-
Cancer Nov 2016Solid renal masses and cystic lesions with solid components are suspicious for renal cell carcinoma. Without an effective screening test, composite models and nomograms... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Distinguishing malignant and benign renal masses with composite models and nomograms: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinically localized renal masses suspicious for malignancy.
Solid renal masses and cystic lesions with solid components are suspicious for renal cell carcinoma. Without an effective screening test, composite models and nomograms rely on patient and tumor characteristics to stratify the risk of benign disease versus malignant disease. To guide decisions about the use of renal mass sampling or excision, a systematic review and meta-analysis of the ability of composite models to predict the likelihood of malignancy on the basis of preoperative clinical variables was performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from January 1, 1997, through May 1, 2015, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement. Composite models necessarily included imaging results and at least 1 element from the following to be compared with surgical pathology: demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and blood or urine tests. Two independent reviewers screened citations and extracted data. Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 was used to assess the risk of bias. The strength of evidence was graded with the scheme recommended by Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Twenty studies (12,149 patients) were included in this review. The only significant predictors of malignancy in the composite models were tumor size (effect size, 1.33-fold increased risk per centimeter; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-1.43) and male sex (effect size, 2.71; 95% CI, 2.39-3.02). The results were inconclusive or not significant for tumor characteristics, age, body mass index, and incidental presentation. In conclusion, composite models currently have a limited ability to distinguish malignant renal masses from benign renal masses, with increased tumor size and male sex associated with malignancy. Cancer 2016;122:3267-3276. © 2016 American Cancer Society.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Female; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Male; Models, Statistical; Nomograms; Precancerous Conditions
PubMed: 27508947
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30268 -
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics Dec 2024Solid cancer patients, compared to their healthy counterparts, are at a greater risk of contracting and suffering from severe complications and poorer prognosis after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Solid cancer patients, compared to their healthy counterparts, are at a greater risk of contracting and suffering from severe complications and poorer prognosis after COVID-19 infections. They also have different immune responses after doses of COVID-19 vaccination, but limited evidence is available to reveal the effectiveness and help to guide immunization programs for this subpopulation; MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and clinicaltrials.gov were used to search literature. The pooled seroconversion rate was calculated using a random-effects model and reported with a 95% confidence interval (CI); The review includes 66 studies containing serological responses after COVID-19 vaccination in 13,050 solid cancer patients and 8550 healthy controls. The pooled seropositive rates after the first dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 55.2% (95% CI 45.9%-64.5% = 18) and 90.2% (95% CI 80.9%-96.6% = 13), respectively. The seropositive rates after the second dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 87.6% (95% CI 84.1%-90.7% = 50) and 98.9% (95% CI 97.6%-99.7% = 35), respectively. The seropositive rates after the third dose in patients with solid cancer and healthy controls are 91.4% (95% CI 85.4%-95.9% = 21) and 99.8% (95% CI 98.1%-100.0% = 4), respectively. Subgroup analysis finds that study sample size, timing of antibody testing, and vaccine type have influence on the results; Seroconversion rates after COVID-19 vaccination are significantly lower in patients with solid malignancies, especially after the first dose, then shrinking gradually after the following two vaccinations, indicating that subsequent doses or a booster dose should be considered for the effectiveness of this subpopulation.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasms; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Antibodies, Viral; Seroconversion; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccination
PubMed: 38785118
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2024.2357424 -
The Oncologist May 2024We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil...
We performed a systematic literature review to identify and summarize data from studies reporting clinical efficacy and safety outcomes for trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) combined with other antineoplastic agents in advanced cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We conducted a systematic search on May 29, 2021, for studies reporting one or more efficacy or safety outcome with FTD/TPI-containing combinations. Our search yielded 1378 publications, with 38 records meeting selection criteria: 35 studies of FTD/TPI-containing combinations in mCRC (31 studies second line or later) and 3 studies in other tumor types. FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was extensively studied, including 19 studies in chemorefractory mCRC. Median overall survival ranged 8.6-14.4 months and median progression-free survival 3.7-6.8 months with FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Based on one randomized and several retrospective studies, FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab was associated with improved outcomes compared with FTD/TPI monotherapy. FTD/TPI combinations with chemotherapy or other targeted agents were reported in small early-phase studies; preliminary data indicated higher antitumor activity for certain combinations. Overall, no safety concerns existed with FTD/TPI combinations; most common grade ≥ 3 adverse event was neutropenia, ranging 5%-100% across all studies. In studies comparing FTD/TPI combinations with monotherapy, grade ≥ 3 neutropenia appeared more frequently with combinations (29%-67%) vs. monotherapy (5%-41%). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events ranged 0%-11% for FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab and 0%-17% with other combinations. This systematic review supports feasibility and safety of FTD/TPI plus bevacizumab in refractory mCRC. Data on non-bevacizumab FTD/TPI combinations remain preliminary and need further validation.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Drug Combinations; Pyrrolidines; Thymine; Trifluridine
PubMed: 38366864
DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyae007 -
Oncotarget May 2016p21 protein (Cdc42/Rac)-activated kinase 1 (PAK1) expression appears to be predictive of prognosis in various solid tumors, though the evidence is not yet conclusive. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
p21 protein (Cdc42/Rac)-activated kinase 1 (PAK1) expression appears to be predictive of prognosis in various solid tumors, though the evidence is not yet conclusive. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to explore the relationship between PAK1 and prognosis in patients with solid tumors. Relevant publications were searched in several widely used databases, and 15 studies (3068 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the strength of the association between PAK1 and prognosis. Associations between PAK1 expression and prognosis were observed for overall survival (HR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.07-7.39) and disease-specific survival (HR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.47-3.16). No such association was detected for time to tumor progression (HR = 1.78, 95% CI = 0.99-3.21).Our meta-analysis thus indicates that PAK1 expression may be a predictive marker of overall survival and disease-specific survival in patients with solid tumors.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Disease-Free Survival; Gene Expression Regulation, Enzymologic; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; Neoplasms; Prognosis; p21-Activated Kinases
PubMed: 27027431
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.8320 -
PloS One 2015A systematic literature review was done to determine the relationship between elevated CRP and prognosis in people with solid tumors. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a serum... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
A systematic literature review was done to determine the relationship between elevated CRP and prognosis in people with solid tumors. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a serum acute phase reactant and a well-established inflammatory marker. We also examined the role of CRP to predict treatment response and tumor recurrence.
METHODS
MeSH (Medical Subject Heading) terms were used to search multiple electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EBM-Cochrane). Two independent reviewers selected research papers. We also included a quality Assessment (QA) score. Reports with QA scores <50% were excluded. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) methodology was utilized for this review (S1 PRISMA Checklist).
RESULTS
271 articles were identified for final review. There were 45% prospective studies and 52% retrospective. 264 had intermediate QA score (≥50% but <80%); Seven were adequate (80% -100%); A high CRP was predictive of prognosis in 90% (245/271) of studies-80% of the 245 studies by multivariate analysis, 20% by univariate analysis. Many (52%) of the articles were about gastrointestinal malignancies (GI) or kidney malignancies. A high CRP was prognostic in 90% (127 of 141) of the reports in those groups of tumors. CRP was also prognostic in most reports in other solid tumors primary sites.
CONCLUSIONS
A high CRP was associated with higher mortality in 90% of reports in people with solid tumors primary sites. This was particularly notable in GI malignancies and kidney malignancies. In other solid tumors (lung, pancreas, hepatocellular cancer, and bladder) an elevated CRP also predicted prognosis. In addition there is also evidence to support the use of CRP to help decide treatment response and identify tumor recurrence. Better designed large scale studies should be conducted to examine these issues more comprehensively.
Topics: Adult; Biomarkers, Tumor; C-Reactive Protein; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasms; Prognosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26717416
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143080 -
The Journal of Infection Mar 2021The clinical impact of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in immunocompromised patients... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical impact of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), in immunocompromised patients has not been systematically evaluated.
METHODS
We reviewed current literature reporting on COVID-19 in cancer (CA), hematopoietic cell (HCT), and solid organ transplant (SOT) patients and compared their clinical data and outcomes to the general population. For adult CA, HCT and SOT patients, an extensive search strategy retrieved all articles published until July 20, 2020 by combining the terms coronavirus, coronavirus infection, COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 in PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science, and following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. For the pediatric CA cohort, a global COVID-19 registry was used. For the general population cohort, a large meta-analysis was used to compare pooled prevalence estimates, and two large meta-analyses were utilized to serve as pooled comparators for hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
FINDINGS
Compared to the general population, adult CA and SOT patients with COVID-19 had higher comorbidities, greater levels of inflammatory markers at diagnosis, and higher rates of intensive care and hospital mortality. Pediatric CA patients and HCT patients with COVID-19 tended to have clinical presentations and outcomes similar to the general population.
INTERPRETATION
To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review evaluating COVID-19 phenotype and outcomes in immunocompromised patients and comparing them to the general population, which shows that hospital outcomes appear to be worse in adult CA and SOT patients, potentially due to their higher co-morbidity burden.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Adult; COVID-19; Child; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; Immunocompromised Host; Neoplasms; Organ Transplantation; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 33549624
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.01.022 -
Oncotarget Jan 2016There is limited data on the impact of specific patient characteristics, tumor subtypes or treatment interventions on survival in breast cancer LM. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There is limited data on the impact of specific patient characteristics, tumor subtypes or treatment interventions on survival in breast cancer LM.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted to assess the impact of hormone receptor and HER-2 status on survival in breast cancer LM. A search for clinical studies published between 1/1/2007 and 7/1/2012 and all randomized-controlled trials was performed. Survival data from all studies are reported by study design (prospective trials, retrospective cohort studies, case studies).
RESULTS
A total of 36 studies with 851 LM breast cancer subjects were identified. The majority (87%) were treated with intrathecal chemotherapy. Pooled median overall survival ranged from 14.9-18.1 weeks depending on study type. Breast cancer LM survival (15 weeks) was longer than other solid tumor LM 8.3 weeks and lung cancer LM 8.7 weeks, but shorter than LM lymphoma (15.4 versus 24.2 weeks). The impact of hormone receptor and HER-2 status on survival could not be determined.
CONCLUSIONS
A median overall survival of 15 weeks in prospective studies of breast cancer LM provides a historical comparison for future LM breast cancer trials. Other outcomes including the impact of molecular status on survival could not be determined based on available studies.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Meningeal Neoplasms
PubMed: 26543235
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.5911 -
PloS One 2016In the era of somatostatin analogues and targeted therapies, the role of chemotherapy in NET remains largely undefined. This systematic review aimed to assess the effect... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES
In the era of somatostatin analogues and targeted therapies, the role of chemotherapy in NET remains largely undefined. This systematic review aimed to assess the effect of chemotherapy on response rates (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity compared to other chemotherapies/systemic therapies or best supportive care in patients with advanced or metastatic NET.
METHODS
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from 1946 to 2015 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, other databases and conference proceedings. Review of abstracts, quality assessment and data abstraction were performed independently by two investigators. Meta-analyses were conducted using Mantel-Haenszel analysis with random-effects modelling.
RESULTS
Six RCTs comparing standard streptozotocin plus 5-fluorouacil (STZ/5FU) chemotherapy to other chemotherapy regimens, and 2 comparing this to interferon (IFN) were included. Only 1 study was considered at low risk of bias. STZ/5-FU was no different to other chemotherapies in response rate [RR 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-1.27], PFS (RR 0.95; CI 0.81-1.13), or OS (RR 1.03; CI 0.77-1.39). IFN may produce higher response than STZ/5FU (RR 0.20; CI 0.04-1.13), but event rates were small and survival was no different. Interferon was associated with higher overall haematological (RR 0.47; CI 0.27-0.82) and lower overall renal toxicity (RR 3.61; CI 1.24-10.51).
CONCLUSION
Strong evidence is lacking in the area of chemotherapy in neuroendocrine tumors. There is currently no evidence that one chemotherapeutic regimen is significantly better than the other, nor is interferon better than chemotherapy. There is an urgent need to design RCTs comparing modern chemotherapy to other agents in NET.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Disease-Free Survival; Fluorouracil; Humans; Interferons; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Somatostatin; Streptozocin; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27362760
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158140 -
PloS One 2013To evaluate the effect of Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy on overall survival of patients with metastatic solid tumors. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy on overall survival of patients with metastatic solid tumors.
DESIGN
A systematic literature search to identify randomized trials comparing chemotherapy with and without Bevacizumab in metastatic cancer. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) and the secondary end points were progression free survival (PFS) and toxicity. A meta-analysis was performed for each tumor type and for the combination of all tumors.
RESULTS
24 randomized trials with 8 different types of malignancies were included in this meta-analysis. Patients treated with Bevacizumab had an OS benefit, hazard ratio (HR) 0.89 (95% CI 0.84-0.93, P<0.00001 I(2)-4%). The combined analysis showed a PFS benefit with a HR 0.71 (95% CI 0.68-0.74, P<0.00001, I(2)-54%). The toxicity analysis showed a statistically significant increase in fatal adverse events (FAEs) in the Bevacizumab treatment arm, risk ratio (RR) 1.47 (95% CI 1.1-1.98). A separate analysis of the lung cancer trials showed an increased risk of fatal pulmonary hemorrhage with a RR of 5.65 (95% CI 1.26-25.26). The risk of G3-4 adverse events was increased: RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.15-1.24).
CONCLUSION
in this combined analysis Bevacizumab improved OS (with little heterogeneity) and PFS. These results should be considered in the light of lack of markers predictive of response and the increased severe and fatal toxicity seen with Bevacizumab treatment.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Bevacizumab; Humans; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neoplasms; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 23349675
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051780 -
Haematologica Oct 2017Treatment intensification to maximize disease control and reduced intensity approaches to minimize the risk of late sequelae have been evaluated in newly diagnosed... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Secondary malignant neoplasms, progression-free survival and overall survival in patients treated for Hodgkin lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Treatment intensification to maximize disease control and reduced intensity approaches to minimize the risk of late sequelae have been evaluated in newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma. The influence of these interventions on the risk of secondary malignant neoplasms, progression-free survival and overall survival is reported in the meta-analysis herein, based on individual patient data from 9498 patients treated within 16 randomized controlled trials for newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma between 1984 and 2007. Secondary malignant neoplasms were meta-analyzed using Peto's method as time-to-event outcomes. For progression-free and overall survival, hazard ratios derived from each trial using Cox regression were combined by inverse-variance weighting. Five study questions (combined-modality treatment chemotherapy alone; more extended involved-field radiotherapy; radiation at higher doses radiation at 20 Gy; more fewer cycles of the same chemotherapy protocol; standard-dose chemotherapy intensified chemotherapy) were investigated. After a median follow-up of 7.4 years, dose-intensified chemotherapy resulted in better progression-free survival rates (=0.007) as compared with standard-dose chemotherapy, but was associated with an increased risk of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia/myelodysplastic syndromes (=0.0028). No progression-free or overall survival differences were observed between combined-modality treatment and chemotherapy alone, but more secondary malignant neoplasms were seen after combined-modality treatment (=0.010). For the remaining three study questions, outcomes and secondary malignancy rates did not differ significantly between treatment strategies. The results of this meta-analysis help to weigh up efficacy and secondary malignancy risk for the choice of first-line treatment for Hodgkin lymphoma patients. However, final conclusions regarding secondary solid tumors require longer follow-up.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Combined Modality Therapy; Disease-Free Survival; Follow-Up Studies; Hodgkin Disease; Humans; Neoplasms, Second Primary; Odds Ratio; Proportional Hazards Models; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28912173
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2017.167478