Dataset Information

A network meta-analysis for toxicity of eight chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the incidence of toxicity of 8 different chemotherapy regimens, including doxorubicin + paclitaxel, doxorubicin, capecitabine, CMF (cyclophosphamide + methotrexate + 5-fluorouracil), FAC (fluorouracil + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide), doxorubicin + docetaxel, doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

Results

This network meta-analysis included 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The findings revealed that, with regard to capecitabine alone regimen exhibited higher incidence of nausea/vomiting than doxorubicin + paclitaxel regimen, doxorubicin alone regimen and paclitaxel alone regimen in the treatment of patients with metastatic/advanced breast cancer (OR = 32.48, 95% CI = 1.65~2340.57; OR = 22.75, 95% CI = 1.03~1923.52; OR = 59.63, 95% CI = 2.22~5664.88, respectively). Furthermore, doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide regimen had lower incidence of febrile neutropenia than doxorubicin + docetaxel (OR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.03~0.96). No significant difference in the incidence of stomatitis was observed among eight chemotherapy regimens.

Materials and methods

We initially searched PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases from the founding of these databases to January 2016. Eligible studies investigating the 8 different chemotherapy regimens for treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer were included for direct and indirect comparison. The odds ratio (OR) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) value of the incidence of toxicity among eight chemotherapy regimens were analyzed.

Conclusions

Capecitabine alone regimen and doxorubicin + docetaxel regimen may have a more frequent toxicity in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

SUBMITTER: Zhang XH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5356679 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A network meta-analysis for toxicity of eight chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

Zhang Xiao-Hua XH Hao Shuai S Gao Bo B Tian Wu-Guo WG Jiang Yan Y Zhang Shu S Guo Ling-Ji LJ Luo Dong-Lin DL

Oncotarget 20161201 51

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the incidence of toxicity of 8 different chemotherapy regimens, including doxorubicin + paclitaxel, doxorubicin, capecitabine, CMF (cyclophosphamide + methotrexate + 5-fluorouracil), FAC (fluorouracil + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide), doxorubicin + docetaxel, doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide and paclitaxel in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.<h4>Results</h4>This network meta-analysis included 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The findings reveal ...[more]

PMID: 27811367

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) and methotrexate, vinblastine, adriamycin, and cisplatin (MVAC) have been the first-line treatments for advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (AMUC). However, their effects are unsatisfactory, and more drugs and regimens still need to be explored. Objective: We aimed to comprehensively compare all possible regimens with GC or MVAC in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by network meta-analysis. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for RCTs that evaluated regimens compared to GC or MVAC on AMUC patients. The major outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). A network meta-analysis was used to assess the effectiveness and safety of the included treatment regimens, and the regimens were then clustered by the average linkage method. Results: A total of 19 trials that assessed 3,363 AMUC patients were included. For PFS, paclitaxel plus GC (PGC) was significantly superior to GC (log hazard ratio (HR): -0.16; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.32, 0.00) with a moderate level of reliability. However, there was no significant difference between PGC and MVAC (log HR: -0.03; 95% CI: -0.27, 0.20). For OS, PGC was significantly superior to GC (log HR:-0.17; 95% CI: -0.33, -0.00) with a moderate reliability level but not significantly different from MVAC (log HR: -0.10; 95% CI: -0.35, 0.15). Analysis of ORR showed that PGC was superior to MVAC (log odds ratio (OR): 0.59; 95% CI: 0.02, 1.16) with a low reliability level and GC (log OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.12, 0.71) with a moderate reliability level. In the cluster results, PGC and sorafenib plus GC (GCS) exhibited relative advantages in efficiency, followed by MVAC and apatorsen plus GC (GCA); however, PGC, gemcitabine plus carboplatin (GP), and MVAC had more serious side effects. Conclusions: In our analysis, PGC was superior to MVAC and GC in only the ORR results and superior to GC in the OS and PFS results but was not significantly different from MVAC. More individualized therapies with targeted drugs need to be studied.

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:BackgroundOvarian cancer (OC) is the 5th leading cause of cancer-related deaths around the world, and several chemotherapy regimens have been applied in the treatment of OC. We aim to compare toxicities of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) using network meta-analysis.MethodsLiterature research in Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE was performed up to November 2015. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different chemotherapy regimens were included. Network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect evidence to assess pooled odds ratios (ORs) and draw the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves.ResultsThirteen eligible RCTs were included in this network meta-analysis, including 8 chemotherapy regimens (paclitaxel + carboplatin [PC], pegylated liposomal doxorubicin [PLD] + carboplatin, carboplatin, gemcitabine + carboplatin, paclitaxel, PC + epirubicin, PC + topotecan, docetaxel + carboplatin). Gemcitabine + carboplatin regimen exerted higher incidence of anemia when compared with carboplatin and paclitaxel regimens. The incidence of febrile neutropenia of gemcitabine + carboplatin regimen was higher than that of PC, PLD + carboplatin, carboplatin, and PC + topotecan regimens. Topotecan PC + epirubicin regimen had a higher toxicity, comparing with PC, PLD + carboplatin, and PC + topotecan regimens. As for thrombocytopenia, gemcitabine + carboplatin chemotherapy regimen produced an obviously higher toxicity than PC and carboplatin. As for nausea, PLD + carboplatin chemotherapy regimen had a significantly higher toxicity than that of carboplatin chemotherapy regimen. Moreover, when compared with PC and carboplatin chemotherapy regimens, the toxicity of PC + epirubicin was greatly higher to patients with AOC.ConclusionThe nonhematologic toxicity of PLD + carboplatin regimen was higher than other regimens, which was clinically significant for the treatment of AOC.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of different concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) regimens in the treatment of advanced cervical cancer (CC) by adopting a network meta-analysis.MethodsWe searched PubMed and Cochrane Library from the inception of these databases to September 2016, and all cohort studies (CSs) related to different CCRT regimens in the treatment of CC were included. A network analysis was adopted to compare the combination of direct and indirect evidence, to analyze the odds ratio (OR), and to draw a surface under the cumulative ranking curve of the efficacy and toxicity of different CCRT regimens for CC. Cluster analyses were used to group each category based on similar treatment regimens.ResultsNineteen CSs were enrolled in this network meta-analysis, including 12 CCRT regimens (radiotherapy [RT], CCRT [cisplatin], CCRT [vinorelbine], CCRT [paclitaxel], CCRT [hydroxyurea], CCRT [cisplatin + FU], CCRT [cisplatin + gemcitabine], CCRT [cisplatin + docetaxel], CCRT [cisplatin + paclitaxel], CCRT [cisplatin + amifostine], CCRT [cisplatin + FU + hydroxyurea], and CCRT [cisplatin + vincristine + bleomycin]). The results of the network meta-analysis showed that regarding efficacy, the overall response rate of CCRT (cisplatin + docetaxel) was higher than RT, and the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of CCRT (cisplatin + FU + hydroxyurea) was relatively higher than CCRT (hydroxyurea). As for toxicity, CCRT (cisplatin) had a lower incidence of leukopenia than CCRT (hydroxyurea), CCRT (cisplatin + FU) and CCRT (cisplatin + paclitaxel), and the incidences of diarrhea and vomiting in CCRT (cisplatin) were lower than those in CCRT (cisplatin + gemcitabine). Additionally, the cluster analysis showed that CCRT (cisplatin) had relatively lower incidences of both hematotoxicity and gastrointestinal toxicity, and CCRT (paclitaxel) had lower gastrointestinal toxicity than other regimens.ConclusionOur study demonstrated that CCRT (cisplatin + docetaxel) might be the best choice of CCRT regimens in the treatment of CC, and the 5-year OS rate of CCRT (cisplatin + FU + hydroxyurea) might be the highest among these different regimens. CCRT (cisplatin) might have the lowest toxicity among all the CCRT regimens.

Project description:ObjectivePatients with breast cancer carrying BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic alterations show poor prognoses. However, the efficacy of pharmacotherapies for patients with advanced breast cancer carrying BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants remains unclear. This study aimed to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of various pharmacotherapies for patients with metastatic, locally advanced, or recurrent breast cancer carrying BRCA1/BRCA2 pathogenic variants.MethodsA literature search was conducted using Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), from inception to 11th May 2022. The references of included articles were screened to identify relevant literature. This network meta-analysis included patients with metastatic locally advanced or recurrent breast cancer who received pharmacotherapy and carried deleterious variants of BRCA1/2. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed for conducting and reporting this systematic meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was employed to evaluate evidential certainty. Frequentist random-effect model was applied. Results of objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and rates of any-grade adverse events were presented.ResultsNine randomized controlled trials were obtained comprising six treatment regimens, including 1912 patients with pathogenic variants of BRCA1 and BRCA2. The orchestration of PARP inhibitors with platinum-based chemotherapy was found to be the most effective with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 3.52 (95% CI 2.14, 5.78) for ORR; 1.53 (1.34,1.76), 3.05 (1.79, 5.19), and 5.80 (1.42, 23.77) for 3-, 12-, and 24-month PFS, respectively, and 1.04 (1.00, 1.07), 1.76 (1.25, 2.49) and 2.31 (1.41, 3.77) for 3-, 12-, and 36-month OS, respectively compared to those receiving non-platinum-based chemotherapy. However, it posed an elevated risk of some adverse events. Platinum-based chemotherapy alone or PARP inhibitors markedly improved ORR, PFS, and OS compared to non-platinum-based chemotherapy. Interestingly, platinum-based chemotherapy surpassed PARP inhibitors in terms of efficacy. Evidence on programmed death-ligand 1(PD-L1) inhibitors and sacituzumab govitecan (SG) suggested low quality and insignificant results.ConclusionsAmong all treatment regimens, PARP inhibitors with platinum exhibited the best efficacy, although with a trade-off of elevated risk of some types of adverse events. Future research on direct comparisons between different treatment regimens specifically targeting patients with breast cancer carrying BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants with a pre-specified adequate sample size is warranted.

Dataset Information

A network meta-analysis for toxicity of eight chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

Objective

Results

Materials and methods

Conclusions

Publications

A network meta-analysis for toxicity of eight chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of metastatic/advanced breast cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets