Dataset Information

A Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of systemic regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Background

For advanced pancreatic cancer, many regimens have been compared with gemcitabine (G) as the standard arm in randomized controlled trials. Few regimens have been directly compared with each other in randomized controlled trials and the relative efficacy and safety among them remains unclear.

Methods

A systematic review was performed through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ASCO meeting abstracts up to May 2013 to identify randomized controlled trials that included advanced pancreatic cancer comparing the following regimens: G, G+5-fluorouracil, G+ capecitabine, G+S1, G+ cisplatin, G+ oxaliplatin, G+ erlotinib, G+ nab-paclitaxel, and FOLFIRINOX. Overall survival and progression-free survival with 95% credible regions were extracted using the Parmar method. A Bayesian multiple treatment comparisons was performed to compare all regimens simultaneously.

Results

Twenty-two studies were identified and 16 were included in the meta-analysis. Median overall survival, progression free survival, and response rates for G arms from all trials were similar, suggesting no significant clinical heterogeneity. For overall survival, the mixed treatment comparisons found that the probability that FOLFIRINOX was the best regimen was 83%, while it was 11% for G+ nab-paclitaxel and 3% for G+ S1 and G+ erlotinib, respectively. The overall survival hazard ratio for FOLFIRINOX versus G+ nab-paclitaxel was 0.79 [0.50-1.24], with no obvious difference in toxicities. The hazard ratios from direct pairwise comparisons were consistent with the mixed treatment comparisons results.

Conclusions

FOLFIRINOX appeared to be the best regimen for advanced pancreatic cancer probabilistically, with a trend towards improvement in survival when compared with other regimens by indirect comparisons.

SUBMITTER: Chan K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4186762 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of systemic regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Chan Kelvin K Shah Keya K Lien Kelly K Coyle Doug D Lam Henry H Ko Yoo-Joung YJ

PloS one 20141006 10

<h4>Background</h4>For advanced pancreatic cancer, many regimens have been compared with gemcitabine (G) as the standard arm in randomized controlled trials. Few regimens have been directly compared with each other in randomized controlled trials and the relative efficacy and safety among them remains unclear.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic review was performed through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ASCO meeting abstracts up to May 2013 to identify randomized c ...[more]

PMID: 25286060

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAdvanced pancreatic cancer confers poor prognosis and treatment advancement has been slow. Recent randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated survival benefits for combination therapy compared to gemcitabine alone. However, the comparative benefits and harms of available combination chemotherapy treatments are not clear. We therefore conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to assess the comparative safety and efficacy of chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.MethodsMEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Registry of Clinical trials and abstracts from major scientific meetings were searched for RCTs published from 2002 to 2013. Key outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and safety including grade 3-4 febrile neutropenia, neutropenia, vomiting, diarrhea, fatigue and sensory neuropathy. Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted to calculate survival and safety outcomes using gemcitabine (GEM) as the reference comparator. Effect estimates and 95% credible intervals were calculated for each comparison. Mean ranks and the probability of being best were obtained for each treatment analyzed in the network meta-analysis.ResultsThe search identified 23 studies involving 19 different treatment regimens and 9,989 patients. FOLFIRINOX, GEM/cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU (PEFG), GEM/NAB-paclitaxel (NAB-P), GEM/erlotinib+/-bevacizumab, GEM/capecitabine, and GEM/oxaliplatin were associated with statistically significant improvements in OS and PFS relative to gemcitabine alone and several other treatments. They were amongst the top ranked for survival outcomes amongst other treatments included. No significant differences were found for other combination chemotherapy treatments. Effect estimates from indirect comparisons matched closely to estimates derived from pairwise comparisons. Overall, combination therapies had greater risk for evaluated grade 3-4 toxicities over gemcitabine alone.ConclusionsIn the absence of head-to-head comparisons, we performed a mixed-treatment analysis to achieve high-quality information on the effectiveness and safety of each treatment. This study suggests that some combination therapies may offer greater benefits in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer than others. To more fully elucidate the comparative benefits and harms of different combination chemotherapy regimens, rigorously conducted comparative studies, or network meta-analysis of patient-level data are required.

Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently ranked fourth place of cancer related mortality. Only a minority of 10-20% of patients with PDAC have a primarily resectable disease, while 50-60% of the patients are diagnosed with irresectable disease. A certain group of patients is defined as "borderline resectable", which is mainly relied to contact of the tumor to major abdominal vessels. For preoperative evaluation of resectability CT and MRI is commonly used. Although CT-scanning, which is the standard preoperative imaging modality, has striking limitations concerning evaluation of lymph node status as well as vessel involvement and approximately 20% of the patients are staged incorrectly. A central part of modern therapy of locally advanced or not primarily resectable PDAC is neoadjuvant therapy. Especially neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to the FOLFIRINOX protocol resulted in high resection rates of initially not resectable patients. Furthermore, treatment with FOLFIRINOX was shown to be an independent predictor of improved prognosis and resection after neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved survival. Neoadjuvant treatment was able to increases the rates of R0 resection, which depicts an independent prognostic factor and FOLFIRINOX outmatched other treatment regimes (e.g., gemcitabine-based radio-chemotherapy) concerning achievement of a R0 resection. While most evidence of neoadjuvant treatment of PDAC is conferred by retrospective analysis, there is growing data from randomized controlled trials, confirming the beneficial effects of neoadjuvant therapy on the prognosis of PDAC. Thus, patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced PDAC should be evaluated for neoadjuvant treatment. If there is no progression of the disease during neoadjuvant treatment exploration with the goal of R0 resection should be performed. If possible, patients should be included in well-designed randomized controlled trials at specialized pancreatic centers.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) usually have dismal prognostic outcomes. Venetoclax, a selective inhibitor of antiapoptotic protein B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2), demonstrates antimyeloma activity in plasma cells with t(11;14) or high BCL-2 expression.ObjectivesThis meta-analysis aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of venetoclax-based therapy in RRMM.DesignThis is a meta-analysis study.Data sources and methodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for studies published up to 20 December 2021. Overall response rate (ORR), rate of very good partial response or better (≧VGPR), and complete response (CR) rate were pooled with the random-effects model. Safety was evaluated by the incidences of grade ≧3 adverse events. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to identify the causes of heterogeneities. All the analyses were conducted by STATA 15.0 software.ResultsA total of 14 studies with 713 patients were included for analysis. The pooled ORR, rate of ≧VGPR, and CR for all patients were 59% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 45-71%], 38% (95% CI = 26-51%), and 17% (95% CI = 10-26%), respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) ranged from 2.0 months to not reached (NR), and the median overall survival (OS) ranged from 12.0 months to NR. Meta-regression showed that patients treated with more drugs combined or less heavily pretreated had higher response rates. Patients with t(11;14) had superior ORR [relative risk (RR) = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.05-2.07], ≧VGPR (RR = 1.71, 95% CI = 1.12-2.60), CR (RR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.34-2.57), PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.30-0.65], and OS (HR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.08-0.52) compared with patients without t(11;14). Most grade ≧3 adverse events were hematologic, gastrointestinal, and infectious related and were manageable.ConclusionVenetoclax-based therapy is an effective and safe option for RRMM patients, especially those with t(11;14).

Dataset Information

A Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of systemic regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

A Bayesian meta-analysis of multiple treatment comparisons of systemic regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets