-
The Journal of Infection Sep 2023The optimisation of the use of β-lactam antibiotics (BLA) via prolonged infusions in life-threatening complications such as febrile neutropenia (FN) is still... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The optimisation of the use of β-lactam antibiotics (BLA) via prolonged infusions in life-threatening complications such as febrile neutropenia (FN) is still controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the efficacy of this strategy in onco-haematological patients with FN.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, EMBASE, World Health Organization, and ClinicalTrials.gov, from database inception until December 2022. The search included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared prolonged vs short-term infusions of the same BLA. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were defervescence, requirement of vasoactive drugs, length of hospital stay and adverse events. Pooled risk ratios were calculated using random effects models.
RESULTS
Five studies were included, comprising 691 episodes of FN, mainly in haematological patients. Prolonged infusion was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (pRR 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.48). Nor differences were found in secondary outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The limited data available did not show significant differences in terms of all-cause mortality or significant secondary outcomes in patients with FN receiving BLA in prolonged vs. short-term infusion. High-quality RCTs are needed to determine whether there are subgroups of FN patients who would benefit from prolonged BLA infusion.
Topics: Humans; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Monobactams; Febrile Neutropenia
PubMed: 37423503
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2023.06.023 -
Genes Aug 2023PSTPIP1 (proline-serine-threonine phosphatase-interactive protein 1)-associated myeloid-related proteinemia inflammatory (PAMI) syndrome, previously known as... (Review)
Review
PSTPIP1 (proline-serine-threonine phosphatase-interactive protein 1)-associated myeloid-related proteinemia inflammatory (PAMI) syndrome, previously known as Hyperzincemia/Hypercalprotectinemia (Hz/Hc) syndrome, is a recently described, rare auto-inflammatory disorder caused by specific deleterious variants in the gene (p.E250K and p.E257K). The disease is characterized by chronic systemic inflammation, cutaneous and osteoarticular manifestations, hepatosplenomegaly, anemia, and neutropenia. Increased blood levels of MRP 8/14 and zinc distinguish this condition from other PSTPIP1-associated inflammatory diseases (PAID). The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the disease phenotype, course, treatment, and outcome based on reported cases. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines (2020) for reporting. A literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, and Web of Science on 13 October 2022. The quality of the case reports and case series was assessed using the JBI checklists. Out of the 43 included patients with PAMI syndrome, there were 24 females and 19 males. The median age at onset was 3.9 years. The main clinical manifestations included anemia (100%), neutropenia (98%), cutaneous manifestations (74%), osteoarticular manifestations (72%), splenomegaly (70%), growth failure (57%), fever (51%), hepatomegaly (56%), and lymphadenopathy (39%). Systemic inflammation was described in all patients. Marked elevation of zinc and MRP 8/14 blood levels were observed in all tested patients. Response to treatment varied and no consistently effective therapy was identified. The most common therapeutic options were corticosteroids (N = 30), anakinra (N = 13), cyclosporine A (N = 11), canakinumab (N = 6), and anti-TNF (N = 14). Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has been recently reported to be successful in five patients. Our review highlights the key characteristics of PAMI syndrome and the importance of considering this disease in the differential diagnosis of patients presenting with early-onset systemic inflammation and cytopenia.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Neutropenia; Diagnosis, Differential; Cytoskeletal Proteins; Adaptor Proteins, Signal Transducing
PubMed: 37628706
DOI: 10.3390/genes14081655 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Schizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Schizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking and speech, emotional processes, behaviour and sense of self. Clozapine is useful in the treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders, particularly when other antipsychotic medications have failed. It improves positive symptoms (such as delusions and hallucinations) and negative symptoms (such as withdrawal and poverty of speech). However, it is unclear what dose of clozapine is most effective with the least side effects.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and tolerability of clozapine at different doses and to identify the optimal dose of clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenia, schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorders.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (August 2011 and 8 December 2016).
SELECTION CRITERIA
All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of blinding status or language, that compared the effects of clozapine at different doses in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, diagnosed by any criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We independently inspected citations from the searches, identified relevant abstracts, obtained full articles of relevant abstracts, and classified trials as included or excluded. We included trials that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five studies that could be included. Each compared the effects of clozapine at very low dose (up to 149 mg/day), low dose (150 mg/day to 300 mg/day) and standard dose (301 mg/day to 600 mg/day). Four of the five included studies were based on a small number of participants. We rated all the evidence reported for the main outcomes of interest as low or very low quality. No data were available for the main outcomes of global state, service use or quality of life. Very low dose compared to low doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low and very low doses of clozapine in terms of average Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored (BPRS-A) endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 3.55, 95% CI -4.50 to 11.60, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in body mass index (BMI) in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.95 to 0.75, low-quality evidence). Very low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between very low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of average BPRS-A endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 6.67, 95% CI -2.09 to 15.43, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 58, MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.96, low-quality evidence) Low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of both clinician-assessed clinical improvement (2 RCTs, n = 141, RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.61, medium-quality evidence) and clinically important response as more than 30% change in BPRS score (1 RCT, n = 176, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.10, medium-quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 57, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.24, low-quality evidence).We found some evidence of effect for other adverse effect outcomes; however, the data were again limited. Very low dose compared to low doseThere was limited evidence that serum triglycerides were lower at low-dose clozapine compared to very low dose in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.49). Low dose compared to standard doseWeight gain was lower at very low dose compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 27, MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.38 to -0.02). Glucose level one hour after meal was also lower at very lose dose (1 RCT, n = 58, MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.90 to -0.30). Total cholesterol levels were higher at very low compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 58, n = 58, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.80). Low dose compared to standard doseThere was evidence of fewer adverse effects, measured as lower TESS scores, in the low-dose group in the short term (2 RCTs, n = 266, MD -3.99, 95% CI -5.75 to -2.24); and in one study there was evidence that the incidence of lethargy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), hypersalivation (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.84), dizziness (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81) and tachycardia (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.71) was less at low dose compared to standard dose.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence of effect on mental state between standard, low and very low dose regimes, but we did not identify any trials on high or very high doses of clozapine. BMI measurements were similar between groups in the short term, although weight gain was less at very low dose compared to standard dose in one study. There was limited evidence that the incidence of some adverse effects was greater at standard dose compared to lower dose regimes. We found very little useful data and the evidence available is generally of low or very low quality. More studies are needed to validate our findings and report on outcomes such as relapse, remission, social functioning, service utilisation, cost-effectiveness, satisfaction with care, and quality of life. There is a particular lack of medium- or long-term outcome data, and on dose regimes above the standard rate.
Topics: Agranulocytosis; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 28613395
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009555.pub2 -
Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Apr 2023Rechallenge/continuation of clozapine in association with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) following neutropenia/agranulocytosis has been reported, but many questions... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
Rechallenge/continuation of clozapine in association with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) following neutropenia/agranulocytosis has been reported, but many questions remain unanswered about efficacy and safety. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of rechallenging/continuing clozapine in patients following neutropenia/agranulocytosis using CSFs.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception date to July 31, 2022. Articles screening and data extraction were realized independently by two reviewers, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 systematic review guidance. Included articles had to report on at least one case where clozapine was rechallenged/continued using CSFs despite previous neutropenia/agranulocytosis.
RESULTS
Eight hundred forty articles were retrieved; 34 articles met the inclusion criteria, totaling 59 individual cases. Clozapine was successfully rechallenged/continued in 76% of patients for an average follow-up period of 1.9 years. There was a trend toward better efficacy reported in case reports/series, compared with consecutive case series (overall success rates of 84% and 60%, respectively, -value = 0.065). Two administration strategies were identified, "as-needed" and prophylactic, both yielding similar success rates (81% and 80%, respectively). Only mild and transient adverse events were documented.
CONCLUSIONS
Although limited by the relatively small number of published cases, factors such as time of onset to first neutropenia and severity of the episode did not seem to impact the outcome of a subsequent clozapine rechallenge using CSFs. While the efficacy of this strategy remains to be further adequately evaluated in more rigorous study designs, its long-term innocuity warrants considering its use more proactively in the management of clozapine hematological adverse events as to maintain this treatment for as many individuals as possible.
Topics: Humans; Clozapine; Antipsychotic Agents; Neutropenia; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
PubMed: 36794520
DOI: 10.1177/02698811231154111 -
Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease 2022In pandemic conditions, patients with febrile neutropenia are also at risk of COVID-19. Aim of this systematic review is to evaluate COVID-19 cases presented with... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
In pandemic conditions, patients with febrile neutropenia are also at risk of COVID-19. Aim of this systematic review is to evaluate COVID-19 cases presented with febrile neutropenia and provide information regarding incidence, clinical course and prognosis.
METHODS
We systematically searched on COVID-19 and febrile neutropenia cases in PubMed, SCOPUS and Web of Science.
RESULTS
A total of 19 febrile neutropenic patients were analyzed. A male predominance was noted. Eleven cases had hematological malignancies. Fourteen of the cases were previously received chemotherapy. Five patients had severe neutropenia: 3 had hematologic cancer and none died. 17 (89.5%) cases have pulmonary involvement and seven of them had severe disease with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Three cases with ARDS were died. 12 of them received G-CSF for treatment. Five cases were developed respiratory failure after G-CSF use. Overall mortality was 15.8%, while death was not observed in patients without malignancy and solid organ tumors, the mortality rate was 27% in cases with hematological malignancies.
CONCLUSION
In ongoing pandemic, febrile neutropenic patients should be precisely evaluated for COVID-19 disease. It should be remembered that there may not be typical signs and symptoms and laboratory findings of COVID-19 disease because of the immunosuppression.
Topics: COVID-19; Febrile Neutropenia; Female; Fever; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor; Hematologic Neoplasms; Humans; Male; Neoplasms; Respiratory Distress Syndrome
PubMed: 35272019
DOI: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2022.102305 -
Medicine Oct 2015Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are a critical member of systemic therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) are a critical member of systemic therapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Erlotinib is the first-generation EGFR-TKIs, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend it as a first-line agent in patients with sensitizing EGFR mutations. However, the safety of erlotinib plus chemotherapy (CT) or erlotinib alone for advanced NSCLC remains controversial. We carried out a systematic meta-analysis to determine the overall risk of neutropenia and leukopenia associated with erlotinib. PubMed, EMBASE, CBM, CNKI, WanFang database, The Cochrane library, Web of Science, as well as abstracts presented at ASCO conferences and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify relevant studies. RR with 95% CIs for neutropenia and leukopenia were all extracted. The random-effects model was used to calculate pooled RRs and 95% CIs. Power calculation was performed using macro embedded in SAS software after all syntheses were conducted. We identified 12 eligible studies involving 3932 patients. Erlotinib plus CT or alone relative to CT is associated with significantly decreased risks of neutropenia and leukopenia in patients with advanced NSCLC (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.21-0.71; P = 0.00; incidence: 9.9 vs. 35.2%) and (RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.11-0.93; P = 0.04; incidence: 3.5 vs. 11.6%), respectively. The subgroup analysis by erlotinib with or without CT showed that erlotinib combine with CT have no significance decrease the relative risks of neutropenia or leukopenia (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.78-1.23; P = 0.87; incidence: 26.2 vs. 30.5%) and (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.34-1.95; P = 0.64; incidence: 6.5 vs. 9.3%), respectively. However, erlotinib alone could decrease incidence of neutropenia (RR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.27; P = 0.00; incidence: 3.7 vs. 40.8%) or leukopenia (RR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.45; P = 0.01; incidence: 0.8 vs. 15.7%). The power analysis suggests that a power of 61.31% was determined to detect an RR of 0.38 for neutropenia, and 78.03% for an RR of 0.32 for leukopenia. The present meta-analysis suggested that erlotinib could decrease the incidence of neutropenia and leukopenia in patients with advanced NSCLC undergoing erlotinib regardless of whether combined with CT or not. The subgroup analysis revealed that erlotinib combine with CT did not affect the incidence; however, erlotinib alone could significantly decrease the incidence of neutropenia and leukopenia compared with CT alone.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Erlotinib Hydrochloride; Humans; Leukopenia; Lung Neoplasms; Neutropenia; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Risk Factors
PubMed: 26448029
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001719 -
Scientific Reports Feb 2024Individual trials of abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib show a similar impact on progression-free survival yet differing statistical significance for overall... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Individual trials of abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib show a similar impact on progression-free survival yet differing statistical significance for overall survival (OS). A robust comparative evaluation of OS, safety, and tolerability of the three drugs is warranted. A systematic literature search identified phase 3 randomized clinical trials reporting OS of CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) in combination with endocrine therapy in ER-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Trial-level data on OS and common and serious adverse events (AE) were extracted for each drug. In the absence of direct comparisons, a network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate pairwise comparative efficacy, safety, and tolerability of each of the CDK4/6i. Seven studies comprising of 4415 patients met the inclusion criteria. Median follow-up was 73.3 months (range: 48.7-97.2 months). There were no statistically significant differences in OS between any of the CDK4/6i. Compared to palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib both showed significantly higher GI toxicity (grade 1-2 vomiting OR 1.87 [95% CI 1.37-2.56] and OR 2.27 [95% CI 1.59-3.23] respectively). Compared to palbociclib, abemaciclib was associated with more grade 3-4 diarrhea OR 118.06 [95% CI 7.28-1915.32]. In contrast, palbociclib was associated with significantly more neutropenia than ribociclib and abemaciclib but significantly lower risk of grade 3-4 infections. Abemaciclib had significantly less grade 3-4 transaminitis and grade 3-4 neutropenia than ribociclib. Treatment discontinuation and death due to AE were significantly higher with abemaciclib than palbociclib and ribociclib. There is no statistically significant difference in OS between CDK4/6i despite differing statistical significance levels of individual trials. Real-world data analyses may help to identify if there is a meaningful inter-drug difference in efficacy. Significant differences between CDK4/6i are observed for safety and tolerability outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Aminopyridines; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Benzimidazoles; Breast Neoplasms; Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4; Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 6; Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor Proteins; Neutropenia; Purines; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38326452
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-53151-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2016Chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) where surgical resection of metastases is not an option. Both... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Irinotecan chemotherapy combined with fluoropyrimidines versus irinotecan alone for overall survival and progression-free survival in patients with advanced and/or metastatic colorectal cancer.
BACKGROUND
Chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) where surgical resection of metastases is not an option. Both irinotecan (IRI) and fluoropyrimidines are often included in first- or second- line chemotherapy treatment regimens in such patients. However, it is not clear whether combining these agents is superior to irinotecan alone.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of two chemotherapeutic regimens, irinotecan monotherapy or irinotecan in combination with fluoropyrimidines, for patients with advanced CRC when administered in the first or second-line settings.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials: Cochrane Colorectal Cancer Group Specialised Register (January 13, 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)(The Cochrane Library Issue 12, 2016), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to January 13, 2016), Ovid EMBASE (1974 to January 13, 2016), registers of controlled trials in progress, references cited in relevant publications and conference proceedings in related fields (BioMed Central and Medscape's Conference). The key authors or investigators of all eligible studies, and professionals in the field were contacted when necessary. The search from January 2016 identified one eligible study, an ongoing trial currently presented as an abstract, to be considered in an update of this review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy and safety of IRI chemotherapy combined with fluoropyrimidine compared with IRI alone for the treatment of patients with advanced CRC, regardless of treatment line settings.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Study eligibility and methodological quality were assessed independently by the two authors, and any disagreement was solved by a third author. The data collected from the studies were reviewed qualitatively and quantitatively using the Cochrane Collaboration statistical software RevMan 5.3.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies were included in this review with a total of 1,726 patients. The top-up search resulted in an additional ongoing trial, the results of which have not been incorporated in this review. Among five included studies, no reduction in all-cause mortality was observed in the combination arm, with a summary hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.81-1.02). Longer progression-free survival was observed in those treated with the combination chemotherapy (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53-0.87), however, this result may have been driven by findings from the single first-line treatment setting study.The quality of evidence for overall survival was low and for progression-free survival was moderate, mainly due to study limitation from the lack of information on randomisation methods and allocation concealment.There were higher risks of toxicity outcomes grade 3 or 4 diarrhoea and grade 1 or 2 alopecia, and a lower risk of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia in controls compared to the invervention group. Evidence for toxicity has been assessed to be low to moderate quality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was no overall survival benefit of the irinotecan and fluoropyrimidine treatment over irinotecan alone, thus both regimens remain reasonable options in treating patients with advanced or metastatic CRC. Given the low and moderate quality of the evidence, future studies with sufficient numbers of patients in each treatment arms are needed to clarify the benefit observed in progression-free survival with combination irinotecan and fluoropyrimidines.
Topics: Alopecia; Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin; Colorectal Neoplasms; Diarrhea; Disease-Free Survival; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Nausea; Neutropenia; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26869023
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008593.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Systemic fungal infection is considered to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly those with neutropenia. Antifungal drugs are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Systemic fungal infection is considered to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly those with neutropenia. Antifungal drugs are often given prophylactically, or empirically to patients with persistent fever.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether commonly used antifungal drugs decrease mortality in cancer patients with neutropenia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched PubMed from 1966 to 7 July 2014 and the reference lists of identified articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials of amphotericin B, fluconazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, itraconazole or voriconazole compared with placebo or no treatment in cancer patients with neutropenia.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and abstracted data.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-two trials involving 4287 patients were included. Prophylactic or empirical treatment with amphotericin B significantly decreased total mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.96), whereas the estimated RRs for fluconazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, and itraconazole were close to 1.00. No eligible trials were found with voriconazole. Amphotericin B and fluconazole decreased mortality ascribed to fungal infection (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.76 and RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.73, respectively). The incidence of invasive fungal infection decreased significantly with administration of amphotericin B (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.73), fluconazole (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.57) and itraconazole (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.97), but not with ketoconazole or miconazole. Effect estimates were similar for those 13 trials that had adequate allocation concealment and were blinded. The reporting of harms was far too variable from trial to trial to allow a meaningful overview. For the 2011 and 2014 updates no additional trials were identified for inclusion.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous amphotericin B was the only antifungal agent that reduced total mortality. It should therefore be preferred when prophylactic or empirical antifungal therapy is introduced in cancer patients with neutropenia.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Humans; Immunocompromised Host; Mycoses; Neoplasms; Neutropenia; Opportunistic Infections; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25188768
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000026.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2022Ovarian cancer is the seventh most frequent cancer diagnosis worldwide, and the eighth leading cause of cancer mortality. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ovarian cancer is the seventh most frequent cancer diagnosis worldwide, and the eighth leading cause of cancer mortality. Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most common kind, accounting for 90% of cases. First-line therapy for women with epithelial ovarian cancer consists of a combination of cytoreductive surgery and platinum and taxane-based chemotherapy. However, more than 50% of women with epithelial ovarian cancer will experience a relapse and require further chemotherapy and at some point develop resistance to platinum-based drugs. Currently, guidance on the use of most chemotherapy drugs, including taxanes, is unclear for women whose epithelial ovarian cancer has recurred. Paclitaxel, topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride, trabectedin and gemcitabine are all licensed for use in the UK at the discretion of clinicians, following discussion with the women as to potential adverse effects. Taxanes can be given in once-weekly regimens (at a lower dose) or three-weekly regimens (at a higher dose), which may have differences in the severity of side effects and effectiveness. As relapsed disease suggests incurable disease, it is all the more important to consider side effects and the impact of treatment schedules, as well as quality of life, and not only the life-prolonging effects of treatment.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and toxicity of different taxane monotherapy regimens for women with recurrent epithelial ovarian, tubal or primary peritoneal cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase, up to 22 March 2022. Other related databases and trial registries were searched as well as grey literature and no additional studies were identified. A total of 1500 records were identified.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of taxane monotherapy for adult women diagnosed with recurrent epithelial ovarian, tubal or primary peritoneal cancer, previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. We included trials comparing two or more taxane monotherapy regimens. Participants could be experiencing their first recurrence of disease or any line of recurrence.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened, independently assessed studies, and extracted data from the included studies. The clinical outcomes we examined were overall survival, response rate, progression-free survival, neurotoxicity, neutropenia, alopecia, and quality of life. We performed statistical analyses using fixed-effect and random-effects models following standard Cochrane methodology. We rated the certainty of evidence according to the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Our literature search yielded 1500 records of 1466 studies; no additional studies were identified by searching grey literature or handsearching. We uploaded the search results into Covidence. After the exclusion of 92 duplicates, we screened titles and abstracts of 1374 records. Of these, we identified 24 studies for full-text screening. We included four parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs). All trials were multicentred and conducted in a hospital setting. The studies included 981 eligible participants with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer, tubal or primary peritoneal cancer with a median age ranging between 56 to 62 years of age. All participants had a WHO (World Health Organization) performance status of between 0 to 2. The proportion of participants with serous histology ranged between 56% to 85%. Participants included women who had platinum-sensitive (71%) and platinum-resistant (29%) relapse. Some participants were taxane pre-treated (5.6%), whilst the majority were taxane-naive (94.4%). No studies were classified as having a high risk of bias for any of the domains in the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We found that there may be little or no difference in overall survival (OS) between weekly paclitaxel and three-weekly paclitaxel, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) of 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 1.33, two studies, 263 participants, very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, there may be little or no difference in response rate (RR of 1.07, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.48, two studies, 263 participants, very low-certainty evidence) and progression-free survival (PFS) (RR of 0.83, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.52, two studies, 263 participants, very low-certainty evidence) between weekly and three-weekly paclitaxel, but the evidence is very uncertain. We found differences in the chemotherapy-associated adverse events between the weekly and three-weekly paclitaxel regimens. The weekly paclitaxel regimen may result in a reduction in neutropenia (RR 0.51, 95% 0.27 to 0.95, two studies, 260 participants, low-certainty evidence) and alopecia (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.73, one study, 205 participants, low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in neurotoxicity, but the evidence was very low-certainty and we cannot exclude an effect (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.45, two studies, 260 participants). When examining the effect of paclitaxel dosage in the three-weekly regimen, the 250 mg/m paclitaxel regimen probably causes more neurotoxicity compared to the 175 mg/m regimen (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.80, one study, 330 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). Quality-of-life data were not extractable from any of the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Fewer people may experience neutropenia when given weekly rather than three-weekly paclitaxel (low-certainty evidence), although it may make little or no difference to the risk of developing neurotoxicity (very low-certainty evidence). This is based on the participants receiving lower doses of drug more often. However, our confidence in this result is low and the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Weekly paclitaxel probably reduces the risk of alopecia, although the rates in both arms were high (46% versus 79%) (low-certainty evidence). A change to weekly from three-weekly chemotherapy could be considered to reduce the likelihood of toxicity, as it may have little or no negative impact on response rate (very low-certainty evidence), PFS (very low-certainty evidence) or OS (very low-certainty evidence). Three-weekly paclitaxel, given at a dose of 175 mg/m compared to a higher dose,probably reduces the risk of neurotoxicity.We are moderately confident in this result; the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. A change to 175 mg/m paclitaxel (from a higher dose), if a three-weekly regimen is used, probably has little or no negative impact on PFS or OS (very low-certainty evidence).
Topics: Adult; Alopecia; Bridged-Ring Compounds; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neutropenia; Ovarian Neoplasms; Paclitaxel; Taxoids
PubMed: 35866378
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008766.pub3