Dataset Information

A network meta-analysis of eight chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

ABSTRACT: This study compared the short-term efficacies of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) through pair-wise and network meta-analyses (NMA). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified in a comprehensive online literature search met our inclusion criteria. Direct and indirect evidence was combined to compare odds ratios (OR) and surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) across the different treatment regimens. Twelve eligible RCTs were finally included, involving eight regimens (Paclitaxel + Carboplatin [PC], Gemcitabine + Carboplatin [GC], Carboplatin, Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin + Carboplatin [PLD + Carboplatin], Paclitaxel, Paclitaxel + Carboplatin + Topotecan [PC + Topotecan], Paclitaxel + Carboplatin + Epirubicin [PC + Epirubicin] and Docetaxel + Carboplatin [DC]). The NMA results revealed that in terms of overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR), PC (ORR: OR=2.59, 95%CI=1.20-6.22; DCR: OR=2.58, 95%CI=1.05-6.82) and GC (ORR: OR=2.08, 95%CI=1.08-4.37; DCR: OR=2.43, 95%CI=1.07-5.80) were more effective against AOC than Carboplatin alone. Similarly, PC (OR=0.21, 95%CI=0.05-0.69), GC (OR=0.31, 95%CI=0.09-0.90) and PLD + Carboplatin (OR=0.22, 95%CI=0.04-0.92) slowed disease progression better than Carboplatin alone. We also found that PC was more efficacious against AOC than Carboplatin or Paclitaxel single-agent chemotherapy. Combination chemotherapy is thus recommended for AOC, and should guide subsequent drug development and treatment strategies.

SUBMITTER: Jiang XP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5386673 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A network meta-analysis of eight chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

Jiang Xi-Ping XP Rui Xiao-Hui XH Guo Cai-Xia CX Huang Ya-Qing YQ Li Qin Q Xu Yun Y

Oncotarget 20170301 12

This study compared the short-term efficacies of different chemotherapy regimens in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) through pair-wise and network meta-analyses (NMA). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) identified in a comprehensive online literature search met our inclusion criteria. Direct and indirect evidence was combined to compare odds ratios (OR) and surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) across the different treatment regimens. Twelve eligible RCTs were final ...[more]

PMID: 27835912

Similar Datasets

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: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:ObjectiveWe aimed to compare the survival outcomes and adverse events of hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IP)and intravenous chemotherapy (IP)for primary advanced ovarian cancer.MethodsPubMed, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials), Embase, Web of Science and Scopus were searched using multiple terms for primary advanced ovarian cancer, including randomized controlled trials and comparative studies in both Chinese and English (up to date 15 August 2022). Outcomes include overall survival, progression-free survival and adverse events. The data were pooled and reported as hazard ratio (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scales were used to assess the risk of bias in the included comparative study. The Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool was used for randomized controlled trials.ResultsIn total, 32 studies, including 6347 patients and 8 different platinum-based chemotherapy regimens, were included in this network meta-analysis. Our analysis results showed that HIPEC2 (carboplatin with area under the curve 10) exhibited a statistically significant OS benefit compared to IV, weekly dose-dense chemotherapy and HIPEC1 (cisplatin with 75/100 mg/m2). Intraperitoneal plus intravenous chemotherapy was associated with a statistically significantly better likelihood of overall survival compared to IV. For progression-free survival, our statistical results only suggest a better progression-free survival in ovarian cancer patients treated with HIPEC1 compared with weekly dose-dense chemotherapy. No evidence of difference was observed between the other comparison groups. Compared with the non-HIPEC group, HIPEC may had a higher incidence of electrolyte disturbances (≥grade 3).ConclusionOur statistical analysis suggests that the groups receiving HIPEC2 had a better OS than the groups receiving IV, weekly dose-dense chemotherapy and HIPEC1. For PFS, our analysis only showed HIPEC1 is better than IV. Moreover, HIPEC may lead to a higher incidence of electrolyte disturbances (≥grade 3). HIPEC therapy for advanced ovarian cancer is currently controversial.

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.

Dataset Information

A network meta-analysis of eight chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

Publications

A network meta-analysis of eight chemotherapy regimens for treatment of advanced ovarian cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets