-
Hormones (Athens, Greece) Apr 2017Pituitary tumors represent 10-15% of all intracranial tumors; of these, prolactinomas account for 40-50% of cases. Prolactinomas usually respond well to dopamine... (Review)
Review
Pituitary tumors represent 10-15% of all intracranial tumors; of these, prolactinomas account for 40-50% of cases. Prolactinomas usually respond well to dopamine agonists (DA) as first-line therapy. However, treatment resistance remains a concern. Temozolomide (TMZ) is an oral alkylating agent that has shown promise in treating aggressive pituitary adenomas and carcinomas that are resistant to other therapies. To date, no control trials have been undertaken and only single case reports of pituitary tumors treated with TMZ have been published. A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting the use of TMZ for the treatment of prolactinomas that were resistant to standard therapy. In total, 42 reported cases were identified and included in our analysis: 23 cases of prolactin-secreting adenomas and 19 of prolactin-secreting carcinomas. Prior to TMZ administration, patients had exhibited tumor progression and had previously undergone various treatments including surgery, radiotherapy, and drug therapy. Tumor shrinkage was reported in 76% of patients. Reduced prolactin levels were observed in 75% of patients, while normalization of prolactin was reported in 8%. TMZ failure occurred in 20.6% of cases. Most patients exhibited no serious adverse effects. In conclusion, TMZ has potential for the treatment of highly aggressive and resistant prolactin-secreting adenomas and carcinomas, as demonstrated by tumor shrinkage or complete response and normalization of hormone hypersecretion, and exhibits good tolerability and few side effects.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Carcinoma; Dacarbazine; Humans; Pituitary Neoplasms; Prolactinoma; Temozolomide
PubMed: 28742502
DOI: 10.14310/horm.2002.1729 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017There are two different international standards for the treatment of early unfavourable and advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL): chemotherapy with escalated BEACOPP... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of first-line chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP versus chemotherapy including ABVD for people with early unfavourable or advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma.
BACKGROUND
There are two different international standards for the treatment of early unfavourable and advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL): chemotherapy with escalated BEACOPP (bleomycin/etoposide/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone) regimen and chemotherapy with ABVD (doxorubicin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine) regimen.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the advantages and disadvantages of chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP compared to chemotherapy including ABVD in the treatment of early unfavourable or advanced stage HL as first-line treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for randomised controlled trials in MEDLINE, CENTRAL and conference proceedings (January 1985 to July 2013 and for the update to March 2017) and Embase (1985 to November 2008). Moreover we searched trial registries (March 2017; www.controlled-trials.com, www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search, clinicaltrials.gov, www.eortc.be, www.ghsg.org, www.ctc.usyd.edu.au, www.trialscentral.org/index.html) SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials examining chemotherapy including at least two cycles of escalated BEACOPP regimens compared with chemotherapy including at least four cycles of ABVD regimens as first-line treatment for patients with early unfavourable stage or advanced stage HL.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
The effect measures we used were hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and freedom from first progression.We used risk ratios (RRs) relative risks to analyse harms: treatment-related mortality, secondary malignancies (including myeloid dysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myeloid leukaemia (AML)), infertility and adverse events.Quality of life was not reported in any trial, therefore not analysed. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed quality of trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We screened 1796 records and identified five eligible trials in total i.e. one trial could be added on the previous review. These trials included only adults (16 to 65 years of age). We included all five trials with 3427 people in the meta-analyses: the HD9 and HD14 trials were co-ordinated in Germany, the HD2000 and GSM-HD trials were performed in Italy and the EORTC 20012 was conducted in Belgium. The overall risk of performance and detection bias was low for overall survival (OS), but was high for other outcomes, as therapy blinding was not feasible. The remaining 'Risk of bias' domains were low and unclear.All trials reported results for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). In contrast to the our first published review (2011) the addition of results from the EORTC 20012 BEACOPP escalated increases OS (3142 participants; HR 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.97; high-quality evidence). This means that only 90 (70 to 117) patients will die after five years in the BEACOPP escalated arm compared to 120 in the ABVD arm. This survival advantage is also reflected in an increased PFS with BEACOPP escalated (3142 participants; HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.64); moderate-quality evidence), meaning that after five years only 144 (121 to 168) patients will experience a progress, relapse or death in the BEACOPP escalated arm compared to 250 in the ABVD arm.There is no evidence for a difference for treatment-related mortality (2700 participants, RR 2.15 (95% CI = 0.93 to 4.95), low-quality evidence).Although the occurrence of MDS or AML may increase with BEACOPP escalated (3332 participants, RR 3.90 (95% CI 1.36 to 11.21); low-quality evidence)), there is no evidence for a difference between both regimens for overall secondary malignancies (3332 participants, RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.48), low-quality evidence). However, the observation time of the studies included in the review is too short to be expected to demonstrate differences with respect to second solid tumours which would not be expected to show significance until around 15 years after treatment.We are very uncertain how many female patients will be infertile due to chemotherapy and which arm might be favoured (106 participants, RR 1.37 (95% CI 0.83 to 2.26), very low-quality evidence). This is a very small sample, and the age of the patients was not detailed. No analysis of male fertility was provided.Five trials reported adverse events and the analysis shows that the escalated BEACOPP regimens probably causes more haematological toxicities WHO grade III or IV ((anaemia: 2425 participants, RR 10.67 (95% CI 7.14 to 15.93); neutropenia: 519 participants, RR 1.80 (95% CI 1.52 to 2.13); thrombocytopenia: 2425 participants, RR 18.12 (95% CI 11.77 to 27.92); infections: 2425 participants, RR 3.73 (95% CI 2.58 to 5.38), all low-quality evidence).Only one trial (EORTC 20012) planned to assess quality of life, however, no results were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis provides moderate- to high-quality evidence that adult patients between 16 and 60 years of age with early unfavourable and advanced stage HL benefit regarding OS and PFS from first-line chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP. The proven benefit in OS for patients with advanced HL is a new finding of this updated review due to the inclusion of the results from the EORTC 20012 trial. Furthermore, there is only low-quality evidence of a difference in the total number of secondary malignancies, as the follow-up period might be too short to detect meaningful differences. Low-quality evidence also suggests that people treated with escalated BEACOPP may have a higher risk to develop secondary AML or MDS. Due to the availability of only very low-quality evidence available, we are unable to come to a conclusion in terms of infertility. This review does for the first time suggest a survival benefit. However, it is clear from this review that BEACOPP escalated may be more toxic that ABVD, and very important long-term side effects of second malignancies and infertility have not been sufficiently analysed yet.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bleomycin; Cyclophosphamide; Dacarbazine; Disease Progression; Doxorubicin; Etoposide; Hodgkin Disease; Humans; Middle Aged; Prednisone; Procarbazine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vinblastine; Vincristine; Young Adult
PubMed: 28541603
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007941.pub3 -
Advances in Therapy Feb 2017Advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma have been achieved in recent years: immunotherapies and targeted therapies have demonstrated survival benefits over... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma have been achieved in recent years: immunotherapies and targeted therapies have demonstrated survival benefits over older agents such as granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), dacarbazine, and glycoprotein peptide vaccine (gp100) in pivotal phase 3 trials. It is important to compare therapies to guide the treatment decision-making process, and establishing the relationship between older agents can strengthen the networks of evidence for newer therapies. We report the outcome of an indirect comparison of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 in metastatic melanoma through meta-analysis of absolute treatment effect.
METHODS
A systematic literature review identified trials for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A valid network meta-analysis was not feasible: treatment-specific meta-analysis was conducted. A published algorithm was used to adjust overall survival estimates from trials of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 for heterogeneity in baseline prognostic factors. Survival estimates were compared in three patient groups: stage IIIB-IV M1c, stage IIIB-IV M1a, and stage IV M1b/c.
RESULTS
One trial of GM-CSF, four of dacarbazine, and one of gp100 were included in the analysis. After adjusting for differences in baseline prognostic factors, median overall survival (OS) in all patient groups was longer for those receiving GM-CSF than for those receiving dacarbazine or gp100. The observed survival over time for GM-CSF was similar to the adjusted survival for dacarbazine and greater than for gp100 in all patient groups.
CONCLUSION
The relative treatment effect of GM-CSF, dacarbazine, and gp100 has been reliably estimated by adjusting for differences in baseline prognostic factors. Results suggest that OS with GM-CSF is at least as good as with dacarbazine and greater than with gp100. Given the role of these agents as controls in phase 3 trials of new immunotherapies and targeted agents, these results can be used to contextualize the efficacy of newer therapies.
FUNDING
Amgen Inc.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Cancer Vaccines; Dacarbazine; Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor; Humans; Melanoma; Neoplasm Metastasis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28000169
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-016-0464-9 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Aug 2016Since 2003, only two chemotherapeutic agents, evaluated in phase III trials, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of newly diagnosed... (Review)
Review
Gliadel wafer implantation combined with standard radiotherapy and concurrent followed by adjuvant temozolomide for treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma: a systematic literature review.
Since 2003, only two chemotherapeutic agents, evaluated in phase III trials, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treatment of newly diagnosed high-grade glioma (HGG): Gliadel wafers (intracranially implanted local chemotherapy) and temozolomide (TMZ) (systemic chemotherapy). Neither agent is curative, but each has been shown to improve median overall survival (OS) compared to radiotherapy (RT) alone. To date, no phase III trial has tested these agents when used in sequential combination; however, a number of smaller trials have reported favorable results. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the combination of Gliadel wafers with standard RT (60 Gy) plus concurrent and adjuvant TMZ (RT/TMZ) for newly diagnosed HGG. A literature search was conducted for the period of January 1995 to September 2015. Data were extracted and categorized, and means and ranges were determined. A total of 11 publications met criteria, three prospective trials and eight retrospective studies, representing 411 patients who received Gliadel plus standard RT/TMZ. Patients were similar in age, gender, and performance status. The weighted mean of median OS was 18.2 months (ten trials, n = 379, range 12.7 to 21.3 months), and the weighted mean of median progression-free survival was 9.7 months (seven trials, n = 287, range 7 to 12.9 months). The most commonly reported grade 3 and 4 adverse events were myelosuppression (10.22 %), neurologic deficit (7.8 %), and healing abnormalities (4.3 %). Adverse events reflected the distinct independent safety profiles of Gliadel wafers and RT/TMZ, with little evidence of enhanced toxicity from their use in sequential combination. In the 11 identified trials, an increased benefit from sequentially combining Gliadel wafers with RT/TMZ was strongly suggested. Median OS tended to be improved by 3 to 4 months beyond that observed for Gliadel wafers or TMZ when used alone in the respective phase III trials. Larger prospective trials of Gliadel plus RT/TMZ are warranted.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Brain Neoplasms; Carmustine; Chemoradiotherapy; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Combined Modality Therapy; Dacarbazine; Decanoic Acids; Disease-Free Survival; Drug Implants; Glioblastoma; Humans; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Grading; Polyesters; Temozolomide; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration
PubMed: 27557526
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-016-0975-5 -
Sarcoma 2016This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies.... (Review)
Review
This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies of adults with advanced or metastatic STS who received systemic anticancer therapy before enrollment in a randomized-controlled trial of pazopanib, another targeted cancer agent, or cytotoxic chemotherapy. Of 204 publications identified, seven articles representing six unique studies met inclusion criteria. Additional safety results for pazopanib were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov. Hematologic toxicities were common with all therapies evaluated (pazopanib, trabectedin, dacarbazine ± gemcitabine, gemcitabine ± docetaxel, cyclophosphamide, and ifosfamide). Studies differed in AE type, timing of assessment, and outcomes reported, although patient populations and AE assessment timing were relatively similar for pazopanib and trabectedin. AEs that were more common with trabectedin than pazopanib were anemia, neutropenia, nausea/vomiting, and elevations in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase. An AE that was more common with pazopanib than trabectedin was anorexia. Only the pazopanib study reported AE frequencies versus placebo. A planned meta-analysis was not feasible, as there was no common comparator. More well-designed studies that include common comparators are needed for comparison of safety effects among treatments for STS.
PubMed: 27516726
DOI: 10.1155/2016/3597609 -
Translational Oncology Feb 2016This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1 immunotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) for overall efficacy, safety, and...
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated anti-programmed cell death (PD)-1 immunotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) for overall efficacy, safety, and effective dose relative to standard chemotherapy or other conventional drugs in the treatment of malignant tumors. We searched the following databases, PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Wangfang Data, Weipu, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and the reference lists of the selected articles for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-PD-1 therapies in humans. The outcome measures were overall survival, treatment response, and adverse events. Only four randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. Three of these evaluated responses to nivolumab, whereas one tested pembrolizumab. The result of our analysis suggested that nivolumab may improve the overall response rate in treating melanoma relative to chemotherapy and has few associated adverse events. Similarly, in metastatic melanoma patients, nivolumab had a significant advantage over dacarbazine in terms of 1-year survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate. Regarding dose levels of nivolumab for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, the outcomes in response to 2 and 10 mg/kg were similar, but both had significant advantages over 0.3 mg/kg. In addition, pembrolizumab showed similar outcomes in response to 2- and 10-mg/kg treatment. Anti-PD-1 immunotherapy appears to be safe and effective for patients with melanoma or metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Our meta-analysis is limited, but additional clinical trials are warranted to verify this preliminary evidence of positive outcomes and before anti-PD-1 therapy can be recommended for routine clinical use.
PubMed: 26947879
DOI: 10.1016/j.tranon.2015.11.010 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Aug 2015Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) are rare tumors. As there is a paucity of randomized studies, this expert consensus document represents an initiative by the European... (Review)
Review
Pulmonary neuroendocrine (carcinoid) tumors: European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society expert consensus and recommendations for best practice for typical and atypical pulmonary carcinoids.
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary carcinoids (PCs) are rare tumors. As there is a paucity of randomized studies, this expert consensus document represents an initiative by the European Neuroendocrine Tumor Society to provide guidance on their management.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Bibliographical searches were carried out in PubMed for the terms 'pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors', 'bronchial neuroendocrine tumors', 'bronchial carcinoid tumors', 'pulmonary carcinoid', 'pulmonary typical/atypical carcinoid', and 'pulmonary carcinoid and diagnosis/treatment/epidemiology/prognosis'. A systematic review of the relevant literature was carried out, followed by expert review.
RESULTS
PCs are well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and include low- and intermediate-grade malignant tumors, i.e. typical (TC) and atypical carcinoid (AC), respectively. Contrast CT scan is the diagnostic gold standard for PCs, but pathology examination is mandatory for their correct classification. Somatostatin receptor imaging may visualize nearly 80% of the primary tumors and is most sensitive for metastatic disease. Plasma chromogranin A can be increased in PCs. Surgery is the treatment of choice for PCs with the aim of removing the tumor and preserving as much lung tissue as possible. Resection of metastases should be considered whenever possible with curative intent. Somatostatin analogs are the first-line treatment of carcinoid syndrome and may be considered as first-line systemic antiproliferative treatment in unresectable PCs, particularly of low-grade TC and AC. Locoregional or radiotargeted therapies should be considered for metastatic disease. Systemic chemotherapy is used for progressive PCs, although cytotoxic regimens have demonstrated limited effects with etoposide and platinum combination the most commonly used, however, temozolomide has shown most clinical benefit.
CONCLUSIONS
PCs are complex tumors which require a multidisciplinary approach and long-term follow-up.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bronchoscopy; Carboplatin; Carcinoid Heart Disease; Carcinoid Tumor; Cisplatin; Dacarbazine; Etoposide; Europe; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Pneumonectomy; Positron-Emission Tomography; Receptors, Somatostatin; Societies, Medical; Temozolomide; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 25646366
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv041 -
BMC Cancer Aug 2013Current guidelines recommend anthracycline-based chemotherapy primarily with doxorubicin either as monotherapy or in combination with ifosfamide as the first-line... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines recommend anthracycline-based chemotherapy primarily with doxorubicin either as monotherapy or in combination with ifosfamide as the first-line treatment for most advanced STS subtypes. Therapeutic options after failure of doxorubicin and/or ifosfamide are limited. This study aimed to comprehensively review available data on the activity and safety of interventions in second- or later-line treatment of advanced STS.
METHODS
Electronic literature databases (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched from 1980 to 01 March 2012 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (both prospective and retrospective) evaluating pharmacological interventions in patients with advanced STS pre-treated with anthracycline- and/or ifosfamide-based therapy.
RESULTS
The review identified six RCTs (one phase III and five phase II trials) and 94 non-randomised studies. Based on the primary trial endpoints, RCTs demonstrated favourable efficacy for pazopanib over placebo (PFS: 4.6 months vs. 1.6 months), gemcitabine plus dacarbazine over dacarbazine monotherapy (3-month PFS rate: 54.2% vs. 35.2%), and trabectedin 3-weekly schedule over weekly schedule (TTP: 3.7 months vs. 2.3 months. The non-randomised studies demonstrated heterogeneity in efficacy and safety results.
CONCLUSIONS
Across the RCTs, pazopanib over placebo, gemcitabine-dacarbazine over dacarbazine, and trabectedin 3-weekly over weekly regimen clearly demonstrated a PFS advantage in the second- and later-line treatment of advanced STS. With only one phase III trial in this setting, there is a clear need for additional comparative trials to better understand the risk: benefit ratios of available agents and combinations.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Dacarbazine; Deoxycytidine; Dioxoles; Humans; Indazoles; Pyrimidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sarcoma; Sulfonamides; Tetrahydroisoquinolines; Trabectedin; Treatment Failure; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 23937858
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-385 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2013High grade glioma (HGG) is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Treatment of HGG usually entails biopsy, or resection if safe, followed by radiotherapy. Temozolomide is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
High grade glioma (HGG) is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Treatment of HGG usually entails biopsy, or resection if safe, followed by radiotherapy. Temozolomide is a novel oral chemotherapy drug that penetrates into the brain and purportedly has a low incidence of adverse events.
OBJECTIVES
To assess whether temozolomide has any advantage for treating HGG in either primary or recurrent disease settings.
SEARCH METHODS
The following databases were searched: CENTRAL (Issue 10, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Physician Data Query and the Meta-Register of Controlled Trials in October, 2012. Reference lists of identified studies were searched. The Journal of Neuro-Oncology and Neuro-oncology were handsearched from 1999 to 2012 including conference abstracts. We contacted neuro-oncologists regarding ongoing and unpublished trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the interventions were the use of temozolomide during primary therapy or for recurrent disease. Comparisons included no chemotherapy, non-temozolomide chemotherapy or different dosing schedules of temozolomide. Patients included those of all ages with histologically proven HGG.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors undertook the quality assessment and data extraction. Outcome measures included: overall survival (OS); progression-free survival (PFS); quality of life (QoL); and adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
For primary therapy three RCTs were identified, enrolling a total of 745 patients, that investigated temozolomide in combination with radiotherapy versus radiotherapy alone for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). Temozolomide increased OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.79, P value 0.0003) and increased PFS (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92, P value 0.02), when compared with radiotherapy alone, although these benefits only appear to emerge when therapy is given in both concomitant and adjuvant phases of treatment. A single RCT found that temozolomide did not have a statistically significant effect on QoL. Risk of haematological complications, fatigue and infections were increased with temozolomide.In recurrent HGG, two RCTs enrolling 672 patients in total found that temozolomide did not increase OS compared to standard chemotherapy (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.06, P value 0.2) but it did increase PFS in a subgroup analysis of grade IV GBM tumours (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.90, P value 0.008). Adverse events were similar between arms.In the elderly, 2 RCTs of 664 patients found OS and PFS was similar with temozolomide alone versus radiotherapy alone. QoL did not appear to differ between arms in a single trial but certain adverse events were significantly more common with temozolomide.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Temozolomide when given in both concomitant and adjuvant phases is an effective primary therapy in GBM compared to radiotherapy alone. It prolongs survival and delays progression without impacting on QoL but it does increase early adverse events. In recurrent GBM, temozolomide compared with standard chemotherapy improves time-to-progression (TTP) and may have benefits on QoL without increasing adverse events but it does not improve overall. In the elderly, temozolomide alone appears comparable to radiotherapy in terms of OS and PFS but with a higher instance of adverse events.
Topics: Age Factors; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Brain Neoplasms; Dacarbazine; Glioblastoma; Humans; Neoplasm Grading; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis; Temozolomide
PubMed: 23633341
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007415.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2013Ovarian carcinosarcoma, also known as malignant mixed Mullerian tumour, is a rare malignant gynaecological tumour constituting about 1% or less of all ovarian cancers.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ovarian carcinosarcoma, also known as malignant mixed Mullerian tumour, is a rare malignant gynaecological tumour constituting about 1% or less of all ovarian cancers. In over 80% of cases, there is extra-ovarian intra-abdominal spread at diagnosis. The primary treatment has traditionally been surgical cytoreduction followed by radiotherapy and chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. Regimes have included cisplatin alone; a combination of doxorubicin, ifosfamide, dacarbazine, cyclophosphamide, taxol; and various other combinations. The effectiveness of these various regimens appears to be mixed. Therefore, there is a need to clarify if there is an optimum neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy after surgical cytoreduction for this rare tumour. Also, it is important to address quality of life (QoL) issues related to treatment, particularly toxicity, as the overall prognosis appears to be poor.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of various adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy options or chemotherapy alone in combination with surgery in the management of ovarian carcinosarcoma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to February 2012. We also searched registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings, reference lists of review articles and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, or chemotherapy alone, in women with ovarian carcinosarcoma (malignant mixed Mullerian sarcoma of the ovary). We also reviewed non-randomised studies (NRS) for discussion in the absence of RCTs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed whether potentially relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. No trials were found and therefore no data were analysed.
MAIN RESULTS
The search strategy identified 297 unique references of which all were excluded.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We found no evidence to inform decisions about neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy regimens, or chemotherapy alone, for women with ovarian carcinosarcoma. Ideally, an RCT that is multicentre or multinational, or well designed non-randomised studies that use multivariate analysis to adjust for baseline imbalances, are needed to compare treatment modalities and improve current knowledge. Further research in genetic and molecular signalling pathways might improve understanding of this tumour subtype.
Topics: Carcinosarcoma; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Female; Humans; Ovarian Neoplasms; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant
PubMed: 23450567
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006246.pub2