-
Translational Cancer Research Jun 2022Bevacizumab (Avastin), a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, is widely used in treating a variety of malignant tumors. Several...
BACKGROUND
Bevacizumab (Avastin), a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, is widely used in treating a variety of malignant tumors. Several biosimilars of bevacizumab have been developed and marketed with the expiration of bevacizumab's patent. The objective of this study was to collate available data from head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and evaluate the efficacy and safety of biosimilar bevacizumab compared with the bevacizumab (Avastin) in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS
Literature search of Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed from inception until October 15, 2021. The efficacy outcome indicators were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The occurrence of adverse events (AEs) was evaluated for safety outcome.
RESULTS
Ten RCTs recruiting 6,416 patients with non-squamous NSCLC were included. All RCTs studies included the biosimilar bevacizumab group as the experimental group and the original bevacizumab group as the control group. The patients in the experimental group and control group received the same dose and duration of chemotherapy combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. The results of meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in ORR [risk ratio (RR): 0.97, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.93-1.02. P=0.841, I=0], PFS (RR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.98-1.10, P=0.235, I=0) and OS (RR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.00-1.10, P=0.692, I=0) between the biomarker and original groups. The P values of ORR, PFS and OS were 0.533, 0.970 and 0.916 respectively as shown by Egger's test, suggesting that there was no publication bias. Subgroup analysis showed no significant differences in ORR, PFS, and OS between the Chinese and multicenter trials. The pooled incidence rate of AEs between two groups was similar, and there was also no significant difference between the two groups.
DISCUSSION
This is the first study to independently report biosimilar bevacizumab in a meta-analysis on NSCLC treatment. The results showed that biosimilar bevacizumab had similar efficacy and safety compared with the original bevacizumab.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration No. CRD42021276991.
PubMed: 35836506
DOI: 10.21037/tcr-22-71 -
Medicine Nov 2014The standard treatment for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is still a matter of debate. The chemotherapy regimen of paclitaxel (PTX) combined with S-1 has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy and toxicity of paclitaxel plus S-1 compared with paclitaxel plus 5-FU for advanced gastric cancer: a PRISMA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
The standard treatment for patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is still a matter of debate. The chemotherapy regimen of paclitaxel (PTX) combined with S-1 has been used to treat AGC or metastatic gastric cancer.We conducted a meta-analysis to compare oral S-1 and infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) to determine which agent was more efficacious and less toxic in combination with PTX. A systematic review with a meta-analysis was performed. PubMed, EmBase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched to select randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PTX plus S-1 and PTX plus 5-FU in patients with AGC.Three RCTs were eligible and 352 patients were analyzed. PTX plus S-1 increased the disease control rate (risk ratio [RR] = 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00-1.30, P = 0.04) and reduced the progressive disease rate (RR = 0.62, 95% CI] = 0.39-0.98, P = 0.04) compared with PTX plus 5-FU. There was a significant decrease in nausea (RR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.43-0.82, P = 0.001) and vomiting (RR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.33-0.91, P = 0.02) in patients treated with PTX plus S-1.PTX plus S-1 was associated with almost equivalent safety and a lower progressive disease rate compared with PTX plus 5-FU. PTX plus S-1 is a good alternative strategy for patients who cannot tolerate a continuous intravenous infusion.
Topics: Age Factors; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Disease Progression; Drug Combinations; Fluorouracil; Neoplasm Staging; Oxonic Acid; Risk Factors; Sex Factors; Stomach Neoplasms; Tegafur
PubMed: 25437030
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000164 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2014Approximately 13% of women diagnosed with endometrial cancer present with advanced stage disease (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Approximately 13% of women diagnosed with endometrial cancer present with advanced stage disease (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage III/IV). The standard treatment of advanced endometrial cancer consists of cytoreductive surgery followed by radiation therapy, or chemotherapy, or both. There is currently little agreement about which adjuvant treatment is the safest and most effective.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adjuvant chemotherapy compared with radiotherapy or chemoradiation, and to determine which chemotherapy agents are most effective in women presenting with advanced endometrial cancer (FIGO stage III/IV).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Collaborative Review Group's Trial Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 10 2013), MEDLINE and EMBASE up to November 2013. Also we searched electronic clinical trial registries for ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adjuvant chemotherapy compared with radiotherapy or chemoradiation in women with FIGO stage III and IV endometrial cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors selected trials, extracted data, and assessed trials for risk of bias. Where necessary, we contacted trial investigators for relevant, unpublished data. We pooled data using the random-effects model in Review Manager (RevMan) software.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four multicentre RCTs involving 1269 women with primary FIGO stage III/IV endometrial cancer. We considered the trials to be at low to moderate risk of bias. All participants received primary cytoreductive surgery. Two trials, evaluating 620 women (83% stage III, 17% stage IV), compared adjuvant chemotherapy with adjuvant radiotherapy; one trial evaluating 552 women (88% stage III, 12% stage IV) compared two chemotherapy regimens (cisplatin/doxorubicin/paclitaxel (CDP) versus cisplatin/doxorubicin (CD) treatment) in women who had all undergone adjuvant radiotherapy; and one trial contributed no data.Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was longer with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with adjuvant radiotherapy (OS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.99, I² = 22%; and PFS: HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.92, I² = 0%). Sensitivity analysis using adjusted and unadjusted OS data, gave similar results. In subgroup analyses, the effects on survival in favour of chemotherapy were not different for stage III and IV, or stage IIIA and IIIC (tests for subgroup differences were not significant and I² = 0%). This evidence was of moderate quality. Data from one trial showed that women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to experience haematological and neurological adverse events and alopecia, and more likely to discontinue treatment (33/194 versus 6/202; RR 5.73, 95% CI 2.45 to 13.36), than those receiving adjuvant radiotherapy. There was no statistically significant difference in treatment-related deaths between the chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment arms (8/309 versus 5/311; Risk Ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% CI 0.55 to 5.00).There was no clear difference in PFS between intervention groups in the one trial that compared CDP versus CD (552 women; HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.17). We considered this evidence to be of moderate quality. Mature OS data from this trial were not yet available. Severe haematological and neurological adverse events occurred more frequently with CDP than CD.We found no trials to include of adjuvant chemotherapy versus chemoradiation in advanced endometrial cancer; however we identified one ongoing trial of this comparison.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is moderate quality evidence that chemotherapy increases survival time after primary surgery by approximately 25% relative to radiotherapy in stage III and IV endometrial cancer. There is limited evidence that it is associated with more adverse effects. There is some uncertainty as to whether triplet regimens offer similar survival benefits over doublet regimens in the long-term. Further research is needed to determine which chemotherapy regimen(s) are the most effective and least toxic, and whether the addition of radiotherapy further improves outcomes. A large trial evaluating the benefits and risks of adjuvant chemoradiation versus chemotherapy in advanced endometrial cancer is ongoing.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Chemoradiotherapy; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Cisplatin; Disease-Free Survival; Doxorubicin; Endometrial Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Neoplasm Staging; Paclitaxel; Radiotherapy, Adjuvant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24832785
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010681.pub2 -
Advances in Therapy Jun 2024Gastric cancer has the highest incidence and mortality in Eastern Asia. The efficacy and safety of ramucirumab (RAM) monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel (PTX)... (Review)
Review
Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Ramucirumab as a Second-Line Treatment for Patients with Unresectable Advanced or Metastatic Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma in Japan and South Korea: A Systematic Literature Review.
INTRODUCTION
Gastric cancer has the highest incidence and mortality in Eastern Asia. The efficacy and safety of ramucirumab (RAM) monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel (PTX) for patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (G/GEA) have been established in clinical trials. To assess the effectiveness and safety of RAM or RAM-based therapy as a second-line treatment in real-world clinical practice in Eastern Asia and to pave the way for future research, a systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted.
METHODS
Studies published between January 2014 and December 2021 were identified in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, and CBM databases.
RESULTS
This SLR included 23 studies from Japan and South Korea, of which 22 were retrospective and 11 were full-text articles. Most studies investigated RAM + PTX (range of median overall survival [mOS] 7.4-12.2 months; median progression-free survival [mPFS] 3.35-7.0 months). Data were limited for RAM, RAM + albumin-bound paclitaxel, and RAM + taxane. RAM + PTX was associated with longer survival (mOS 9.3-12.2 months vs. 5.2-9.7 months; mPFS 4.1-5.1 months vs. 3.0-4.1 months) than PTX. Patients with prior anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) exposure experienced longer mPFS (4.8 vs. 3.4 months) from RAM + taxane than those without prior anti-PD-1 exposure. Few patients (3.3-6.3%) discontinued RAM or RAM-based therapy because of adverse events (AEs). Hematological toxicities were most frequently occurring AEs and no new safety signals were identified compared to clinical trials.
CONCLUSION
RAM + PTX as a second-line treatment is effective and associated with an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with advanced or metastatic G/GEA in real-world settings of Japan and South Korea. More studies are recommended to further evaluate effectiveness and safety of RAM or RAM-based therapy, especially after anti-PD-1 therapy, in a wider Eastern Asian population.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
INPLASY registration number INPLASY2022120023.
Topics: Ramucirumab; Humans; Stomach Neoplasms; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Adenocarcinoma; Esophagogastric Junction; Republic of Korea; Esophageal Neoplasms; Paclitaxel; Japan; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38619719
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-024-02838-5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2015It is generally accepted that taxanes are among the most active chemotherapy agents in the management of metastatic breast cancer. This is an update of a Cochrane review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
It is generally accepted that taxanes are among the most active chemotherapy agents in the management of metastatic breast cancer. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to compare taxane-containing chemotherapy regimens with regimens not containing a taxane in the management of women with metastatic breast cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
In this review update, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), and ClinicalTrials.gov on 14 February 2013 using keywords such as 'advanced breast cancer' and 'chemotherapy'. We searched reference lists of articles, contacted study authors, and did not apply any language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing taxane-containing chemotherapy regimens to regimens without taxanes in women with metastatic breast cancer. We included published and unpublished studies.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We derived hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival, time to progression, and time to treatment failure where possible, and used a fixed-effect model for meta-analysis. We represented objective tumour response rates and toxicity as risk ratios (RRs). We extracted quality of life data where present.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included 28 studies. The updated analysis included 6871 randomised women, while the original review had 3643 women. Of the 28 included studies, we considered 19 studies to be at low risk of bias overall; however, some studies failed to report details on allocation concealment and methods of outcome assessment for those outcomes that are more likely to be influenced by a lack of blinding (for example tumour response rate). Studies varied in the taxane-containing chemotherapy backbone, and the comparator arms and were categorised into three groups: Regimen A plus taxane versus Regimen A (2 studies); Regimen A plus taxane versus Regimen B (14 studies); and single-agent taxane versus Regimen C (13 studies). Thirteen studies used paclitaxel, 14 studies used docetaxel, and 1 study allowed the investigator to decide on the type of taxane; the majority of studies delivered a taxane every 3 weeks. Twenty studies administered taxanes as first-line treatment, and 21 studies involved anthracycline naïve women in the metastatic setting. The combined HR for overall survival and time to progression favoured the taxane-containing regimens (HR 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 0.99, P = 0.002, deaths = 4477; and HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97, P = 0.002, estimated 5122 events, respectively) with moderate to substantial heterogeneity across trials. If the analyses were restricted to studies of first-line chemotherapy, this effect persisted for overall survival (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 0.99, P = 0.03) but not for time to progression (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.02, P = 0.22). Tumour response rates appeared to be better with taxane-containing chemotherapy in assessable women (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.27, P < 0.00001) with substantial heterogeneity across studies. Taxanes were associated with an increased risk of neurotoxicity (RR 4.84, 95% CI 3.18 to 7.35, P < 0.00001, 24 studies) and hair loss (RR 2.37, 95% CI 1.45 to 3.87, P = 0.0006, 11 studies) but less nausea/vomiting compared to non-taxane-containing regimens (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.83, P = 0.001, 26 studies). Leukopaenia and treatment-related death did not differ between the two groups (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.17, P = 0.16, 28 studies; and RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.57, P = 0.99, 23 studies, respectively). For quality of life measures, none of the individual studies reported a difference in overall or any of quality of life subscales between taxane-containing and non-taxane chemotherapy regimens.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Taxane-containing regimens appear to improve overall survival, time to progression, and tumour response rate in women with metastatic breast cancer. Taxanes are also associated with an increased risk of neurotoxicity but less nausea and vomiting compared to non-taxane-containing regimens. The considerable heterogeneity encountered across studies probably reflects the varying efficacy of the comparator regimens used in these studies and indicates that taxane-containing regimens are more effective than some, but not all, non-taxane-containing regimens.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; Antineoplastic Agents, Phytogenic; Breast Neoplasms; Bridged-Ring Compounds; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Paclitaxel; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tamoxifen; Taxoids
PubMed: 26058962
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003366.pub3 -
Health Technology Assessment... Jul 2013The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued multiple guidance for the first-line management of patients with lung cancer and recommends... (Review)
Review
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line chemotherapy for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
BACKGROUND
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has issued multiple guidance for the first-line management of patients with lung cancer and recommends different combinations of chemotherapy treatments. This review provides a synthesis of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence supporting current guidance.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of first-line chemotherapy currently licensed in Europe and recommended by NICE, for adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
DATA SOURCES
Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library) were searched from 2001 to August 2010.
REVIEW METHODS
Trials that compared first-line chemotherapy currently licensed in Europe and recommended by NICE in chemotherapy-naive adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC were included. Data on key outcomes including, but not limited to, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs) were extracted. For the assessment of cost-effectiveness, outcomes included incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Analyses were performed for three NSCLC subpopulations: patients with predominantly squamous disease, patients with predominantly non-squamous disease and patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive (M+) status. Meta-analysis and mixed-treatment comparison methodology were conducted where appropriate.
RESULTS
Twenty-three trials involving > 11,000 patients in total met the inclusion criteria. The quality of the trials was poor. In the case of patients with squamous disease, there were no statistically significant differences in OS between treatment regimes. The mixed-treatment comparison demonstrated that, in patients with non-squamous disease, pemetrexed (Alimta®, Eli Lilly and Company; PEM) + platinum (PLAT) increases OS statistically significantly compared with gemcitabine (Gemzar®, Eli Lilly and Company; GEM) + PLAT [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.98] and that paclitaxel (Abraxane®, Celgene Corporation; PAX) + PLAT increases OS statistically significantly compared with docetaxel (Taxotere®, Sanofi-aventis; DOC) + PLAT (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.93). None of the comparisons found any statistically significant differences in OS among patients with EGFR M+ status. Direct meta-analysis showed a statistically significant improvement in PFS with gefitinib (Iressa®, AstraZeneca; GEF) compared with DOC + PLAT and PAX + PLAT (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.73; and HR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.60, respectively). No papers related to UK decision-making were identified. A de novo economic model was developed. Using list prices (British National Formulary), cisplatin (CIS) doublets are preferable to carboplatin doublets, but this is reversed if electronic market information tool prices are used, in which case drug administration costs then become more important than drug acquisition costs. For patients with both squamous and non-squamous disease, moving from low to moderate willingness-to-pay thresholds, the preferred drugs are PAX → GEM → DOC. However, in patients with non-squamous disease, PEM + CIS resulted in increased OS and would be considered cost-effective up to £35,000 per QALY gained. For patients with EGFR M+, use of GEF compared with PAX or DOC yields very high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Vinorelbine (Navelbine®, Pierre Fabre Pharmaceutical Inc.) was not shown to be cost-effective in any comparison.
LIMITATIONS
Poor trial quality and a lack of evidence for all drug comparisons complicated and limited the data analysis. Outcomes and adverse effects are not consistently combined across the trials. Few trials reported quality-of-life data despite their relevance to patients and clinicians.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this comprehensive review are unique to NSCLC and will assist clinicians to make decisions regarding the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. The design of future lung cancer trials needs to reflect the influence of factors such as histology, genetics and the new prognostic biomarkers that are currently being identified. In addition, trials will need to be adequately powered so as to be able to test for statistically significant clinical effectiveness differences within patient populations. New initiatives are in place to record detailed information on the precise chemotherapy (and targeted chemotherapy) regimens being used, together with data on age, cell type, stage of disease and performance status, allowing for very detailed observational audits of management and outcomes at a population level. It would be useful if these initiatives could be expanded to include the collection of health economics data.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Clinical Trials as Topic; Cost-Benefit Analysis; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Neoplasm Metastasis; Quality-Adjusted Life Years
PubMed: 23886301
DOI: 10.3310/hta17310 -
Cancers Feb 2020Combination regimens have shown superiority over single agents in the adjuvant treatment of resected pancreatic cancer (PC), but there are no data supporting definition... (Review)
Review
Combination regimens have shown superiority over single agents in the adjuvant treatment of resected pancreatic cancer (PC), but there are no data supporting definition of the best regimen. This work aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine+capecitabine, and gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel in PC patients. A meta-analysis was performed for direct comparison between trials comparing combination regimens and gemcitabine monotherapy. Subsequently, an indirect comparison was made between trials investigating the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine+capecitabine, and gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel because of the same control arm (gemcitabine). A total of three studies met the selection criteria and were included in our indirect comparison. Indirect comparisons for efficacy outcomes showed a benefit in terms of DFS (disease-free survival)/EFS (event-free survival)/RFS (relapse-free survival) for both mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine+capecitabine (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.91) and versus gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50-0.90). No significant advantage was registered for OS (overall survival). Indirect comparisons for safety showed an increase in terms of G3-5 AEs (with the exception of neutropenia) for mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine+capecitabine (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.50), while no significant differences were observed versus gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel. According to our results, mFOLFIRINOX is feasible and manageable and could represent a first option for fit PC resected patients.
PubMed: 32110977
DOI: 10.3390/cancers12030534 -
Renal Failure Dec 2022To compare the efficacy and safety between paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty and conventional balloon (CB) angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Paclitaxel coated balloon versus conventional balloon angioplasty in dysfunctional dialysis arteriovenous fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
PURPOSE
To compare the efficacy and safety between paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty and conventional balloon (CB) angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional arteriovenous fistula (AVF).
METHODS
We searched four major electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from inception through November 28, 2021. Outcomes of interest included target lesion primary patency (TLPP), technical success and all-cause mortality. The STATA package version 15.1 was utilized to undertake meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs totaling 1535 patients were analyzed. The available data showed that there were no significant differences of TLPP rates at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months between the PCB group and the CB group (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-1.07, = 1.000, = 33.5%, Cochrane test = 0.185, fixed-effect model; RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.99-1.39, = 0.065, = 75.4%, Cochrane test = 0.000, random-effect model; RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.35-1.89, = 0.625, = 62.8%, Cochrane test = 0.045, random-effect model; RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.97-1.47, = 0.096, = 40.5%, Cochrane test = 0.071, random-effect model). In addition, two groups had similar technical success rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97-1.03, = 1.000, = 0.0%, Cochrane test = 0.596, fixed-effect model) and all-cause mortality rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.54-1.84, = 1.000, = 0.0%, Cochrane test = 0.599, fixed-effect model).
CONCLUSIONS
PCB angioplasty did not appear to convey any obvious advantage over CB angioplasty in the treatment of dysfunctional AVF. However, further multi-center, large-scale and well-designed RCTs are needed to prove outcomes.
Topics: Angioplasty, Balloon; Arteriovenous Fistula; Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Humans; Paclitaxel; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Renal Dialysis; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Patency
PubMed: 35166168
DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2022.2029487 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2020This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) combined with paclitaxel-based chemotherapy and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy...
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of traditional Chinese medicines (TCMs) combined with paclitaxel-based chemotherapy and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy alone for gastric cancer treatment. Literature searches (up to September 25, 2019) were performed using the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Chinese Science and Technology Journals (CQVIP), Wanfang, and China Academic Journals (CNKI) databases. Data from 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with 1,109 participants, were included. The results indicated that, compared with paclitaxel-based chemotherapy alone, the combination of TCMs and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy significantly improved the tumor response rate (TRR; RR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.24-1.57; < 0.001, = 12%), increased the quality of life based on the Karnofsky Performance Scale score (RR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.19-1.96; < 0.001, = 0%), and reduced the side effects, such as neutropenia (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.55-0.84; < 0.001, = 44%), leukopenia (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.54-0.90; < 0.01, = 40%), thrombocytopenia (RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.96; < 0.05, = 32%), and nausea and vomiting (RR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.32-0.80; < 0.01, = 85%). Hepatic dysfunction (RR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.33-1.20; = 0.16, = 0%), neurotoxicity (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.26-1.55; = 0.32, = 0%), and anemia (RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.40-1.04; = 0.07, = 0%) were similar between the two groups. Evidence from the meta-analysis suggested that compared with paclitaxel-based chemotherapy alone, the combination of TCMs and paclitaxel-based chemotherapy may increase the TRR, improve quality of life, and reduce multiple chemotherapy-related side effects in gastric cancer patients. Additional rigorously designed large RCTs are required to confirm the efficacy and safety of this treatment.
PubMed: 32174834
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00132 -
Seminars in Oncology Jun 2021The present systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare the mortality rates related to adverse events (AEs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Adverse events of different chemotherapy regimens in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
INTRODUCTION
The present systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to compare the mortality rates related to adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity as well as all AEs of currently used chemotherapy regimens for first-line therapy of advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder (UCB).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for articles published between January 2000 and June 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis extension statement for NMA. Eligible studies included RCTs comparing different first-line chemotherapy regimens for treating advanced or metastatic UCB and AEs as outcome measures. A NMA was performed to assess the mortality rates related to AEs and discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity as well as all AEs.
RESULTS
Fourteen trials comprising 2,615 patients met our eligibility criteria and formal NMAs were conducted. Results revealed that gemcitabine plus carboplatin had the lowest likelihood of mortality related to AEs (P score: 0.8079), while larotaxel plus cisplatin and paclitaxel, cisplatin plus gemcitabine had both a lower toxicity rate leading to discontinuation (P score: 0.7295 and P score: 0.7242, respectively). Compared with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC), most chemotherapy regimens were associated with a lower likelihood of thrombocytopenia, anemia, and cardiovascular toxicity. In contrast, most chemotherapy regimens compared with GC were associated with a higher likelihood of neutropenia, central (fatigue, neuropathy) and gastrointestinal AEs, infections, as well as renal and pulmonary toxicities.
CONCLUSION
Results of the present study demonstrated that hematological toxicity was the most prevalent AE associated with gemcitabine-containing regimens, while central AEs and febrile neutropenia were more commonly in taxane-containing regimens. GC had the lowest rate of gastrointestinal AEs, infection disorders, and pulmonary toxicities. Cisplatin-containing regimens were associated with a higher rate of renal and cardiovascular toxicity. These differential AEs may help in the detection of the personalized therapy in addition of efficacy data.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Transitional Cell; Cisplatin; Female; Humans; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 34749886
DOI: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2021.09.005