-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2014Kaposi's sarcoma remains the most common cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa and the second most common cancer in HIV-infected patients worldwide. Since the introduction of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Kaposi's sarcoma remains the most common cancer in Sub-Saharan Africa and the second most common cancer in HIV-infected patients worldwide. Since the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), there has been a decline in its incidence.However, Kaposi's sarcoma continues to be diagnosed in HIV-infected patients.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the added advantage of chemotherapy plus HAART compared to HAART alone; and the advantages of different chemotherapy regimens in HAART and HAART naive HIV infected adults with severe or progressive Kaposi's sarcoma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and , GATEWAY, the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the US National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov for ongoing trials and the Aegis archive of HIV/AIDS for conference abstracts. An updated search was conducted in July 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials and observational studies evaluating the effects of any chemotherapeutic regimen in combination with HAART compared to HAART alone, chemotherapy versus HAART, and comparisons between different chemotherapy regimens.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed the studies independently and extracted outcome data.We used the risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) as the measure of effect.We did not conduct meta-analysis as none of the included trials assessed identical chemotherapy regimens.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six randomised trials and three observational studies involving 792 HIV-infected adults with severe Kaposi's sarcoma.Seven studies included patients with a mix of mild to moderate (T0) and severe (T1) Kaposi's sarcoma. However, this review was restricted to the subset of participants with severe Kaposi's sarcoma disease.Studies comparing HAART plus chemotherapy to HAART alone showed the following: one trial comparing HAART plus doxorubicin,bleomycin and vincristine (ABV) to HAART alone showed a significant reduction in disease progression in the HAART plus ABV group (RR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.75, 100 participants); there was no statistically significant reduction in mortality and no difference in adverse events. A cohort study comparing liposomal anthracyclines plus HAART to HAART alone showed a non-statistically significant reduction in Kaposi's sarcoma immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome in patients that received HAART plus liposomal anthracyclines (RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.16 to 1.55, 129 participants).Studies comparing HAART plus chemotherapy to HAART plus a different chemotherapy regimen showed the following: one trial involving 49 participants and comparing paclitaxel versus pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients on HAART showed no difference in disease progression. Another trial involving 46 patients and comparing pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus liposomal daunorubicin showed no participants with progressive Kaposi's sarcoma disease in either group.Studies comparing different chemotherapy regimens in patients from the pre-HAART era showed the following: in the single RCT comparing liposomal daunorubicin to ABV, there was no significant difference with the use of liposomal daunorubicin compared to ABV in disease progression (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.34 to 1.82, 227 participants) and overall response rate. Another trial involving 178 participants and comparing oral etoposide versus ABV demonstrated no difference in mortality in either group. A non-randomised trial comparing bleomycin alone to ABV demonstrated a higher median survival time in the ABV group; there was also a non-statistically significant reduction in adverse events and disease progression in the ABV group (RR 11; 95% CI 0.67 to 179.29, 24 participants).An additional non-randomised study showed a non-statistically significant overall mortality benefit from liposomal doxorubicin as compared to conservative management consisting of either bleomycin plus vinblastine, vincristine or single-agent antiretroviral therapy alone (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.15, 29 participants). The overall quality of evidence can be described as moderate quality. The quality of evidence was downgraded due to the small size of many of the included studies and small number of events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The findings from this review suggest that HAART plus chemotherapy may be beneficial in reducing disease progression compared to HAART alone in patients with severe or progressive Kaposi's sarcoma. For patients on HAART, when choosing from different chemotherapy regimens, there was no observed difference between liposomal doxorubicin, liposomal daunorubicin and paclitaxel.
Topics: Alitretinoin; Antineoplastic Agents; Antiretroviral Therapy, Highly Active; Bleomycin; Doxorubicin; Drug Therapy, Combination; Etoposide; HIV Infections; Humans; Liposomes; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sarcoma, Kaposi; Skin Neoplasms; Tretinoin; Vincristine
PubMed: 25221796
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003256.pub2 -
Cancer Biology & Therapy Jun 2014Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death among gynecological tumors. Carboplatin/paclitaxel represents the cornerstone of front-line treatment. Instead, there is no... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death among gynecological tumors. Carboplatin/paclitaxel represents the cornerstone of front-line treatment. Instead, there is no consensus for management of recurrent/progressive disease, in which pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) ± carboplatin is widely used. We performed a systematic review and metaanalysis to evaluate impact of PLD-based compared with no-PLD-based regimens in the ovarian cancer treatment. Data were extracted from randomized trials comparing PLD-based treatment to any other regimens in the January 2000-January 2013 time-frame. Study end-points were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), CA125 response, and toxicity. Hazard ratios (HRs) of OS and PFS, with 95% CI, odds ratios (ORs) of RR and risk ratios of CA125 response and grade 3-4 toxicity, were extracted. Data were pooled using fixed and random effect models for selected endpoints. Fourteen randomized trials for a total of 5760 patients were selected and included for the final analysis, which showed no OS differences for PLD-based compared with other regimens (pooled HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.88-1.02; P = 0.132) and a significant PFS benefit of PLD-based schedule (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86-0.96; P = 0.001), particularly in second-line (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.75-0.91) and in platinum-sensitive (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74-0.94) subgroups. This work confirmed the peculiar tolerability profile of this drug, moreover no difference was observed for common hematological toxicities and for RR, CA125 response. PLD-containing regimens do not improve OS when compared with any other schedule in all phases of disease. A marginal PFS advantage is observed only in platinum-sensitive setting and second-line treatment.
Topics: Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Disease-Free Survival; Doxorubicin; Female; Humans; Ovarian Neoplasms; Polyethylene Glycols; Proportional Hazards Models; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24658024
DOI: 10.4161/cbt.28557 -
Health Technology Assessment... Mar 2006To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of intravenous formulations of topotecan monotherapy, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydorocholoride (PLDH)... (Review)
Review
Topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydrochloride and paclitaxel for second-line or subsequent treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of intravenous formulations of topotecan monotherapy, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin hydorocholoride (PLDH) monotherapy and paclitaxel used alone or in combination with a platinum-based compound for the second-line or subsequent treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.
DATA SOURCES
Electronic databases covering publication years 2000-4. Company submissions.
REVIEW METHODS
Seventeen databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews for the clinical effectiveness of PLDH, topotecan and paclitaxel and economic evaluations of the cost-effectiveness of PLDH, topotecan and paclitaxel. Selected studies were quality assessed and data extracted, as were the three company submissions. A new model was developed to assess the costs of the alternative treatments, the differential mean survival duration and the impact of health-related quality of life. Monte-Carlo simulation was used to reflect uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs were identified. In five of these trials, both the comparators were used within their licensed indications. Of these five, three included participants with both platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive advanced ovarian cancer, and a further two only included participants with platinum-sensitive disease. The comparators that were assessed in the three trials that included both subtypes of participants were PLDH versus topotecan, topotecan versus paclitaxel and PLDH versus paclitaxel. In the further two trials that included participants with the subtype of platinum-sensitive disease, the comparators that were assessed were single-agent paclitaxel versus a combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and cisplatin (CAP) and paclitaxel plus platinum-based chemotherapy versus conventional platinum-based therapy alone. A further four trials were identified and included in the review in which one of the comparators in the trial was used outside its licensed indication. The comparators assessed in these trials were oxaliplatin versus paclitaxel, paclitaxel given weekly versus every 3 weeks, paclitaxel at two different dose levels and oral versus intravenous topotecan. Four studies met the inclusion criteria for the cost-effectiveness review. The review of the economic evidence from the literature and industry submissions identified a number of significant limitations in existing studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of PLDH, topotecan and paclitaxel. Analysis 1 assessed the cost-effectiveness of PLDH, topotecan and paclitaxel administered as monotherapies. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to explore the impact of patient heterogeneity (e.g. platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant/refractory patients), the inclusion of additional trial data and alternative assumptions regarding treatment and monitoring costs. In the base-case results for Analysis 1, paclitaxel monotherapy emerged as the cheapest treatment. When the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated, topotecan was dominated by PLDH. Hence the options considered in the estimation of the ICERs were paclitaxel and PLDH. The ICER for PLDH compared with paclitaxel was pound 7033 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in the overall patient population (comprising platinum-sensitive, -refractory and -resistant patients). The ICER was more favourable in the platinum-sensitive group ( pound 5777 per QALY) and less favourable in the platinum-refractory/resistant group ( pound 9555 per QALY). The cost-effectiveness results for the base-case analysis were sensitive to the inclusion of additional trial data. Incorporating the results of the additional trial data resulted in less favourable estimates for the ICER for PLDH versus paclitaxel compared with the base-case results. The ICER of PLDH compared with paclitaxel was pound 20,620 per QALY in the overall patient population, pound 16,183 per QALY in the platinum-sensitive population and pound 26,867 per QALY in the platinum-resistant and -refractory population. The results from Analysis 2 explored the cost-effectiveness of the full range of treatment comparators for platinum-sensitive patients. The treatment options considered in this model comprised PLDH, topotecan, paclitaxel-monotherapy, CAP, paclitaxel/platinum combination therapy and platinum monotherapy. Owing to the less robust approaches that were employed to synthesise the available evidence and the heterogeneity between the different trials, the reliability of these results should be interpreted with some caution. Topotecan, paclitaxel monotherapy and PLDH were all dominated by platinum monotherapy (i.e. higher costs and lower QALYs). After excluding these alternatives, the treatments that remained under consideration were platinum monotherapy, CAP and paclitaxel-platinum combination therapy. Of these three alternatives, platinum monotherapy was the least costly and least effective. The ICER for CAP compared with platinum monotherapy was pound 16,421 per QALY. The ICER for paclitaxel-platinum combination therapy compared with CAP was pound 20,950 per QALY.
CONCLUSIONS
For participants with platinum-resistant disease there was a low probability of response to treatment with PLDH, topotecan or paclitaxel. Furthermore, there was little difference between the three comparators in relation to overall survival. The comparators did, however, differ considerably in their toxicity profiles. Given the low survival times and response rates, it appears that the maintenance of quality of life and the control of symptoms and toxicity are paramount in this patient group. As the three comparators differed significantly in terms of their toxicity profiles, patient and physician choice is also an important element that should be addressed when decisions are made regarding second-line therapy. It can also be suggested that this group of patients may benefit from being included in further clinical trials of new drugs. For participants with platinum-sensitive disease there was a considerable range of median survival times observed across the trials. The most favourable survival times and response rates were observed for paclitaxel and platinum combination therapy. This suggests that treatment with combination therapy may be more beneficial than treatment with a single-agent chemotherapeutic regimen. In terms of single-agent compounds, the evidence suggests that PLDH is more effective than topotecan. Evidence from a further trial that compared PLDH and paclitaxel suggests that there is no significant difference between these two comparators in this trial. The three comparators did, however, differ significantly in terms of their toxicity profiles across the trials. Although treatment with PLDH may therefore be more beneficial than that with topotecan, patient and physician choice as to the potential toxicities associated with each of the comparators and the patient's ability and willingness to tolerate these are of importance. Assuming the NHS is willing to pay up to pound 20,000-40,000 per additional QALY, PLDH appears to be cost-effective compared with topotecan and paclitaxel monotherapy, in terms of the overall patient population and the main subgroups considered. The cost-effectiveness results for the base-case analysis were sensitive to the inclusion of additional trial data. Incorporating the results of additional trial data gave less favourable estimates for the ICER for PLDH versus paclitaxel monotherapy, compared with the base-case results. Although the ICER of PLDH compared with paclitaxel monotherapy was less favourable, PLDH was still cost-effective compared with topotecan and paclitaxel monotherapy. For platinum-sensitive patients, the combination of paclitaxel and platinum appears to be cost-effective. On the strength of the evidence reviewed here, it can be suggested that participants with platinum-resistant disease may benefit from being included in further clinical trials of new drugs. To assess the effectiveness of combination therapy against a single-agent non-platinum-based compound, it can be suggested that a trial that compared paclitaxel in combination with a platinum-based therapy versus single-agent PLDH would be a reasonable option.
Topics: Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Antineoplastic Agents; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Doxorubicin; Female; Humans; Liposomes; Ovarian Neoplasms; Paclitaxel; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis; Topotecan
PubMed: 16545208
DOI: 10.3310/hta10090 -
PloS One 2024Current treatment recommendations for resectable or borderline pancreatic carcinoma support upfront surgery and adjuvant therapy. However, neoadjuvant therapy (NT) seems... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparison of neoadjuvant treatment and surgery first for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Current treatment recommendations for resectable or borderline pancreatic carcinoma support upfront surgery and adjuvant therapy. However, neoadjuvant therapy (NT) seems to increase prognosis of pancreatic carcinoma and come to everyone's attention gradually. Randomized controlled trials offering comparison with the NT are lacking and optimal neoadjuvant treatment regimen still remains uncertain. This study aims to compare both treatment strategies for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.
METHODS
The PRISMA checklist was used as a guide to systematically review relevant peer-reviewed literature reporting primary data analysis. We searched PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Datebase and related reviews for randomized controlled trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy with surgery first for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma. We estimated relative hazard ratios (HRs) for median overall survival and ratios risks (RRs) for microscopically complete (R0) resection among different neoadjuvant regimens and major complications. We assessed the effects of neoadjuvant therapy on R0 resection rate and median overall survival with Bayesian analysis.
RESULTS
Thirteen eligible articles were included. Eight studies performed comparison neoadjuvant therapy with surgery first, and R0 resection rate was recorded in seven studies. Compared with surgery first, neoadjuvant therapy did increase the R0 resection rate (RR = 1.53, I2 = 0%, P< 0.00001), there was a certain possibility that gemcitabine + cisplatin (Gem+Cis) + Radiotherapy was the most favorable in terms of the fact that there was no significant difference concerning the results from the individual studies. In direct comparison, four studies were included and estimated that Neoadjuvant therapy improved mOS compared with upfront surgery (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58-0.92; P = 0.012; I2 = 15%), after Bayesian analysis it seemed that regimen with Cisplatin/ Epirubicin then Gemcitabine/ Capecitabine (PEXG) was most likely the best with a relatively small sample size. The rate of major surgical complications was available for six studies and ranged from 11% to 56% with neoadjuvant therapy and 11% to 45% with surgery first. There was no significant difference between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery first, also with a high heterogeneity (RR = 0.96, 95%CI = 0.65-1.43; P = 0.85; I2 = 46%).
CONCLUSION
In conclusion neoadjuvant therapy might offer benefit over up-front surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy increased the R0 resection rate with gemcitabine + cisplatin + Radiotherapy that was the most favorable and improved mOS with Cisplatin/ Epirubicin then Gemcitabine/ Capecitabine (PEXG) that was most likely the best.
Topics: Humans; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Gemcitabine; Capecitabine; Cisplatin; Epirubicin; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Deoxycytidine; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
PubMed: 38451955
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0295983 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2010The use of anthracyclines is limited by the occurrence of cardiotoxicity. In an effort to prevent this cardiotoxicity, different anthracycline derivates have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The use of anthracyclines is limited by the occurrence of cardiotoxicity. In an effort to prevent this cardiotoxicity, different anthracycline derivates have been studied.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the occurrence of cardiotoxicity with the use of different anthracycline derivates in cancer patients.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (1966 to 29 May 2009) and EMBASE (1980 to 2 June 2009). In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing-trials-databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which different anthracycline derivates were compared in cancer patients (children and adults).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently performed study selection, assessment of risk of bias and data-extraction including adverse effects.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified five RCTs of varying quality addressing epirubicin versus doxorubicin (1036 patients) with the same dose. The meta-analysis showed no evidence for a significant difference in the occurrence of clinical heart failure between the treatment groups (RR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.11). However, there is some suggestion of a lower rate of clinical heart failure in patients treated with epirubicin.We identified two RCTs with varying quality addressing liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin versus conventional doxorubicin (521 patients). The meta-analysis showed a significantly lower rate of both clinical heart failure and clinical and subclinical heart failure combined in patients treated with liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin (RR = 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.75 and RR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.59 respectively). It should be noted that in one of the studies patients in the liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin group received a higher cumulative anthracycline dose than patients in the doxorubicin group.For the other possible combinations of different anthracycline derivates only one RCT (epirubicin versus liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin) or no RCT was identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We are not able to favour either epirubicin or doxorubicin when given with the same dose. Based on the currently available evidence on heart failure, we conclude that in adults with a solid tumour liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin should be favoured over doxorubicin. For both epirubicin versus doxorubicin and liposomal-encapsulated doxorubicin versus conventional doxorubicin no conclusions can be made about the effects of treatment in children treated with anthracyclines and also not in patients diagnosed with leukaemia. More research is needed. For other combinations of anthracycline derivates not enough evidence was available to make definitive conclusions about the occurrence of cardiotoxicity in patients treated with anthracyclines.
Topics: Adult; Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Cardiac Output, Low; Child; Doxorubicin; Epirubicin; Heart; Humans; Liposomes; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 20464735
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005006.pub4 -
Medicine Nov 2018Autophagy is a mechanism which relies on lysosomes for clearance and recycling of abnormal proteins or organelles. Many studies have demonstrated that the deregulation... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Autophagy is a mechanism which relies on lysosomes for clearance and recycling of abnormal proteins or organelles. Many studies have demonstrated that the deregulation of autophagy is associated with the development of various diseases including cancer. The use of autophagy inhibitors is an emerging trend in cancer treatment. However, the value of autophagy inhibitors remains under debate. Thus, a meta-analysis was performed, aiming to evaluate the clinical value of autophagy-inhibitor-based therapy.
METHODS
We searched for clinical studies that evaluated autophagy-inhibitor-based therapy in cancer. We extracted data from these studies to evaluate the relative risk (RR) of overall response rate (ORR), 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate, and 1-year overall survival (OS) rate.
RESULTS
Seven clinical trials were identified (n = 293). Treatments included 2 combinations of hydroxychloroquine and gemcitabine, 1 combination of hydroxychloroquine and doxorubicin, 1 combination of chloroquine and radiation, 2 combinations of chloroquine, temozolomide, and radiation, and 1 hydroxychloroquine monotherapy. Autophagy-inhibitor-based therapy showed higher ORR (RR: 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.86, P = .009), PFS (RR: 1.72, 95% CI: 1.05-2.82, P = .000), OS (RR: 1.39, 95% CI: 1.11-1.75, P = .000) values than the therapy without inhibiting autophagy.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis showed that autophagy-inhibitor-based therapy has better treatment response compared to chemotherapy or radiation therapy without inhibiting autophagy, which may provide a new strategy for the treatment of cancers.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Autophagy; Chloroquine; Clinical Trials as Topic; Dacarbazine; Deoxycytidine; Doxorubicin; Humans; Hydroxychloroquine; Neoplasms; Risk; Temozolomide; Treatment Outcome; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 30431566
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012912 -
Journal of Cancer Research and... 2018The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the two most commonly used chemotherapy regimens gemcitabine plus cisplatin... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the two most commonly used chemotherapy regimens gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) and methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin/adriamycin, and cisplatin (MVAC) regimens for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) patients.
METHODS
We searched for all studies investigating GC and MVAC for MIBC patients in PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Central Search Library. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed.
RESULTS
Our searches identified 13 studies among 2174 patients. In the meta-analysis, the pathological complete response to GC regimens was superior to MVAC regimens. No significant difference in pathological partial response was found between the two groups. GC regimens were associated with a significant decrease risk in Grade 3-4 neutropenia, mucositis, and febrile neutropenia, but a significant increase risk in Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia. There was no significant difference in overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) when compared GC regimens to MVAC regimens.
CONCLUSIONS
GC regimens significantly improved pathological complete response compared to MVAC regimens. GC regimens were associated with a significant decrease risk in Grade 3-4 neutropenia, mucositis, and febrile neutropenia, but a significant increase risk in Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia. There was no significant difference in OS, DSS, and DFS when compared the two regimens.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cisplatin; Deoxycytidine; Doxorubicin; Humans; Methotrexate; Muscle Neoplasms; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Prognosis; Survival Rate; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Vinblastine; Gemcitabine
PubMed: 30488841
DOI: 10.4103/0973-1482.188434 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2013Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common cancer in women and it is usually diagnosed at an advanced stage. The majority of ovarian tumours are epithelial in origin.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ovarian cancer is the eighth most common cancer in women and it is usually diagnosed at an advanced stage. The majority of ovarian tumours are epithelial in origin. Women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) often have a reduced performance status with a limited life expectancy, therefore maintaining quality of life with effective symptom control is the main purpose of treatment. Drug treatment of relapsed disease is directed by the platinum-free interval: relapsed platinum-sensitive disease is usually re-treated with platinum-based therapy and platinum-resistant disease challenged with non-platinum drugs. However, the side-effects of chemotherapy agents may be severe and optimal treatment regimens are unclear. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), which contains a cytotoxic drug called doxorubicin hydrochloride is one of several treatment modalities that may be considered for single-agent treatment of relapsed EOC, or used in combination with other drugs.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of PLD in women with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Group (CGCG) trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1990 to February 2013. We also searched online registers of clinical trials, abstracts of scientific meetings and reference lists of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated PLD in women diagnosed with relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently abstracted data to a pre-designed data collection form and assessed the risk of bias according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. Where possible, we pooled collected data in meta-analyses using RevMan 5.2 software.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 RCTs that evaluated PLD alone or in combination with other drugs. Four RCTs contributed no data to the meta-analyses. Two studies compared PLD plus carboplatin (carbo) to paclitaxel (PAC)/carbo in women with platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC. Overall survival (OS) was similar for these treatments, however progression-free survival (PFS) was longer with PLD/carbo (1164 participants; hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.97; I² = 7%; P value 0.01). PLD/carbo was associated with significantly more anaemia and thrombocytopenia than PAC/carbo, whereas PAC/carbo was associated with significantly more alopecia, neuropathies, hypersensitivity reactions and arthralgias/myalgias. PLD/carbo was well-tolerated and women receiving this treatment were significantly less likely to discontinue treatment than those receiving PAC/carbo (two studies, 1150 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.57; I² = 0%; P < 0.00001).Five studies compared other agents to PLD alone. None of these agents were associated with significantly better survival or severe adverse-event profiles than PLD. Topotecan and gemcitabine were associated with significantly more haematological severe adverse events than PLD, and patupilone was associated with significantly more severe neuropathies and diarrhoea. Severe hand-foot syndrome (HFS) occurred consistently more frequently with PLD than the other drugs.Three studies compared PLD combination treatment to PLD alone. Two combinations resulted in a significantly longer PFS compared with PLD alone: trabectedin (TBD)/PLD (one study, 672 women; HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.96; P value 0.02) and vintafolide (EC145)/PLD (one study, 149 women; HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; P value 0.04). TBD/PLD appeared to benefit the partially platinum-sensitive subgroup only. Further studies are likely to have an important impact on our confidence in these estimates. TBD/PLD was associated with significantly more haematological and gastrointestinal severe adverse events than PLD alone, whereas EC145/PLD appeared to be well-tolerated.For platinum-resistant relapsed EOC, the median PFS and OS for single-agent PLD across seven included studies was 15 weeks and 54 weeks, respectively. Severe HFS occurred significantly more frequently in women receiving a 50 mg/m² dose of PLD than those receiving less than 50 mg/m² (17% versus 2%, respectively; P value 0.01).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In platinum-sensitive relapsed epithelial ovarian cancer, PLD/carbo is more effective than PAC/carbo and is better tolerated; PLD/carbo should therefore be considered as first-line treatment in women with platinum-sensitive relapsed EOC. PLD alone is a useful agent for platinum-resistant relapsed EOC, however it remains unclear how it compares with other single agents for this subgroup and in what order these agents should be used. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of PLD in combination with other agents in platinum-resistant relapsed EOC.
Topics: Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Doxorubicin; Female; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasms, Glandular and Epithelial; Ovarian Neoplasms; Polyethylene Glycols; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 23835762
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006910.pub2 -
Annals of Oncology : Official Journal... Apr 2002Anthracyclines are essential for the treatment of the children with cancer. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the existing evidence of the frequency and risk... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Anthracyclines are essential for the treatment of the children with cancer. We performed a systematic review to evaluate the existing evidence of the frequency and risk factors of anthracycline-induced clinical heart failure (A-CHF) in children.
DESIGN
Medline was searched for articles reporting the frequency of A-CHF, published from 1966 to December 2000. Information about study features, risk factors and frequency were abstracted, and a validity score was given for each study. The potential predictive factors of A-CHF were analysed both within and across the studies.
RESULTS
The frequency of A-CHF in children was estimated in 30 studies described in 25 articles. All studies have serious methodological limitations. The frequency varied between 0% and 16%. In the analysis across the studies the type of anthracyclines and the maximal dose in 1 week explain a considerable part of the variation of the frequency of A-CHF.
CONCLUSIONS
Doxorubicin and a dose above 45 mg/m2 within 1 week seemed to increase the frequency of A-CHF. Well designed and executed studies are needed to accurately estimate the frequency of A-CHF and reliably assess the importance of potential risk factors.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; Cardiovascular Diseases; Child; Child, Preschool; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Doxorubicin; Female; Forecasting; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Male; Neoplasms; Risk Factors
PubMed: 12056699
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdf118 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2012Indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies include follicular lymphoma, small lymphocytic lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma and marginal zone... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies include follicular lymphoma, small lymphocytic lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma and marginal zone lymphomas. Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is a lymphoid malignancy similar to small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in its leukaemic phase.Indolent lymphoid malignancies including CLL are characterised by slow growth, a high initial response rate and a relapsing and progressive disease course. Advanced-stage indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies are often incurable. If symptoms or progressive disease occur, chemotherapy plus rituximab is indicated. No chemotherapy regimen has been shown to improve overall survival compared to a different regimen.Bendamustine is efficacious in the treatment of patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies. A number of randomised controlled trials have examined the effect of bendamustine compared to other chemotherapy regimens in these patients. Improved disease control with no survival benefit is shown.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy of bendamustine therapy for patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies including CLL.
SEARCH METHODS
We electronically searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1966 to May 2012), EMBASE (1974 to November 2011), LILACS (1982 to May 2012), databases of ongoing trials (accessed 30 April 2012) and relevant conference proceedings. We searched references of identified trials and contacted the first author of each included trial.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials that compared a bendamustine-containing regimen to other chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently appraised the quality of each trial and extracted data from included trials. We estimated and pooled hazard ratios (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included five trials randomising 1343 adult patients in the systematic review. Allocation and blinding were unclear in three trials and adequate in two. Incomplete outcome data and selective reporting were adequate in all trials. Trials varied in the type of lymphoid malignancy, bendamustine regimen and the comparator regimen. In the three trials that included patients with follicular lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma and other indolent lymphomas the comparator treatment was cyclophosphamide, a combination of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin and prednisone, and fludarabine. Two trials included only patients with CLL and compared bendamustine to chlorambucil, and to fludarabine. We did not conduct a meta-analysis due to the clinical heterogeneity among trials. Bendamustine had no statistically significant effect on the overall survival of patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies in any of the included trials (trials of moderate quality). Progression-free survival was statistically significantly improved with bendamustine treatment compared to other chemotherapy in three of the four trials that reported on it. One trial demonstrated a non statistically significant improvement of PFS. The risk of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was similar when bendamustine was compared to CHOP and fludarabine, and higher when compared to chlorambucil. Compared to chlorambucil quality of life was unaffected by bendamustine treatment (one trial, no meta-analysis).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
As none of the currently available chemotherapeutic protocols for induction therapy in indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies confer a survival benefit and due to the improved progression-free survival in each of the included trials, and a similar rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events, bendamustine may be considered for the treatment of patients with indolent B cell lymphoid malignancies. However, the unclear effect on survival and the higher rate of adverse events compared to chlorambucil in patients with CLL/SLL does not support the use of bendamustine for these patients.The effect of bendamustine combined with rituximab should be evaluated in randomised clinical trials with more homogenous populations and outcomes for specific subgroups of patients by type of lymphoma should be reported. Any future trial should evaluate the effect of bendamustine on quality of life.
Topics: Adult; Antineoplastic Agents, Alkylating; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bendamustine Hydrochloride; Cyclophosphamide; Doxorubicin; Humans; Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell; Lymphoma, B-Cell; Lymphoma, Follicular; Lymphoma, Mantle-Cell; Nitrogen Mustard Compounds; Prednisone; Recurrence; Vincristine; Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia
PubMed: 22972131
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009045.pub2