Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of metronomic chemotherapy in breast cancer: A protocol for network meta-analysis protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Metronomic chemotherapy (MC) strategy has been used in breast cancer for more than a decade since it was first proposed. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate its efficacy and safety for breast cancer patients at various stages, as well as to clarify the most effective medication strategy when applying MC and discover its most sensitive subpopulation in breast cancer patients.

Method

We will systematically retrieve random controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of MC in breast cancer on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and web of science to perform this network meta-analysis. Markov chain Monte Carlo method based on Bayesian Theory will be used to conduct network meta-analysis and the efficacy and safety will be ranked by combining direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. We will assess the quality of literatures with the Cochrane Risk Bias Assessment Tool and assess the strength of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. Data analysis will be completed with the WinBUGS, R, Stata and RevMan softwares.

Results and conclusion

Through the analysis, we can obtain the ranking of efficacy and safety in different MC strategy, and reveal the specific breast cancer groups that are more sensitive to MC. We access the effectiveness by disease free survival, progress free survival, time to progress, objective response rate, and overall survival, and measure the toxicity by dose-limiting toxicity. The result of our study could provide evidence for clinicians to make a better choice when they consider MC.

Inplasy registration number

INPLASY202140142.

SUBMITTER: Xie Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8202618 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAcute renal colic is one of the most common urological emergencies. While previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pairwise meta-analyses only looked at the efficacy of 1 or 2 analgesics. It is not fully understood that the comprehensive ranking of the effectiveness and safeness of analgesics from these published articles. Therefore, this network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify RCTs of different analgesics for acute renal colic. RCTs assessing active analgesics intervention against active comparator or placebo controls for acute renal colic will be included. We will also screen the reference lists of included studies, previous reviews and meta-analyses to identify other relevant trials. The primary outcomes will be pain variance at 30 minutes, need rescue medicine, complete pain relief or at least 50% pain relief at 30 minutes, and pain relapse within 24 hours. We will also assess secondary outcomes for safeness (side effects: dizziness, vomit, allergic, hypotension, cardiac toxicity, and drug dependence). The risk of bias of included RCTs will be assessed by using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and the quality of evidence will be assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument. We will perform pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian NMA to compare the effectiveness and safeness of different analgesic interventions.ResultsThis NMA will compare and rank the different analgesics for treatment of acute renal colic.ConclusionThis is the first systematic review to use the NMA to comprehensively compare and rank analgesics for relieving pain of acute renal colic in adults based on most important factors deciding the choice of initial analgesia, and the results can provide implications for clinical practice and further research.

Project description:BackgroundRecently, several new first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus chemotherapy have been approved for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, direct comparisons between first-line treatments are lacking. Therefore, we indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of specific treatment strategies to inform physicians' and patients' clinical decisions.MethodsThe Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched from 1 January 2000 to 27 November 2022, for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing first-line immuno-chemotherapies for ES-SCLC. A fixed-effect multivariable meta-regression model was established for frequentist network meta-analysis and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were computed to compare the effects of immuno-chemotherapies on patient overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), while risk ratios with 95% CI were used for treatment- and immune-related adverse events (AEs). The p score values were then used to rank treatments based on their odds of being the best treatment option. The research protocol was registered with the PROSPERO (CRD42022383254).ResultsSeven studies involving 3822 patients were eligible for analysis. Serplulimab plus chemotherapy had better OS outcomes compared to chemotherapy (HR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.49-0.82) and ipilimumab plus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.50-0.90). It additionally exhibited better PFS outcomes compared to chemotherapy (HR = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.39-0.60), adebrelimab (HR = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.53-0.97), atezolizumab (HR = 0.62; 0.46-0.85), durvalumab (HR = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.45-0.80), durvalumab and tremelimumab (HR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.43-0.76), ipilimumab (HR = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.44-0.73), and pembrolizumab (HR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.48-0.86) plus chemotherapy. Serplulimab plus chemotherapy was linked to the greatest odds of effectively reducing the odds of death (p score = 0.87) and progression (p score = 0.99) while exhibiting a good safety profile.ConclusionSerplulimab plus chemotherapy exhibited the best survival outcomes with manageable AEs. Thus, serplulimab plus chemotherapy may represent the optimal best first-line treatment option for ES-SCLC patients.