Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety comparison of chemotherapies for advanced gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Chemotherapy is one of the commonly used therapies for advanced gastric cancer. In this study, we performed a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of common treatments to give evidences of their relative benefits.

Results

32 trials with 8550 patients and 20 regimens were included in this study. According to the results of primary outcomes, 5-FU plus OXA, 5-FU plus DOC, CAP plus CIS, CAP plus OXA, S-1 plus OXA and S-1 plus PAC performed well in improving OS and ORR. As for the adverse events, S-1 had a safer effect than other treatments, conversely, 5-FU plus CIS ranked the last. However, there was no regimen with outstanding performances in both efficacy and safety.

Materials and methods

Studies were searched from database and screened with criteria. The Bayesian framework based network meta-analysis was performed with software R and STATA. Overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR) were considered as primary outcomes while adverse events as secondary outcomes. The outcomes were represented by hazard ratios or odd ratios with 95% corresponding credible intervals, respectively.

Conclusions

The network meta-analysis suggested that 5-FU plus OXA and 5-FU plus DOC were recommended when efficacy was stressed. S-1 was safest but poorly effective. A regimen, as an excellent combination of efficacy and safety, is still waiting to be discovered.

SUBMITTER: Sun J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5503642 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety comparison of chemotherapies for advanced gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis.

Sun Jinping J Ren Zheng Z Sun Xinfang X Hou Hongtao H Li Ke K Ge Quanxing Q

Oncotarget 20170601 24

<h4>Objective</h4>Chemotherapy is one of the commonly used therapies for advanced gastric cancer. In this study, we performed a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of common treatments to give evidences of their relative benefits.<h4>Results</h4>32 trials with 8550 patients and 20 regimens were included in this study. According to the results of primary outcomes, 5-FU plus OXA, 5-FU plus DOC, CAP plus CIS, CAP plus OXA, S-1 plus OXA and S-1 plus PAC performed well in improving OS an ...[more]

PMID: 28562333

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough various third-line treatments of advanced gastric cancer (AGC) significantly improved the overall survival, the optimal regimen has not been determined by now. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of multiple third-line treatments of AGC via integrated analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) to provide valuable evidence for the optimal third-line systemic therapy for AGC.MethodsBy searching the databases of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from Jan 01, 2005 to Dec 31, 2020, we included phase II/III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of the third-line treatments for AGC to perform NMA. The main outcomes for NMA were median overall survival (mOS), median progression-free survival (mPFS), disease control rate (DCR) and adverse events (AEs). We also included phase IB/II non-RCTs and II/III RCTs of the third-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for integrated analysis for pooled mOS (POS), pooled mPFS (PPFS) and other outcomes.ResultsEight phase II/III RCTs and 2 ICIs-related phase IB/II non-RCTs were included for analysis, involving 9 treatment regimens and 3012 AGC patients. In terms of mOS, apatinib (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.48-0.78) and nivolumab (HR 0.62, 95% CrI 0.51-0.76) were the most effective treatments compared with placebo. Apatinib also significantly improved mPFS versus placebo (HR 0.38, 95% CrI 0.29-0.49). Nivolumab ranked first among all regimens for 1-year OS rate and achieved the best OS in patients with HER-2 positive tumor, patients with gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer and patients without gastrectomy history. TAS-102 (OR 7.46, 95% CrI 4.61-12.51) was the most toxic treatment in terms of AEs of grade 3 and higher (≥3 AEs). Pembrolizumab was more likely to cause immune related adverse event. Finally, the POS, pooled 1-year OS rate, pooled ORR and PPFS of AGC patients treated with third-line ICIs were 5.1 months, 25%, 10% and 1.71 months respectively.ConclusionsApatinib and nivolumab are the most effective treatments for the third-line treatment of AGC in contrast to the third-line chemotherapy. For AGC patients with HER-2 positive tumor, patients with GEJ cancer and patients without gastrectomy history, ICIs could be the optimal third-line treatment choice.

Project description:BackgroundMany options for third-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (GC) or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma (GEJC) have been developed. Therapies including immunotherapy (nivolumab), chemotherapy (irinotecan, FTD/TPI), targeted therapy (apatinib), and antibody drug conjugates (ADC) have shown to increase the survival rates in patients, but few studies have compared the relative efficacy of these treatments. Here, we compared the efficacies of these regimens using network meta-analysis (NMA) to provide guides in selecting the best regimen and formulating a precise individualized treatment plan.MethodsThe published RCTs of phase II/III in PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase were searched. The median overall survival (mOS) was the primary outcome of NMA, and the other outcomes were median progression-free survival (mPFS), disease control rate (DCR) (proportion of patients with confirmed CR, PR, or stable disease (SD)) and incidence of grade 3 or above adverse events (≥3AEs).ResultsFive phase II/III RCTs involving 1674 patients and 7 treatment regimens were analyzed. It showed that Trastuzumab Deruxtecan (DS-8201) prolonged the OS of patients significantly comparing with chemotherapy (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.39-0.89) for the overall population. DS-8201 (HR: 0.27; 95% CI: 0.17-0.42) and chemotherapy (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.47-0.7) improved the PFS significantly over nivolumab. Apatinib (RR: 3.04; 95% CI: 1.65-5.95) and DS-8201 (RR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.51-4.83) were more effective than nivolumab in improving DCR. DS-8201 achieved greater OS benefits compared to chemotherapy (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.39-0.88) for patients who were HER2-positive. We ranked the Bayesian surface under the cumulative ranking curve according to OS benefit, and showed that ADC ranked first for the general patient population and for patients with a HER2-positive diagnosis, intestinal histopathology, previous gastrectomy history, gastric origination cancer, ages over 65 and ECOG PS=0/1, followed by nivolumab and apatinib. For patients with GEJC, nivolumab ranked first.ConclusionsNivolumab, apatinib, chemotherapy, and ADC all improved the OS of GC/GEJC patients significantly. ADC may be the best option for the overall population of GC, as well as for patients with HER2-overexpression, intestinal histopathology, previous gastrectomy history, gastric origination cancer, ages over 65 and ECOG PS=0/1, followed by nivolumab and apatinib. Nivolumab may be the first treatment option for GEJC patients.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier CRD42022364714.

Project description:The aim of our meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy and safety of the target combined chemotherapy for the patients with unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer.In accordance with the standard meta-analysis procedures, the patients included in our study were with unresectable advanced or recurrent gastric cancer and allocated randomly to receive target combined chemotherapy or the traditional chemotherapy. The search was applied to PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Cocran's library (from inception to February 2016). All analyses were performed by STATA 12.0, with the odds ratio, hazard ratio, and 95 % confidence interval as the effect measures.Fourteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. A total of 5067 patients with advanced gastric cancer were divided into two arms: traditional chemotherapy arm and target combined chemotherapy arm. A significant improvement for overall survival (hazard ratio was 0.89, 95 % confidence interval: 0.83-0.95) and overall response rate (odds ratio was 1.44, 95 % confidence interval: 1.15-1.81) was observed, but no significant difference was found for progression-free survival (hazard ratio was 0.89, 95 % confidence interval: 0.77-1.00) in the target combined chemotherapy arm. In subgroup analysis, increasing benefits regarding overall survival and progression-free survival were found in anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs for selected patients subgroup and anti vascular endothelial growth factor receptor target drugs for unselected patients subgroup, but not in anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs for unselected patients subgroup. Besides, some adverse events were increased in the target combined chemotherapy arm.The target combined chemotherapy represented a better overall survival benefit and treatment efficiency and higher incidence of some grade 3-4 adverse events than the traditional chemotherapy for patients with unresectable advanced or recurrence gastric cancer. The anti vascular endothelial growth factor receptor drugs can improve the efficacy in the whole patients with unresectable advanced or recurrence gastric cancer and the anti epidermal growth factor receptor target drugs can only improve the efficacy in the epidermal growth factor receptor positive patients.

Project description:BackgroundElemene is a natural compound extracted from Zingiberaceae plants, and is used in various cancer. However, the efficacy and safety elemene combined with chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer (GC) are lack of systematic assessment.Methodswe searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Academic Journals (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Journals (CQVIP) and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing elemene plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone in participants with advanced GC and reporting at least one of the following outcomes were selected and assessed for inclusion. JADAD scale was used to assess the quality. Data was screened and extracted by two independent investigators. The primary clinical outcome was overall response rate (ORR); the secondary outcomes were quality of life (QOL) and adverse events (AEs). Analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.ResultsSixteen RCTs matched the selection criteria, which reported on 969 subjects. Risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for ORR, life quality based on KPS, and risk of AEs. Compared to chemotherapy alone, elemene combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of GC may increase the efficiency of ORR(RR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.23-1.60; P < .0001), improve their life quality based on KPS (RR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.45-2.34; P < .00001), and reduce the adverse reactions, including leukopenia(RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.62-0.85; P < .00001), neutropenia (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.60-0.95; P = .02), anemia (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.60-0.95; P = .02), thrombocytopenia (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.43-0.73; P < .00001). Nausea and vomiting (RR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.84-1.07; P = .39), diarrhea (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.41-1.15; P = .15), neurotoxicity (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.59-1.00; P = .05) and hepatic dysfunction (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.58-1.54; P = .83) were similar between two groups.ConclusionsElemene may have the potential to improve the efficacy and reduce the AEs of chemotherapy for gastric cancer. However, the long-term, high-quality researches with a large sample size in different populations are required.

Project description:BackgroundOncolytic viruses (OVs) have shown prospects in advanced and metastatic cancer, and many clinical trials have been carried out. To compare OV therapies comprehensively and provide a categorized profile and ranking of efficacy and safety, a network meta-analysis was conducted.MethodsA total of 5948 studies were screened and 13 randomized controlled trials with 1939 patients, of whom 1106 patients received OV therapies, comparing four OVs (NTX-010, pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec), talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), and pelareorep) were included in a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following clinical outcome measures: objective response rate (ORR) and grade ≥ 3 adverse events.ResultsCompared to systemic treatments alone, talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) (OR 7.00, 95% CI 1.90-26.00) and T-VEC plus systemic treatment (2.90, 0.80-11.00) showed better objective response rates (ORRs), whereas Pexa-Vec 1 * 109 pfu plus systemic treatment (0.91, 0.26-3.00) and pelareorep plus systemic treatment (1.10, 0.61-2.00) were found to be comparable. The grade ≥ 3 adverse event ranking of the treatments from worst to best was as follows: T-VEC (ranking probability 24%), Pexa-Vec 1 * 109 pfu plus systemic treatment (21%), Pexa-Vec 1 * 109 pfu (17%), T-VEC plus systemic treatment (13%), pelareorep plus systemic treatment (13%), systemic treatments (18%), Pexa-Vec 1 * 108 pfu (12%), and NTX-010 (20%).ConclusionsCompared with other oncolytic virus therapies for patients with advanced or metastatic cancer, T-VEC and T-VEC plus systemic treatment appear to provide the best ORR therapy in terms of monotherapy and combination respectively, but should be given with caution to grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Conversely, combining OVs with chemotherapy or target agents was demonstrated not to improve efficacy compared with chemotherapy or target agents alone. Combining OV therapies with immune-checkpoint inhibitors, instead of chemotherapy or target agents, tended to provide better ORRs without causing severe adverse events. This study will guide treatment choice and optimize future trial designs for investigations of advanced or metastatic cancer.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety comparison of chemotherapies for advanced gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis.

Objective

Results

Materials and methods

Conclusions

Publications

Efficacy and safety comparison of chemotherapies for advanced gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets