Suppr超能文献

拓扑替康与依托泊苷联合铂类药物治疗广泛期小细胞肺癌的比较:系统评价与荟萃分析。

Camptothecins compared with etoposide in combination with platinum analog in extensive stage small cell lung cancer: systematic review with meta-analysis.

机构信息

Departamento de Oncologia Clínica, Hospital de Câncer de Barretos, Barretos, Brazil.

出版信息

J Thorac Oncol. 2010 Dec;5(12):1986-93. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181f2451c.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Superiority of camptothecin regimens over etoposide-both combined with platinum analogs-in extensive disease small cell lung cancer has been a matter of debate with contradictory findings in randomized trials. A systematic review was sought to elucidate this issue.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials comparing first-line camptothecin-platinum doublets versus etoposide-platinum doublets in patients with extensive disease small cell lung cancer were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CENTRAL databases, European Society of Medical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer meeting sites. Meta-analyses were performed using fixed-effects model. Subgroup analyses were undertaken comparing each type of camptothecin to etoposide-based regimens. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR), and toxicities.

RESULTS

Eight studies (3086 patients) were included. The meta-analysis of topotecan regimens (TP) was not reliable due to impending heterogeneity. Meta-analysis of trials testing irinotecan combinations (IP) versus etoposide regimens (EP; 1561 patients) stated an OS improvement in favor of IP arm, though with considerable heterogeneity, whose origin seemed to be a Japanese trial. In the analyses without that study (1407 patients left), IP brought a significant improvement in OS (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95% confidence interval 0.78-0.97; p = 0.02; I = 0). IP also increased PFS (hazard ratio = 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.95; p = 0.006; I = 0%). There was no impact in RR (absolute RR 56% with IP; 53% with EP; p = 0.17). IP caused more diarrhea (p < 0.0001) but less hematological toxicities (p < 0.001) than EP.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis demonstrates statistically significant OS and PFS benefits of IP over EP regimens in western and eastern patients. Specific characteristics of safety profile should be taken into account when administrating IP chemotherapy.

摘要

介绍

与含铂类药物的依托泊苷方案相比,拓扑替康方案在广泛期小细胞肺癌中的优越性一直存在争议,随机试验的结果相互矛盾。本研究旨在对这一问题进行系统评价。

方法

检索 MEDLINE、EMBASE、LILACS 和 CENTRAL 数据库、欧洲肿瘤内科学会、美国临床肿瘤学会和国际肺癌研究协会会议网站,寻找比较广泛期小细胞肺癌患者一线含卡铂类药物联合化疗方案与依托泊苷联合铂类药物化疗方案的随机对照试验。采用固定效应模型进行荟萃分析。进行亚组分析,比较每种喜树碱与依托泊苷为基础的方案。主要观察终点为总生存(OS)、无进展生存(PFS)、客观缓解率(RR)和毒性。

结果

共纳入 8 项研究(3086 例患者)。拓扑替康方案(TP)的荟萃分析由于即将出现的异质性而不可靠。对伊立替康联合方案(IP)与依托泊苷方案(EP)进行试验的荟萃分析(1561 例患者)表明,IP 组 OS 有改善,但存在较大的异质性,其来源似乎是一项日本试验。在不包括该研究的分析中(1407 例患者),IP 显著改善 OS(风险比=0.87;95%置信区间 0.78-0.97;p=0.02;I=0)。IP 还增加了 PFS(风险比=0.83;95%置信区间 0.73-0.95;p=0.006;I=0)。RR 没有影响(IP 组绝对 RR 为 56%,EP 组为 53%;p=0.17)。IP 组腹泻发生率更高(p<0.0001),但血液学毒性更低(p<0.001)。

结论

本荟萃分析显示,IP 方案与 EP 方案相比,在西方和东方患者中均具有显著的 OS 和 PFS 获益。在给予 IP 化疗时,应考虑其安全性特征。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验