-
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2022Previous studies determined the therapeutic effects of capecitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the optimal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Addition of Capecitabine to Adjuvant Chemotherapy May be the Most Effective Strategy for Patients With Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of 9 Randomized Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Previous studies determined the therapeutic effects of capecitabine-based chemotherapy regimens on early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). However, the optimal strategy of capecitabine-based chemotherapy remains uncertain. We conducted this network meta-analysis to address this issue.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to retrieve eligible studies published before September 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted information from eligible studies using a pre-designed data extraction sheet. The primary outcome included disease-free survival, and the second outcome showed overall survival and adverse events. Direct meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4, and Bayesian network analysis was performed using R version 3.6.1 with the "gemtc" and "rjags" packages.
RESULTS
Nine studies involving 3661 TNBC patients met the selection criteria. The network meta-analysis suggested that the addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy achieved a significantly longer disease-free (HR = 0.66, 95% CrI = 0.49 to 0.86) and overall survival time (HR = 0.60, 95% CrI = 0.43 to 0.83) than standard chemotherapy. All comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. The addition of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective treatment for improving disease-free (81.24%) and overall survival (78.46%) times, and the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on available evidence, capecitabine-based chemotherapy benefits TNBC patients, and the addition of capecitabine with adjuvant chemotherapy was the most effective regime. In contrast, the replacement of capecitabine to adjuvant chemotherapy was the safest regime. More studies of high quality and large scale are needed to confirm our findings.
Topics: Bayes Theorem; Capecitabine; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 35957836
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.939048 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2021Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Retrospective analyses suggest that capecitabine may carry superior activity in hormone receptor-positive relative to hormone receptor-negative metastatic breast cancer. This review examined the veracity of that finding and explored whether this differential activity extends to early breast cancer.
OBJECTIVES
To assess effects of chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine compared with regimens not containing capecitabine for women with hormone receptor-positive versus hormone receptor-negative breast cancer across the three major treatment scenarios: neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic.
SEARCH METHODS
On 4 June 2019, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2019, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials looking at chemotherapy regimens containing capecitabine alone or in combination with other agents versus a control or similar regimen without capecitabine for treatment of breast cancer at any stage. The primary outcome measure for metastatic and adjuvant trials was overall survival (OS), and for neoadjuvant studies pathological complete response (pCR).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. Hazard ratios (HRs) were derived for time-to-event outcomes, and odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, and meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effect model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 26 studies with outcome data by hormone receptor: 12 metastatic studies (n = 4325), 6 neoadjuvant trials (n = 3152), and 8 adjuvant studies (n = 13,457). Capecitabine treatment was added in several different ways across studies. These could be classified as capecitabine alone compared to another treatment, capecitabine substituted for part of the control chemotherapy, and capecitabine added to control chemotherapy. In the metastatic setting, the effect of capecitabine was heterogenous between hormone receptor-positive and -negative tumours. For OS, no difference between capecitabine-containing and non-capecitabine-containing regimens was observed for all participants taken together (HR 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.05; 12 studies, 4325 participants; high-certainty evidence), for those with hormone receptor-positive disease (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04; 7 studies, 1834 participants; high-certainty evidence), and for those with hormone receptor-negative disease (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; 8 studies, 1577 participants; high-certainty evidence). For progression-free survival (PFS), a small improvement was seen for all people (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96; 12 studies, 4325 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This was largely accounted for by a moderate improvement in PFS for inclusion of capecitabine in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.91; 7 studies, 1594 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) compared to no difference in PFS for hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.10; 7 studies, 1122 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Quality of life was assessed in five studies; in general there did not seem to be differences in global health scores between the two treatment groups at around two years' follow-up. Neoadjuvant studies were highly variable in design, having been undertaken to test various experimental regimens using pathological complete response (pCR) as a surrogate for disease-free survival (DFS) and OS. Across all patients, capecitabine-containing regimens resulted in little difference in pCR in comparison to non-capecitabine-containing regimens (odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.33; 6 studies, 3152 participants; high-certainty evidence). By subtype, no difference in pCR was observed for either hormone receptor-positive (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.95; 4 studies, 964 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or hormone receptor-negative tumours (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.66; 4 studies, 646 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Four studies with 2460 people reported longer-term outcomes: these investigators detected no difference in either DFS (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21; high-certainty evidence) or OS (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.23; high-certainty evidence). In the adjuvant setting, a modest improvement in OS was observed across all participants (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; 8 studies, 13,547 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and no difference in OS was seen in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.09; 3 studies, 3683 participants), whereas OS improved in hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.89; 5 studies, 3432 participants). No difference in DFS or relapse-free survival (RFS) was observed across all participants (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; 8 studies, 13,457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). As was observed for OS, no difference in DFS/RFS was seen in hormone receptor-positive cancers (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17; 5 studies, 5604 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and improvements in DFS/RFS with inclusion of capecitabine were observed for hormone receptor-negative cancers (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.86; 7 studies, 3307 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects were reported across all three scenarios. When grade 3 or 4 febrile neutropenia was considered, no difference was seen for capecitabine compared to non-capecitabine regimens in neoadjuvant studies (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.77; 4 studies, 2890 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and a marked reduction was seen for capecitabine in adjuvant studies (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64; 5 studies, 8086 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was an increase in diarrhoea and hand-foot syndrome in neoadjuvant (diarrhoea: OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.89; 3 studies, 2686 participants; hand-foot syndrome: OR 6.77, 95% CI 4.89 to 9.38; 5 studies, 3021 participants; both moderate-certainty evidence) and adjuvant trials (diarrhoea: OR 2.46, 95% CI 2.01 to 3.01; hand-foot syndrome: OR 13.60, 95% CI 10.65 to 17.37; 8 studies, 11,207 participants; moderate-certainty evidence for both outcomes).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In summary, a moderate PFS benefit by including capecitabine was seen only in hormone receptor-positive cancers in metastatic studies. No benefit of capecitabine for pCR was noted overall or in hormone receptor subgroups when included in neoadjuvant therapy. In contrast, the addition of capecitabine in the adjuvant setting led to improved outcomes for OS and DFS in hormone receptor-negative cancer. Future studies should stratify by hormone receptor and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) status to clarify the differential effects of capecitabine in these subgroups across all treatment scenarios, to optimally guide capecitabine inclusion.
Topics: Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bias; Breast Neoplasms; Capecitabine; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 34037241
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011220.pub2 -
PloS One 2023It is critical to select subsequent treatments for patients after the failure of trastuzumab therapy. Following the failure of standard trastuzumab therapy guidelines in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
It is critical to select subsequent treatments for patients after the failure of trastuzumab therapy. Following the failure of standard trastuzumab therapy guidelines in the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology, pyrotinib and capecitabine is a grade I recommended regimen for treating patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. Concurrently, in treating patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, lapatinib and capecitabine are also recommended regimens for those who have previously received taxanes, anthracyclines, and trastuzumab therapy. However, there is currently no systematic review and meta-analysis comparing pyrotinib with lapatinib among HER2+ MBC patients. Therefore, this study aims to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis and assess whether pyrotinib is superior to lapatinib in efficacy and safety.
METHODS
Relevant trials were searched in CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from inception until March 27th, 2022. The primary outcomes were PFS and OS, and the secondary outcomes were ORR and grade ≥3 AEs.
RESULTS
Five relevant studies were included in this study, including 2 RCTs and 3 retrospective cohort studies. Pyrotinib combined with chemotherapy is superior to lapatinib combined with chemotherapy among HER2+ metastatic breast cancer patients, with a significant improvement in PFS (prior trastuzumab therapy) (HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.39-0.57, p<0.001, I2 = 0%, FEM), PFS (trastuzumab resistance) (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39-0.68, p<0.001, I2 = 40%, FEM) and ORR (RR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.26-1.67, p<0.001, I2 = 8%, FEM), but has higher grade ≥3 diarrhea incidence (RR: 2.68, 95% CI: 1.85-3.90, p<0.001, I2 = 44%, FEM).
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of pyrotinib combined with chemotherapy is superior to lapatinib combined with chemotherapy but has more safety risks.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Lapatinib; Capecitabine; Retrospective Studies; Receptor, ErbB-2; Trastuzumab; Treatment Failure; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 36602979
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279775 -
Cancer Medicine Jan 2023This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCMs) to capecitabine-based regimens for colorectal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the addition of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCMs) to capecitabine-based regimens for colorectal cancer (CRC) in term of tumor. The eight electronic databases including Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Excerpt Medica Database (Embase), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Journals (CQVIP), and Wanfang Database were systematically searched for eligible studies from their inception to March 2021. Thirty-nine randomized controlled trials were involved in this study, and all the data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3 (Nordic Cochran Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark) and R 4.0.5 software. The meta-analyses suggested that TCMs in combination with capecitabine-based regimens increased objective response rate (ORR) in the palliative treatment of CRC (risk ratio [RR], 1.35 [1.17, 1.55], I = 0%), disease control rate (DCR) (RR, 1.22 [1.12, 1.32], I = 3%), and quality of life (QOL) (RR, 1.71 [1.44, 2.03], I = 0%), with decreased risks of myelosuppression, anemia, thrombocytopenia, liver/renal dysfunction, neurotoxicity, nausea/vomiting, neutropenia, diarrhea, leukopenia, improved the peripheral lymphocyte, reduced the expression of tumor markers, and related factors. Further sensitivity analysis of specific plant-based TCMs found that dangshen, fuling, and gancao had significantly higher contributions to the results of the RR. The results show that capecitabine-based chemotherapy combined with TCM in the treatment of CRC increases the efficiency of ORR and DCR, reduces chemotherapeutic agents-associated adverse reactions, and improves their life quality as compared with chemotherapy alone, but further randomized and large sample of studies are needed.
Topics: Humans; Medicine, Chinese Traditional; Capecitabine; Quality of Life; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Neutropenia; Colorectal Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35650714
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.4896 -
Medicine Nov 2023To ascertain the efficacy and safety of cladribine, cytarabine, and filgrastim-based regimen in relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To ascertain the efficacy and safety of cladribine, cytarabine, and filgrastim-based regimen in relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML patients.
METHODS
Clinical studies were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase data. We selected available factors including complete remission (CR), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS) to evaluate the efficacy, and early death (ED), and adverse events to evaluate safety.
RESULTS
15 records with 812 R/R AML patients were finally included and analyzed using the R software. Subgroups analysis was also conducted. The pooled CR rate for CLAG regimen, CLAG-M regimen, and CLAG combined with any other drugs regimen is 56% (95% CI: 46-66), 46% (95% CI: 34-56), 44% (95% CI: 26-64), respectively. The relapsed and refractory groups showed a CR rate of 68% (95% CI: 53-80), and 51% (95% CI: 45-58) with CLAG related regimens. As risk grade decreases, the pooled CR rate increases. Regarding the safety for CLAG-related protocols, systematic review was conducted.
CONCLUSION
The CLAG-related regimen is an effective and safe therapy for R/R AML patients, CLAG seems to have more superiority than CLAG combined therapy, though further studies including cladribine combination treatment protocols, are still needed to confirm our results further.
Topics: Humans; Filgrastim; Cladribine; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute; Remission Induction; Cytarabine; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor
PubMed: 37933074
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034949 -
Acta Bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis Jul 2022In Italy, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) was authorized for HIV prevention in 2017. This scoping...
BACKGROUND AND AIM
In Italy, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) was authorized for HIV prevention in 2017. This scoping systematic review summarizes current evidence on PrEP implementation in Italy since 2017.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in relevant databases, using a search strategy built upon controlled vocabulary, cross-referencing of the citation lists from included reports, and hand-searching of surveillance documents. Findings were summarized narratively according to key issues and themes.
RESULTS
A total of 106 reports were retrieved and six met criteria for inclusion in the review, being three journal articles and three surveillance report by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). In Italy, users can obtain in PrEP in specific hospital- or community-based PrEP services, under prescription by specialists. Due to drug costs, the access is limited to those who can afford it. Data and indicators on PrEP use and monitoring are limited. The vast majority of users were men who have sex with men. In this population, PrEP knowledge and attitudes were investigated across two reports, finding a medium to high level to knowledge and a scare use (mostly due to high costs). A health technology assessment on the adoption of PrEP in Italy advised that the most cost-containing strategy would be the use of PrEP as an "add-on" strategy.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, this scoping review found a relevant evidence gap on PrEP monitoring. Italy needs to implement specific policies and programs for effective and timely delivery of care.
Topics: Anti-HIV Agents; Emtricitabine; Female; HIV Infections; Homosexuality, Male; Humans; Male; Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis; Sexual and Gender Minorities; Tenofovir
PubMed: 35775760
DOI: 10.23750/abm.v93i3.12766 -
Virology Journal Feb 2024Azvudine has been approved for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in China, and this meta-analysis aims to illustrate the safety of azvudine... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Azvudine has been approved for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in China, and this meta-analysis aims to illustrate the safety of azvudine and its effectiveness in reducing mortality.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane Library and the Epistemonikos COVID-19 Living Overview of Evidence database (L.OVE) were searched to aggregate currently published studies. Cochrane risk of bias tool and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess the risk of bias of randomized controlled study and cohort study respectively. Odds radios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CIs) were combined for dichotomous variables. Publication bias was assessed by Egger's test and funnel plots.
RESULTS
A total of 184 articles were retrieved from the included databases and 17 studies were included into the final analysis. Pooled analysis showed that azvudine significantly reduced mortality risk in COVID-19 patients compared with controls (OR: 0.41, 95%CI 0.31-0.54, p < 0.001). Besides, either mild to moderate or severe COVID-19 patients could benefit from azvudine administration. There was no significant difference in the incidence of ICU admission (OR: 0.90, 95%CI 0.47-1.72, p = 0.74) and invasive ventilation (OR: 0.94, 95%CI 0.54-1.62, p = 0.82) between azvudine and control group. The incidence of adverse events was similar between azvudine and control (OR: 1.26, 95%CI 0.59-2.70, p = 0.56).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis suggests that azvudine could reduce the mortality risk of COVID-19 patients, and the safety of administration is acceptable.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO; No.: CRD42023462988; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ .
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Cohort Studies; China; Databases, Factual; Azides; Deoxycytidine
PubMed: 38395970
DOI: 10.1186/s12985-024-02316-y -
Neurologia I Neurochirurgia Polska 2022This study was performed to compare probabilities of SDI on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This study was performed to compare probabilities of SDI on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), treated with cladribine tablets (CT) or fingolimod (FTY), natalizumab (NAT), alemtuzumab (ALE) and ocrelizumab (OCR).
CLINICAL RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
Progression of neurological disability as measured by the EDSS has been a common endpoint in multiple sclerosis (MS) trials. Novel therapies can not only slow this process, but in some patients even reverse it. This effect can be measured by the sustained disability improvement (SDI) - an endpoint that seems to continuously gain importance in clinical practice. Despite that, SDI has rarely been explored as an outcome in MS clinical studies, mostly as post-hoc analyses from randomised trials or as retrospective analyses based on patient registry records.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic review was conducted in Medline, Embase and Cochrane to identify clinical trials (RCT or non-RCT) evaluating 6-month SDI. An indirect comparison via network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed. Bayesian inference with Markov chains Monte Carlo methods were applied.
RESULTS
Eight trials presenting SDI results and applicable for NMA were included: six non-RCTs, with control groups selected by propensity score matching, and two RCTs. NMA results revealed that probability of achieving 6-month SDI with CT was significantly higher compared to all other high efficacy disease-modifying drugs with available data - HR (95% Crl - Bayesian Credibility Interval) vs. FTY: 4.98 (2.11-11.79); vs. NAT: 3.12 (1.31-7.27); vs. ALE: 9.29 (3.40-25.21). The main results were confirmed in the sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Of all considered therapies, treatment with cladribine tablets was associated with a higher probability of sustained disability improvement in RRMS patients. As this conclusion is based on available clinical data of limited quality, future studies, as well as real-world data, would be valuable to provide further evidence regarding the comparative effectiveness of RRMS therapies.
Topics: Humans; Cladribine; Multiple Sclerosis; Immunosuppressive Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Retrospective Studies; Bayes Theorem; Multiple Sclerosis, Relapsing-Remitting; Tablets
PubMed: 36421066
DOI: 10.5603/PJNNS.a2022.0068 -
Oncology Research and Treatment 2020Capecitabine is frequently used alone or combined with other chemotherapy agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in relapsed patients. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy and Safety of Capecitabine Alone or in Combination in Advanced Metastatic Breast Cancer Patients Previously Treated with Anthracycline and Taxane: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
Capecitabine is frequently used alone or combined with other chemotherapy agents for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer in relapsed patients.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of capecitabine monotherapy versus combination in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer patients pretreated with anthracycline and taxane.
METHODS
Eligible randomized controlled trials examining the efficacy and safety of capecitabine alone compared to capecitabine combination were systematically searched. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and grades 3-4 drug-related adverse events were the outcomes assessed.
RESULTS
A total of 6,714 patients of 9 trials were involved in the pooled analysis. Our findings demonstrated that capecitabine combination is significantly superior to capecitabine monotherapy in improving PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% CI 1.13-1.54, p < 0.0001) and ORR (risk ratio [RR] 0.67, 95% CI 0.54-0.83, p < 0.001), but it was insignificant in OS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.98-1.22, p = 0.12). On the other hand, the incidence of non-hematological adverse events such as hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea was lower in capecitabine combination compared to capecitabine monotherapy.
CONCLUSION
Capecitabine-based combination chemotherapy showed superiority over capecitabine monotherapy in terms of PFS and ORR, with no significant difference in OS. Non-hematological adverse effects such as hand-foot syndrome were fewer with a combination regimen. However, hematological adverse events were fewer with capecitabine monotherapy regimen.
Topics: Anthracyclines; Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Breast Neoplasms; Bridged-Ring Compounds; Capecitabine; Diarrhea; Female; Hand-Foot Syndrome; Humans; Middle Aged; Progression-Free Survival; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Rate; Taxoids; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32950984
DOI: 10.1159/000510356 -
BMC Cancer Jul 2021Modified FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NAB) have been recommended as first-line therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Due to the lack of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Modified FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NAB) have been recommended as first-line therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Due to the lack of evidence to directly compare them, we conducted this network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the effectiveness and toxicity of modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.
METHODS
The eligible retrospective studies on treatments related to modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB up to 4 April 2020 were searched and assessed. We used the frequentist model to analyze the survival and toxicity data between different treatments. Pooled analysis for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and events of toxicity were analyzed in this study.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were involved in this network meta-analysis. The comparisons on OS and PFS showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB had similar treatment efficacy (OS: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.78-1.63; PFS: HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.85-1.67). GEM-NAB was more effective than modified FOLFIRINOX based on the result of ORR (RR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.04-1.96). Moreover, our analysis showed a similar toxicity profile between modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.
CONCLUSIONS
The current evidence showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB were similar in survival and toxicity. Many factors should be considered for in the formulation of optimal treatment, and our meta-analysis could provide some guidance to treatment selection in the first-line setting for advanced PC.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Albumins; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Deoxycytidine; Female; Fluorouracil; Humans; Irinotecan; Leucovorin; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Oxaliplatin; Paclitaxel; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Publication Bias; Treatment Outcome; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 34301232
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08605-x