-
European Urology Sep 2021Management of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiotherapy remains controversial due to the perceived high rates of severe genitourinary (GU) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Management of locally recurrent prostate cancer after definitive radiotherapy remains controversial due to the perceived high rates of severe genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity associated with any local salvage modality.
OBJECTIVE
To quantitatively compare the efficacy and toxicity of salvage radical prostatectomy (RP), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), cryotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy, and high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. Two- and 5-yr recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates and crude incidences of severe GU and GI toxicity were extracted as endpoints of interest. Random-effect meta-analyses were conducted to characterize summary effect sizes and quantify heterogeneity. Estimates for each modality were then compared with RP after adjusting for individual study-level covariates using mixed-effect regression models, while allowing for differences in between-study variance across treatment modalities.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 150 studies were included for analysis. There was significant heterogeneity between studies within each modality, and covariates differed between modalities, necessitating adjustment. Adjusted 5-yr RFS ranged from 50% after cryotherapy to 60% after HDR brachytherapy and SBRT, with no significant differences between any modality and RP. Severe GU toxicity was significantly lower with all three forms of radiotherapeutic salvage than with RP (adjusted rates of 20% after RP vs 5.6%, 9.6%, and 9.1% after SBRT, HDR brachytherapy, and LDR brachytherapy, respectively; p ≤ 0.001 for all). Severe GI toxicity was significantly lower with HDR salvage than with RP (adjusted rates 1.8% vs 0.0%, p < 0.01), with no other differences identified.
CONCLUSIONS
Large differences in 5-yr outcomes were not uncovered when comparing all salvage treatment modalities against RP. Reirradiation with SBRT, HDR brachytherapy, or LDR brachytherapy appears to result in less severe GU toxicity than RP, and reirradiation with HDR brachytherapy yields less severe GI toxicity than RP. Prospective studies of local salvage for radiorecurrent disease are warranted.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In a large study-level meta-analysis, we looked at treatment outcomes and toxicity for men treated with a number of salvage treatments for radiorecurrent prostate cancer. We conclude that relapse-free survival at 5 years is equivalent among salvage modalities, but reirradiation may lead to lower toxicity.
Topics: Brachytherapy; Cryotherapy; High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation; Humans; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prospective Studies; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiation Dosage; Radiosurgery; Salvage Therapy
PubMed: 33309278
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.010 -
Radiation Oncology (London, England) Mar 2021Due to improved imaging sensitivity, the term "oligometastatic" prostate cancer disease is diagnosed more often, leading to an increasing interest in metastasis-directed...
BACKGROUND
Due to improved imaging sensitivity, the term "oligometastatic" prostate cancer disease is diagnosed more often, leading to an increasing interest in metastasis-directed therapy (MDT). There are two types of radiation based MDT applied when treating oligometastatic disease: (1) stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) generally used for bone metastases; or (2) SBRT for isolated nodal oligometastases combined with prophylactic elective nodal radiotherapy. This review aims to summarize current evidence data, which may shed light on the optimal management of this heterogeneous group of patients.
METHODS
A systematic review of the Medline database through PubMed was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. All relevant studies published up to November 2020 were identified and screened. Fifty-six titles were included. Besides outcome parameters, different prognostic and predictive factors were assessed, including site of metastases, time between primary treatment and MDT, use of systemic therapies, hormone sensitivity, as well as pattern of recurrence.
FINDINGS
Evidence consists largely of retrospective case series and no consistent precise definition of oligometastasis exists, however, most investigators seem to acknowledge the need to distinguish between patients presenting with what is frequently called "synchronous" versus "metachronous" oligometastatic disease. Available data on radiotherapy as MDT demonstrate high local control rates and a small but relevant proportion of patients without progressive disease after 2 years. This holds true for both hormone sensitive and castration resistant prostate cancer diseases. The use of Ga-PSMA PET/CT for staging increased dramatically. Radiation doses and field sizes varied considerably among the studies. The search for relevant prognostic and predictive factors is ongoing.
CONCLUSIONS
To our best knowledge this review on oligometastatic prostate cancer included the largest number of original articles. It demonstrates the therapeutic potential and challenges of MDT for oligometastatic prostate cancer. Prospective studies are under way and will provide further high-level evidence.
Topics: Bone Neoplasms; Humans; Lymph Nodes; Lymphatic Metastasis; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Radiosurgery; Radiotherapy Dosage
PubMed: 33750437
DOI: 10.1186/s13014-021-01776-8 -
International Journal of Radiation... Apr 2021Osteoradionecrosis is a relatively rare but potentially morbid and costly complication of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Multidisciplinary diagnosis and...
Osteoradionecrosis is a relatively rare but potentially morbid and costly complication of radiation therapy for head and neck cancer. Multidisciplinary diagnosis and treatment are essential. Despite evidence guiding individual aspects of care for osteoradionecrosis, there is a lack of broad consensus on the overall diagnosis and management of this condition. This study comprehensively reviews the literature, with a focus on the past 10 years, to guide evaluation and treatment.
Topics: Bone Density Conservation Agents; Consensus; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Humans; Incidence; Mandible; Mandibular Osteotomy; Osteoradionecrosis; Ozone; Proton Therapy; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated; Risk Factors; Teriparatide; Tooth Extraction; Ultrasonic Therapy
PubMed: 33412258
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.12.043 -
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official... Oct 2017Purpose To update the ASCO guideline for antiemetics in oncology. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the medical literature for... (Review)
Review
Purpose To update the ASCO guideline for antiemetics in oncology. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the medical literature for the period of November 2009 to June 2016. Results Forty-one publications were included in this systematic review. A phase III randomized controlled trial demonstrated that adding olanzapine to antiemetic prophylaxis reduces the likelihood of nausea among adult patients who are treated with high emetic risk antineoplastic agents. Randomized controlled trials also support an expanded role for neurokinin 1 receptor antagonists in patients who are treated with chemotherapy. Recommendation Key updates include the addition of olanzapine to antiemetic regimens for adults who receive high-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents or who experience breakthrough nausea and vomiting; a recommendation to administer dexamethasone on day 1 only for adults who receive anthracycline and cyclophosphamide chemotherapy; and the addition of a neurokinin 1 receptor antagonist for adults who receive carboplatin area under the curve ≥ 4 mg/mL per minute or high-dose chemotherapy, and for pediatric patients who receive high-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents. For radiation-induced nausea and vomiting, adjustments were made to anatomic regions, risk levels, and antiemetic administration schedules. Rescue therapy alone is now recommended for low-emetic-risk radiation therapy. The Expert Panel reiterated the importance of using the most effective antiemetic regimens that are appropriate for antineoplastic agents or radiotherapy being administered. Such regimens should be used with initial treatment, rather than first assessing the patient's emetic response with less-effective treatment. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .
Topics: Antiemetics; Antineoplastic Agents; Humans; Medical Oncology; Nausea; Neoplasms; Vomiting
PubMed: 28759346
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.4789 -
Physiotherapy Research International :... Jun 2015Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is proposed as a treatment for tendinopathies. This is the first systematic review focusing solely on LLLT treatment effects in shoulder... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is proposed as a treatment for tendinopathies. This is the first systematic review focusing solely on LLLT treatment effects in shoulder tendinopathy.
METHODS
A systematic review with meta-analysis and primary outcome measures pain relief on 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and relative risk for global improvement. Two independent assessors rated the included studies according to the PEDro scale. Intervention quality assessments were performed of LLLT dosage and treatment procedures according to World Association for Laser Therapy guidelines. The included trials were sub-grouped by intervention quality and use of other physiotherapy interventions.
RESULTS
Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria, and 13 RCTs were of high and 4 RCTs of moderate methodological quality. Significant and clinically important pain relief was found with weighted mean differences (WMD) over placebo, for LLLT as monotherapy at 20.41 mm (95% CI: 12.38 to 28.44) and as adjunct to exercise therapy at 16.00 mm (95% CI: 11.88 to 20.12). The WMD when LLLT was used in a multimodal physiotherapy treatment regime reached statistical significance over placebo at 12.80 (95% CI: 1.67-23.94) mm pain reduction on VAS. Relative risks for global improvement were statistically significant at 1.96 (95% CI: 1.25-3.08) and 1.51 (95% CI: 1.12-2.03), for laser as monotherapy or adjunctive in a physiotherapy regime, respectively. Secondary outcome measures of shoulder function were only significantly in favour of LLLT when used as monotherapy. Trials performed with inadequate laser doses were ineffective across all outcome measures.
CONCLUSION
This review shows that optimal LLLT can offer clinically relevant pain relief and initiate a more rapid course of improvement, both alone and in combination with physiotherapy interventions. Our findings challenge the conclusions in previous multimodal shoulder reviews of physiotherapy and their lack of intervention quality assessments.
Topics: Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Pain Measurement; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shoulder Joint; Tendinopathy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25450903
DOI: 10.1002/pri.1606 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Mar 2022To compare the efficacy of covid-19 vaccines between immunocompromised and immunocompetent people. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy of covid-19 vaccines between immunocompromised and immunocompetent people.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Embase, Central Register of Controlled Trials, COVID-19 Open Research Dataset Challenge (CORD-19), and WHO covid-19 databases for studies published between 1 December 2020 and 5 November 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched in November 2021 to identify registered but as yet unpublished or ongoing studies.
STUDY SELECTION
Prospective observational studies comparing the efficacy of covid-19 vaccination in immunocompromised and immunocompetent participants.
METHODS
A frequentist random effects meta-analysis was used to separately pool relative and absolute risks of seroconversion after the first and second doses of a covid-19 vaccine. Systematic review without meta-analysis of SARS-CoV-2 antibody titre levels was performed after first, second, and third vaccine doses and the seroconversion rate after a third dose. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed.
RESULTS
82 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Of these studies, 77 (94%) used mRNA vaccines, 16 (20%) viral vector vaccines, and 4 (5%) inactivated whole virus vaccines. 63 studies were assessed to be at low risk of bias and 19 at moderate risk of bias. After one vaccine dose, seroconversion was about half as likely in patients with haematological cancers (risk ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.50, I=80%; absolute risk 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.40, I=89%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.53, 0.39 to 0.71, I=89%; 0.29, 0.11 to 0.58, I=97%), and solid cancers (0.55, 0.46 to 0.65, I=78%; 0.44, 0.36 to 0.53, I=84%) compared with immunocompetent controls, whereas organ transplant recipients were 16 times less likely to seroconvert (0.06, 0.04 to 0.09, I=0%; 0.06, 0.04 to 0.08, I=0%). After a second dose, seroconversion remained least likely in transplant recipients (0.39, 0.32 to 0.46, I=92%; 0.35, 0.26 to 0.46), with only a third achieving seroconversion. Seroconversion was increasingly likely in patients with haematological cancers (0.63, 0.57 to 0.69, I=88%; 0.62, 0.54 to 0.70, I=90%), immune mediated inflammatory disorders (0.75, 0.69 to 0.82, I=92%; 0.77, 0.66 to 0.85, I=93%), and solid cancers (0.90, 0.88 to 0.93, I=51%; 0.89, 0.86 to 0.91, I=49%). Seroconversion was similar between people with HIV and immunocompetent controls (1.00, 0.98 to 1.01, I=0%; 0.97, 0.83 to 1.00, I=89%). Systematic review of 11 studies showed that a third dose of a covid-19 mRNA vaccine was associated with seroconversion among vaccine non-responders with solid cancers, haematological cancers, and immune mediated inflammatory disorders, although response was variable in transplant recipients and inadequately studied in people with HIV and those receiving non-mRNA vaccines.
CONCLUSION
Seroconversion rates after covid-19 vaccination were significantly lower in immunocompromised patients, especially organ transplant recipients. A second dose was associated with consistently improved seroconversion across all patient groups, albeit at a lower magnitude for organ transplant recipients. Targeted interventions for immunocompromised patients, including a third (booster) dose, should be performed.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021272088.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Immunocompetence; SARS-CoV-2; Seroconversion
PubMed: 35236664
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-068632 -
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews Jan 2020Skin pigmentation is a result of melanin produced by melanocytes in the epidermis. Melanocyte activity, along with the type and distribution of melanins, is the main...
Skin pigmentation is a result of melanin produced by melanocytes in the epidermis. Melanocyte activity, along with the type and distribution of melanins, is the main driver for diversity of skin pigmentation. Dark melanin acts to protect against the deleterious effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation, including photo-aging and skin cancer formation. In turn, UV radiation activates skin melanocytes to induce further pigmentation (i.e., "tanning pathway"). The well-characterized MSH/MC1R-cAMP-MITF pathway regulates UV-induced melanization. Pharmacologic activation of this pathway ("sunless tanning") represents a potential strategy for skin cancer prevention, particularly in those with light skin or the "red hair" phenotype who tan poorly after UV exposure due to MC1R inactivating polymorphisms. Skin hyperpigmentation can also occur as a result of inflammatory processes and dermatological disorders such as melasma. While primarily of cosmetic concern, these conditions can dramatically impact quality of life of affected patients. Several topical agents are utilized to treat skin pigmentation disorders. Here, we review melanogenesis induced by UV exposure and the agents that target this pathway.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Cyclic AMP; Dermatologic Agents; Drug Delivery Systems; Humans; Melanins; Pigmentation Disorders; Protein Kinases; Skin Pigmentation; Ultraviolet Rays
PubMed: 32092380
DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2020.02.002 -
Practical Radiation Oncology 2021Organ at risk (OAR) dose constraints are a critical aspect of SABR treatment planning. There is limited evidence supporting preferred dose constraints for many OARs. We...
PURPOSE
Organ at risk (OAR) dose constraints are a critical aspect of SABR treatment planning. There is limited evidence supporting preferred dose constraints for many OARs. We sought to evaluate OAR dose constraints used in ongoing clinical trials of SABR for oligometastatic disease.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
Clinicaltrials.gov was searched from inception to February 2020 to capture actively accruing clinical trials using SABR in oligometastatic disease. Dose constraints were obtained by contacting principal investigators and abstracted by 2 authors. Variability of constraints was assessed by comparing the width of the interquartile range and difference between the maximum and minimum dose to a volume.
RESULTS
Fifty-three of 85 eligible clinical trials contributed OAR constraints used in analysis. Dose constraints for 1 to 8 fractions of SABR were collected for 33 OARs. Variability was found in the absolute allowable OAR doses, use of planning OAR volumes, and whether constraints were optional versus mandatory. For many OARs, modal dose constraints often matched a pre-existing publication, but no single pre-existing publication matched the modes of all OAR dose constraints. Organs displaying the most variability were the rectum, penile bulb, and chest wall and ribs. The esophagus, stomach, duodenum, and small bowel also indicated high variability for at least 1 constraint. OARs previously evaluated by HyTEC appeared to have less variability among study protocols.
CONCLUSIONS
We found substantial variability in OAR dose constraints used in current clinical trials evaluating SABR in oligometastatic disease. We are unable to comment on toxicity rates or acceptability of dose constraints used. Future research and recommendations for standardized OAR dose constraints, as well as consistency in implementing planning OAR volume margins, should be priorities for the field of radiation oncology.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Duodenum; Humans; Organs at Risk; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Rectum
PubMed: 34217495
DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.03.005 -
Medicine Apr 2021In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) including atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab have reported their efficacy and safety profile in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab as first-line treatment in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
In recent years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) including atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab have reported their efficacy and safety profile in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, given the diverse efficacy and inconsistent safety among the ICIs, with the absence of head-to-head researches designed to evaluate the efficacy among them, it might bring with confusion on selection in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVES
The present systematic review and network meta-analysis was performed to conduct indirect comparisons on efficacy and safety profile among ICIs, including atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab as first-line treatment in patients with ES-SCLC.
DESIGN
Several databases were retrieved with established criteria until June 20, 2020, with the main MeSH Terms and their similarities. Hazard ratios of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), odds ratios (ORs) of disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) were compared indirectly with network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Cochrane library, and Embase.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical studies, which reported PFS, OS, and AEs.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Clinical characteristics were extracted by the 2 authors independently. Comparisons of HRs were calculated for PFS and OS by random effect model. ORR, DCR, and AEs were presented with ORs. Based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve, and forest plots, efficacy and safety of the treatments were ranked, with predicted histogram described.
RESULTS
In total, there were 4 studies including 1547 patients who met the eligibility criteria and enrolled. For indirect comparisons, no significant difference on PFS was observed between atezolizumab and durvalumab (HR 0.96, 95% CI, 0.72-1.29), or between atezolizumab and pembrolizumab (HR 1.05, 95% CI, 0.78-1.43), or between atezolizumab and nivolumab (HR 1.18, 95% CI, 0.79-1.79), or between durvalumab and pembrolizumab (HR 1.10, 95% CI, 0.84-1.43). or between durvalumab and nivolumab (HR 1.23, 95% CI, 0.83-1.82), or between pembrolizumab and nivolumab (HR 1.12, 95% CI, 0.76-1.66), nor significant difference on OS observed between atezolizumab and durvalumab (HR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.67-1.30), or between atezolizumab and pembrolizumab (HR 0.88, 95% CI, 0.62-1.24), or between atezolizumab and nivolumab (HR 1.04, 95% CI, 0.66-1.66), or between durvalumab and pembrolizumab (HR 0.94, 95% CI, 0.70-1.25), or between durvalumab and nivolumab (HR 1.12, 95% CI, 0.73-1.71), or between pembrolizumab and nivolumab (HR 1.19, 95% CI, 0.77-1.84). However, durvalumab was shown statistical superiority on ORR when compared with atezolizumab (HR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.64-0.98), also with significantly higher risk on immune-related AEs when compared with atezolizumab (OR 0.22, 95% CI, 0.10-0.50), and pembrolizumab (OR 3.12, 95% CI, 1.27-7.64).
CONCLUSIONS
Results of the study revealed that there was no statistical difference on PFS or OS among agents of atezolizumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab as first-line treatment in patients with ES-SCLC. However, durvalumab was shown superiority on ORR when compared with atezolizumab, also with significantly higher risk on immune-related AEs.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Staging; Network Meta-Analysis; Nivolumab; Progression-Free Survival; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
PubMed: 33847617
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000025180 -
The Lancet. Oncology Jun 201635% of patients with pancreatic cancer have unresectable locally advanced disease at diagnosis. Several studies have examined systemic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
35% of patients with pancreatic cancer have unresectable locally advanced disease at diagnosis. Several studies have examined systemic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin) in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment in this patient population.
METHODS
We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed Publisher, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from July 1, 1994, to July 2, 2015, for studies of treatment-naive patients of any age who received FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival; rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events; and the proportion of patients who underwent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, surgical resection after FOLFIRINOX, and R0 resection. We evaluated survival outcomes with the Kaplan-Meier method with patient-level data. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events, and the proportion of patients who underwent subsequent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or resection, were pooled in a random-effects model.
FINDINGS
We included 13 studies comprising 689 patients, of whom 355 (52%) patients had locally advanced pancreatic cancer. 11 studies, comprising 315 patients with locally advanced disease, reported survival outcomes and were eligible for patient-level meta-analysis. Median overall survival from the start of FOLFIRINOX ranged from 10·0 months (95% CI 4·0-16·0) to 32·7 months (23·1-42·3) across studies with a pooled patient-level median overall survival of 24·2 months (95% CI 21·7-26·8). Median progression-free survival ranged from 3·0 months (95% CI not calculable) to 20·4 months (6·5-34·3) across studies with a patient-level median progression-free survival of 15·0 months (95% 13·8-16·2). In ten studies comprising 490 patients, 296 grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported (60·4 events per 100 patients). No deaths were attributed to FOLFIRINOX toxicity. The proportion of patients who underwent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy ranged from 31% to 100% across studies. In eight studies, 154 (57%) of 271 patients received radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy after FOLFIRINOX. The pooled proportion of patients who received any radiotherapy treatment was 63·5% (95% CI 43·3-81·6, I(2) 90%). The proportion of patients who underwent surgical resection for locally advanced pancreatic cancer ranged from 0% to 43%. The proportion of patients who had R0 resection of those who underwent resection ranged from 50% to 100% across studies. In 12 studies, 91 (28%) of 325 patients underwent resection after FOLFIRINOX. The pooled proportion of patients who had resection was 25·9% (95% CI 20·2-31·9, I(2) 24%). R0 resection was reported in 60 (74%) of 81 patients. The pooled proportion of patients who had R0 resection was 78·4% (95% CI 60·2-92·2, I(2) 64%).
INTERPRETATION
Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX had a median overall survival of 24·2 months-longer than that reported with gemcitabine (6-13 months). Future research should assess these promising results in a randomised controlled trial, and should establish which patients might benefit from radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or resection after FOLFIRINOX.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Deoxycytidine; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Leucovorin; Neoplasm Staging; Organoplatinum Compounds; Oxaliplatin; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Survival Rate; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 27160474
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00172-8