-
Medicine Sep 2021The present network meta-analysis was conducted to perform an indirect comparison among ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety for second-line treatment with ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma progressed on sorafenib treatment: A network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The present network meta-analysis was conducted to perform an indirect comparison among ramucirumab, regorafenib, and cabozantinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progressed on sorafenib treatment.
METHODS
A systematic review through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library was developed, with eligible randomized clinical trials been included. Hazard ratios (HRs) including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), odds ratios of disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events were compared indirectly with network meta-analysis using random model in software STATA version 13.0.
RESULTS
A total of 4 randomized clinical trials including 2137 patients met the eligibility criteria and enrolled. Indirect comparisons showed that there was no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among agents of regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated α-fetoprotein (AFP) (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib was the only agent associated with significant superiority in OS, compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI, 0.50-0.90).
CONCLUSIONS
The present network meta-analysis revealed that there might be no statistical difference observed in the indirect comparison of PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR among regorafenib, cabozantinib, or ramucirumab in advanced HCC patients with elevated AFP (400 ng/mL or higher). However, in patients with low-level AFP (lower than 400 ng/mL), regorafenib might be associated with significant superiority in OS, compared to placebo, which need further investigation in clinical practice.
Topics: Anilides; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Neoplasm Metastasis; Phenylurea Compounds; Pyridines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sorafenib; Ramucirumab
PubMed: 34559096
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000027013 -
International Journal of Radiation... Dec 2019The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care...
The goal of treatment for early stage rectal cancer is to optimize oncologic outcome while minimizing effect of treatment on quality of life. The standard of care treatment for most early rectal cancers is radical surgery alone. Given the morbidity associated with radical surgery, local excision for early rectal cancers has been explored as an alternative approach associated with lower rates of morbidity. The American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria presented in this manuscript are evidence-based guidelines for the use of local excision in early stage rectal cancer that include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) used by a multidisciplinary expert panel to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures. In those instances where evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners and patients who desire information regarding the use of local excision in rectal cancer.
Topics: Alpha Particles; Antineoplastic Agents; Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant; Consensus; Delphi Technique; Evidence-Based Practice; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Patient Selection; Postoperative Complications; Proctectomy; Proctoscopy; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Societies, Medical; Standard of Care; Treatment Outcome; United States; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 31445109
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.08.020