-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014Lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) is the third leading cause of death worldwide and the first leading cause of death in low-income countries. Community-acquired... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) is the third leading cause of death worldwide and the first leading cause of death in low-income countries. Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common condition that causes a significant disease burden for the community, particularly in children younger than five years, the elderly and immunocompromised people. Antibiotics are the standard treatment for CAP. However, increasing antibiotic use is associated with the development of bacterial resistance and side effects for the patient. Several studies have been published regarding optimal antibiotic treatment for CAP but many of these data address treatments in hospitalised patients. This is an update of our 2009 Cochrane Review and addresses antibiotic therapies for CAP in outpatient settings.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatments for CAP in participants older than 12 years treated in outpatient settings with respect to clinical, radiological and bacteriological outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1966 to March week 3, 2014), EMBASE (January 1974 to March 2014), CINAHL (2009 to March 2014), Web of Science (2009 to March 2014) and LILACS (2009 to March 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We looked for randomised controlled trials (RCTs), fully published in peer-reviewed journals, of antibiotics versus placebo as well as antibiotics versus another antibiotic for the treatment of CAP in outpatient settings in participants older than 12 years of age. However, we did not find any studies of antibiotics versus placebo. Therefore, this review includes RCTs of one or more antibiotics, which report the diagnostic criteria and describe the clinical outcomes considered for inclusion in this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors (LMB, TJMV) independently assessed study reports in the first publication. In the 2009 update, LMB performed study selection, which was checked by TJMV and MMK. In this 2014 update, two review authors (SP, SM) independently performed and checked study selection. We contacted trial authors to resolve any ambiguities in the study reports. We compiled and analysed the data. We resolved differences between review authors by discussion and consensus.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 RCTs in this review update (3352 participants older than 12 years with a diagnosis of CAP); 10 RCTs assessed nine antibiotic pairs (3321 participants) and one RCT assessed four antibiotics (31 participants) in people with CAP. The study quality was generally good, with some differences in the extent of the reporting. A variety of clinical, bacteriological and adverse events were reported. Overall, there was no significant difference in the efficacy of the various antibiotics. Studies evaluating clarithromycin and amoxicillin provided only descriptive data regarding the primary outcome. Though the majority of adverse events were similar between all antibiotics, nemonoxacin demonstrated higher gastrointestinal and nervous system adverse events when compared to levofloxacin, while cethromycin demonstrated significantly more nervous system side effects, especially dysgeusia, when compared to clarithromycin. Similarly, high-dose amoxicillin (1 g three times a day) was associated with higher incidence of gastritis and diarrhoea compared to clarithromycin, azithromycin and levofloxacin.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence from recent RCTs is insufficient to make new evidence-based recommendations for the choice of antibiotic to be used for the treatment of CAP in outpatient settings. Pooling of study data was limited by the very low number of studies assessing the same antibiotic pairs. Individual study results do not reveal significant differences in efficacy between various antibiotics and antibiotic groups. However, two studies did find significantly more adverse events with use of cethromycin as compared to clarithromycin and nemonoxacin when compared to levofloxacin. Multi-drug comparisons using similar administration schedules are needed to provide the evidence necessary for practice recommendations. Further studies focusing on diagnosis, management, cost-effectiveness and misuse of antibiotics in CAP and LRTI are warranted in high-, middle- and low-income countries.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Community-Acquired Infections; Humans; Outpatients; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25300166
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002109.pub4 -
F1000Research 2021: The present study aimed to determine the global prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and to assess their association... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Anosmia and dysgeusia in SARS-CoV-2 infection: incidence and effects on COVID-19 severity and mortality, and the possible pathobiology mechanisms - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
: The present study aimed to determine the global prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and to assess their association with severity and mortality of COVID-19. Moreover, this study aimed to discuss the possible pathobiological mechanisms of anosmia and dysgeusia in COVID-19. : Available articles from PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and preprint databases (MedRxiv, BioRxiv, and Researchsquare) were searched on November 10th, 2020. Data on the characteristics of the study (anosmia, dysgeusia, and COVID-19) were extracted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess research quality. Moreover, the pooled prevalence of anosmia and dysgeusia were calculated, and the association between anosmia and dysgeusia in presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was assessed using the Z test. : Out of 32,142 COVID-19 patients from 107 studies, anosmia was reported in 12,038 patients with a prevalence of 38.2% (95% CI: 36.5%, 47.2%); whereas, dysgeusia was reported in 11,337 patients out of 30,901 COVID-19 patients from 101 studies, with prevalence of 36.6% (95% CI: 35.2%, 45.2%), worldwide. Furthermore, the prevalence of anosmia was 10.2-fold higher (OR: 10.21; 95% CI: 6.53, 15.96, < 0.001) and that of dysgeusia was 8.6-fold higher (OR: 8.61; 95% CI: 5.26, 14.11, < 0.001) in COVID-19 patients compared to those with other respiratory infections or COVID-19 like illness. To date, no study has assessed the association of anosmia and dysgeusia with severity and mortality of COVID-19. : Anosmia and dysgeusia are prevalent in COVID-19 patients compared to those with the other non-COVID-19 respiratory infections. Several possible mechanisms have been hypothesized; however, future studies are warranted to elucidate the definitive mechanisms of anosmia and dysgeusia in COVID-19. PROSPERO CRD42020223204.
Topics: Anosmia; COVID-19; Dysgeusia; Humans; Incidence
PubMed: 33824716
DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.28393.1 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2021Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy and sunitinib monotherapy have been...
BACKGROUND
Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy and sunitinib monotherapy have been widely applied to metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), effectiveness and safety data are still lacking. To optimize clinical decision-making, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized clinical trials to characterize the efficacy and the risk of adverse events (AEs) in patients treated with ICIs plus anti-VEGF therapy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We used PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before March 27, 2021. The efficacy outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). The pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of AEs were calculated in the safety analysis.
RESULTS
Six RCTs involving 4,227 patients were identified after a systematic search. For OS, ICI and anti-VEGF combination therapy decreased mortality approximately 30% in the intention-to-treat population (ITT) (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87), but there was no statistical difference in patients evaluated as "favorable" by the International Metastatic Renal-Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria compared with monotherapy (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.55-1.46, = 0.66). In terms of PFS, the progression risk for all participants declined 35% (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.50-0.83) and patients evaluated as "poor" by IMDC benefited further (HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.36-0.58). No evident divergence was found in age and sex subgroups. The RRs of all-grade hypertension, arthralgia, rash, proteinuria, high-grade (grades 3-5) arthralgia, and proteinuria developed after combination therapy were increased compared with sunitinib. The risk of high-grade hypertension and rash showed no statistical difference. However, the risk of hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), stomatitis, and dysgeusia decreased in combination therapy groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with sunitinib, OS, PFS, and ORR were significantly improved in patients receiving ICI and anti-VEGF combination therapy at the expense of increased specific AEs. More attention should be paid to individualized application of these combination therapies to achieve the best benefit-risk ratio in the clinic.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
[https://inplasy.com/] INPLASY: 202130104.
PubMed: 34722290
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.739263 -
Cancer Treatment and Research... 2024The management of periocular basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is challenging due to its proximity to the eyeball. Vismodegib, a Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, has emerged as a... (Review)
Review
The management of periocular basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is challenging due to its proximity to the eyeball. Vismodegib, a Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, has emerged as a therapeutic option for locally advanced and metastatic BCC. To critically appraise the relevant evidence, we conducted a systematic review of observational and experimental studies assessing the efficacy and safety of vismodegib for periocular BCC. Thirty-seven trials, including 435 patients, were eligible. No randomized trials were retrieved. Complete and overall clinical response rates were 20-88 % and 68-100 %, respectively. Disease progression was observed at a maximum rate of 14 %. Recurrence rates varied between 0 % and 31 %. The most common side effects were muscle cramps, dysgeusia, weight loss and alopecia. Treatment with vismodegib improved health-related quality of life. In conclusion, vismodegib represents an important novel treatment for advanced periocular BCC, with good response rates and acceptable tolerability profile. Nevertheless, its full potential needs clarification through randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Anilides; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Basal Cell; Pyridines; Quality of Life; Skin Neoplasms
PubMed: 38367414
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctarc.2024.100796 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jan 2023Taste and smell disorders (TSDs) are common side effects in patients undergoing cancer treatments. Knowing which treatments specifically cause them is crucial to improve... (Review)
Review
Taste and smell disorders (TSDs) are common side effects in patients undergoing cancer treatments. Knowing which treatments specifically cause them is crucial to improve patients' quality of life. This review looked at the oncological treatments that cause taste and smell alterations and their time of onset. We performed an integrative rapid review. The PubMed, PROSPERO, and Web of Science databases were searched in November 2022. The article screening and study selection were conducted independently by two reviewers. Data were analyzed narratively. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. A high heterogeneity was detected. Taste disorders ranged between 17 and 86%, while dysosmia ranged between 8 and 45%. Docetaxel, paclitaxel, nab-paclitaxel, capecitabine, cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, anthracyclines, and oral 5-FU analogues were found to be the drugs most frequently associated with TSDs. This review identifies the cancer treatments that mainly lead to taste and smell changes and provides evidence for wider studies, including those focusing on prevention. Further studies are warranted to make conclusive indication possible.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasms; Olfaction Disorders; Quality of Life; Smell; Taste; Taste Disorders
PubMed: 36768861
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24032538 -
European Archives of... Apr 2021This meta-analysis is aimed to review and analyze all available data of intraoperative and postoperative results of endoscopic and microscopic stapes surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This meta-analysis is aimed to review and analyze all available data of intraoperative and postoperative results of endoscopic and microscopic stapes surgery.
METHODS
According to the PRISMA statements checklist, this systematic review and meta-analysis were designed. Data were extracted from public databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and more. The quality of studies was evaluated using the MINORS scale. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were estimated for binary outcome data, while the mean differences and 95% CIs were estimated for continuous data. I and χ tests were used to quantify statistical heterogeneity. If more than ten studies were included in each analysis, funnel plot would be performed to analysis publication bias.
RESULTS
Twelve studies with 620 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Primary outcomes collected in this meta-analysis included average postoperative auditory gain (APAG), postoperative air-bone gap (ABG), the rate of chorda tympani handling and bone curettage, which all showed a statistically significant difference in favor of endoscopy. While only secondary outcomes about postoperative pain and dysgeusia demonstrated a significantly reduced incidence. Furthermore, there was not any statistically significant difference on postoperative dizziness and average operative time between endoscopy and microscopy.
CONCLUSION
Although there is a need for high-quality pooled data in the future, a consistently superior effect of the endoscopic group was still shown in terms of total effectiveness, when compared to the microscopic group. We have reasons to support the application of endoscopy in stapes surgery. The future of ESS, we believe, is blazing bright.
Topics: Endoscopy; Humans; Microscopy; Operative Time; Otosclerosis; Reference Standards; Retrospective Studies; Stapes; Stapes Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32648030
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-020-06132-2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) has an estimated incidence of one to three people per 100,000 people per year, and occurs most commonly in obese, young women.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) has an estimated incidence of one to three people per 100,000 people per year, and occurs most commonly in obese, young women. IIH is associated with severe morbidity, notably due to a significant threat to sight and severe headache. Several different management options have been proposed. Conservative measures centre on weight loss. Pharmacological therapy includes use of diuretics. Refractory and sight-threatening cases demand surgical intervention, most often in the form of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion or optic nerve sheath fenestration. Other treatments include venous sinus stenting and bariatric surgery.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of any intervention for IIH in any patient group.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) (2015 Issue 6), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily, Ovid OLDMEDLINE (January 1946 to July 2015), EMBASE (January 1980 to July 2015), the ISRCTN registry (www.isrctn.com/editAdvancedSearch), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (www.who.int/ictrp/search/en). We did not use any date or language restrictions in the electronic searches for trials. We last searched the electronic databases on 22 July 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which any intervention was compared to placebo, or to another form of treatment, for people with a clinical diagnosis of IIH.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the search results for trials to be included in the review. We resolved any discrepancies by third party decision.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified two completed RCTs (enrolling a total of 211 participants and conducted in the UK and US) and two ongoing trials that met the inclusion criteria. Both completed trials compared acetazolamide to placebo, in conjunction with a weight loss intervention in both groups. Attrition bias was a problem in both trials with high loss to follow-up, in one study this loss to follow-up occurred particularly in the acetazolamide arm. One trial was unmasked and we judged it to be at risk of performance and detection bias.In these studies, change in visual acuity was similar in the treatment and control groups as measured by logMAR acuity. In one study people in the acetalomazide group had a similar change in logMAR acuity compared to the placebo group between baseline and 12 months in the right eye (MD 0.04 logMAR, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.16) and left eye (MD 0.03 logMAR, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.15). In the other study people in the acetalomazide group had a similar change in vision over six months compared with people in the placebo group (mean difference in change in letters read was 0.01 (95% CI -1.45 to 1.46). One study reported no cases of visual loss in 21 people treated with acetalomazide compared to 2/20 cases in the placebo group (odds ratio 0.17, 95% CI 0.01, 3.82).The prespecified outcome for this review was reduction in CSF pressure to normal levels which was not reported by the two trials. One trial reported that, in a subsample of 85 participants who agreed to lumbar puncture at 6 months, people in the acetalomazide group on average had a greater reduction in CSF pressure (MD -59.9 mmH(2)O, 95% CI -96.4, -23.4).In one study, people in the acetalozamide group on average experienced a greater reduction in papilloedema as assessed by fundus photographs MD -0.70 (95% CI -1.00 to -0.40) and by clinical grading MD -0.91 (95% CI -1.27 to -0.54) between baseline and six months in the study eye.Headache was recorded as present/absent in one study at 12 months (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.12,1.41, 41 participants). Both studies reported headache on visual analogue scales (different ones) but results were inconclusive (MD for change in headache score measured on 10-point visual analogue scale at 12 months was 1.0 (-1.80, 3.70, 41 participants) and MD for change in headache score on a 6 point scale measured at 6 months was -0.45 (-3.5,2.6, number of participants unclear).In one study, a similar proportion of people in the acetalomazide group were in remission (however, the trial authors did not state their definition of this term) at 12 months compared to the placebo group. However, the 95% CIs were wide and there is considerable uncertainty as to the effect (OR 1.13 (95% CI 0.32 to 3.90, 41 participants).In one study of 185 participants, people in the acetalomazide group had an increased risk of decreased CO2, diarrhoea, dysgeusia, fatigue, nausea, paresthesia, tinnitus and vomiting compared to people in the placebo group. In general, the estimates of effect were uncertain with wide 95% CIs. Adverse effects were not reported in the other study.One study reported that quality of life was better in acetazolamide-treated patients based on the visual quality of life (VFQ-25) (MD 6.35, 95% CI 2.22 to 10.47) and the physical (MD 3.02, 95% CI 0.34 to 5.70) and mental (MD 3.45, 95% CI 0.35 to 6.55) components of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey tool at six months. Costs were not reported in either study.We judged the evidence to be low certainty (GRADE) downgrading for imprecision and risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although the two included RCTs showed modest benefits for acetazolamide for some outcomes, there is insufficient evidence to recommend or reject the efficacy of this intervention, or any other treatments currently available, for treating people with IIH. Further high-quality RCTs are required in order to adequately assess the effect of acetazolamide therapy in people with IIH.
Topics: Acetazolamide; Adult; Antihypertensive Agents; Cerebrospinal Fluid Pressure; Female; Headache; Humans; Intracranial Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Visual Acuity; Weight Loss
PubMed: 26250102
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003434.pub3 -
JAMA Network Open Apr 2022Neurologic adverse events (NAEs) due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be fatal but are underexplored. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Neurologic adverse events (NAEs) due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can be fatal but are underexplored.
OBJECTIVE
To compare NAEs reported in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of US Food and Drug Administration-approved ICIs with other forms of chemotherapy and placebo.
DATA SOURCES
Bibliographic databases (Embase, Ovid, MEDLINE, and Scopus data) and trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from inception through March 1, 2020.
STUDY SELECTION
Phase II/III RCTs evaluating the use of ICIs were eligible for inclusion. Unpublished trials were excluded from the analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two investigators independently performed screening of trials using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. NAEs were recorded for each arm. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The risk of NAEs with ICI use compared with any drug regimen, cytotoxic chemotherapy, and placebo.
RESULTS
A total 39 trials including 23 705 patients were analyzed (16 135 [68.0%] men, 7866 [33.1%] White). The overall risk of a NAE was lower in the ICI group (risk ratio [RR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.77) and in the subgroup of RCTs comparing ICI use with chemotherapy (RR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.13-0.39). In the subgroup of RCTs comparing ICI with placebo, the overall risk of NAE was significantly higher in the ICI group (RR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.30-1.89). Peripheral neuropathy (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.51) and dysgeusia (RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.63) were significantly lower in the ICI group. Headache was more common with the use of ICIs (RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.10-1.59). In the subgroup analysis of RCTs comparing ICI use with chemotherapy, peripheral neuropathy (RR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.05-0.17), dysgeusia (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21-0.85), and paresthesia (RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.67) were significantly lower in the ICI group. RCTs comparing ICIs with placebo showed a higher risk of headache with ICI use (RR, 1.63; 95%, CI, 1.32-2.02).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Results of this meta-analysis suggest that the overall risk of NAEs, peripheral neuropathy, and dysgeusia is lower with the use of ICI. When compared with chemotherapy, the overall risk of NAE, peripheral neuropathy, paresthesia, and dysgeusia was lower with ICI use; however, when compared with placebo, the risk of NAEs is higher with the use of ICI.
Topics: Dysgeusia; Female; Headache; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Male; Paresthesia; United States
PubMed: 35438755
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.7722 -
Reviews in the Neurosciences Apr 2021The ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected more than 27 million confirmed cases and 8,90,000 deaths all around the world. Verity of viral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The ongoing pandemic of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has infected more than 27 million confirmed cases and 8,90,000 deaths all around the world. Verity of viral infections can infect the nervous system; these viral infections can present a wide range of manifestation. The aim of the current study was to systematically review the COVID-19 associated central nervous system manifestations, mental and neurological symptoms. For that we conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review of four online databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus and Embase. All relevant articles that reported psychiatric/psychological symptoms or disorders in COVID-19 without considering time and language restrictions were assessed. All the study procedures were performed based on the PRISMA criteria. Due to the screening, 14 studies were included. The current study result indicated that, the pooled prevalence of CNS or mental associated disorders with 95% CI was 50.68% (6.68-93.88). The most prevalence symptoms were hyposmia/anosmia/olfactory dysfunction (number of study: 10) with 36.20% (14.99-60.51). Only one study reported numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia. Pooled prevalence of numbness/paresthesia and dysphonia was 5.83% (2.17-12.25) and 2.39% (10.75-14.22). The pooled prevalence of depression and anxiety was 3.52% (2.62-4.54) and 13.92% (9.44-19.08). Our findings demonstrate that COVID-19 has a certain relation with neurological symptoms. The hypsomia, anosmia or olfactory dysfunction was most frequent symptom. Other symptoms were headache or dizziness, dysgeusia or ageusia, dysphonia and fatigue. Depression, anxiety, and confusion were less frequent symptoms.
Topics: Anosmia; Anxiety; COVID-19; Depression; Dysgeusia; Dysphonia; Fatigue; Headache; Humans; Hypesthesia; Nervous System Diseases; Paresthesia; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33618441
DOI: 10.1515/revneuro-2020-0108 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022This review aimed to comprehensively analyze the safety and efficacy of erdafitinib in treating advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma and other solid tumors.
OBJECTIVE
This review aimed to comprehensively analyze the safety and efficacy of erdafitinib in treating advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma and other solid tumors.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched until 10 February 2022. The safety outcome as adverse events and efficacy outcomes, including objective response rate, stable disease rates, and progressive disease rates, were selected and analyzed by comprehensive meta-analysis version 3.0 and STATA 15.0.
RESULTS
The most common all-grade adverse events were hyperphosphatemia, dry mouth, stomatitis, diarrhea, and dysgeusia. The occurrence of ≥3 adverse events was relatively low, and stomatitis and hyponatremia were the most common. Moreover, eye disorders could not be ignored. Efficacy in urothelial carcinoma patients was obviously better than in other solid tumor patients, with a higher objective response rate (0.38 versus 0.10) and lower progressive disease rate (0.26 versus 0.68). All responses occurred in patients with fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) alteration. In those patients, a specific FGFR alteration () was observed to have a maximum response.
CONCLUSION
Erdafitinib has satisfactory clinical activity for metastatic urothelial carcinoma and other solid tumors, while the toxicity is acceptable. With more RCTs and combination therapy trials published, erdafitinib will be applied widely.
PubMed: 36776367
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.907377