date | Description | Assessment* |
|---|---|---|
| 1980s | Phase 2 studies | + |
| 1988 | BCBSA technology evaluation | − |
| 1990 | BCBSA technology evaluation | − |
| 1992 | Literature review by David Eddy (1992) | − |
| 1993 | Peters et al. (1993) report benefits of HDC/HCT relative to historical controls | + |
| 1994 | BCBSA technology evaluation | − |
| 1995 | ECRI Institute: HDC/HCT “no better” than conventional therapy | − |
| 1995 | South African study showing benefits for HDC/HCT † | + |
| 1996 | BCBSA technology evaluation | + |
| 1996 | NCCN guideline: HDC/HCT should be evaluated in clinical trials but is not a recommended treatment | − |
| October 1998 | Dutch RCT published (Rodenhuis et al. 1998) | − |
| February 1999 | Closed-door NCI meeting to review RCT results | − |
| March 1999 | Media reports of negative RCT findings | − |
| May 1999 | Reporting of RCTs at the annual ASCO meeting | − |
*
+HDC/HCT improves outcomes, −HDC/HCT no better than conventional care.
†
A 2000 audit found that the trial was fraudulent.
ASCO, American Society of Clinical Oncology; BCBCA, Blue Cross Blue Shield Association; HDC/HCT, high-dose chemotherapy/hemapoetic cell transplantation; NCCN, National Comprehensive Cancer Network; RCTs, randomized controlled trials.