Suppr超能文献

药物干预在晚期软组织肉瘤二线或更后线治疗中的疗效和安全性:系统评价。

Efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions in second- or later-line treatment of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma: a systematic review.

机构信息

Heron Health Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh, India.

出版信息

BMC Cancer. 2013 Aug 13;13:385. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-385.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend anthracycline-based chemotherapy primarily with doxorubicin either as monotherapy or in combination with ifosfamide as the first-line treatment for most advanced STS subtypes. Therapeutic options after failure of doxorubicin and/or ifosfamide are limited. This study aimed to comprehensively review available data on the activity and safety of interventions in second- or later-line treatment of advanced STS.

METHODS

Electronic literature databases (Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) were searched from 1980 to 01 March 2012 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (both prospective and retrospective) evaluating pharmacological interventions in patients with advanced STS pre-treated with anthracycline- and/or ifosfamide-based therapy.

RESULTS

The review identified six RCTs (one phase III and five phase II trials) and 94 non-randomised studies. Based on the primary trial endpoints, RCTs demonstrated favourable efficacy for pazopanib over placebo (PFS: 4.6 months vs. 1.6 months), gemcitabine plus dacarbazine over dacarbazine monotherapy (3-month PFS rate: 54.2% vs. 35.2%), and trabectedin 3-weekly schedule over weekly schedule (TTP: 3.7 months vs. 2.3 months. The non-randomised studies demonstrated heterogeneity in efficacy and safety results.

CONCLUSIONS

Across the RCTs, pazopanib over placebo, gemcitabine-dacarbazine over dacarbazine, and trabectedin 3-weekly over weekly regimen clearly demonstrated a PFS advantage in the second- and later-line treatment of advanced STS. With only one phase III trial in this setting, there is a clear need for additional comparative trials to better understand the risk: benefit ratios of available agents and combinations.

摘要

背景

目前的指南建议以阿霉素为基础的化疗,主要是阿霉素单药治疗或与异环磷酰胺联合治疗,作为大多数晚期 STS 亚型的一线治疗。阿霉素和/或异环磷酰胺治疗失败后的治疗选择有限。本研究旨在全面回顾二线或更后线治疗晚期 STS 中干预措施的可用数据,评估其疗效和安全性。

方法

从 1980 年至 2012 年 3 月 1 日,检索电子文献数据库(Embase ® 、MEDLINE ® 、MEDLINE ® 在线、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 Cochrane 系统评价数据库),以确定评价晚期 STS 患者在接受阿霉素和/或异环磷酰胺为基础的治疗后,接受药物干预的随机对照试验(RCTs)和非随机研究(前瞻性和回顾性)。

结果

综述共确定了 6 项 RCT(1 项 III 期和 5 项 II 期试验)和 94 项非随机研究。根据主要试验终点,RCT 表明帕唑帕尼与安慰剂相比疗效较好(无进展生存期:4.6 个月 vs. 1.6 个月),吉西他滨联合达卡巴嗪与达卡巴嗪单药治疗相比(3 个月无进展生存率:54.2% vs. 35.2%),以及每周方案改为三周方案(进展时间:3.7 个月 vs. 2.3 个月),而非随机研究的疗效和安全性结果存在异质性。

结论

在 RCT 中,帕唑帕尼优于安慰剂,吉西他滨-达卡巴嗪优于达卡巴嗪,以及每周方案改为三周方案,在晚期 STS 的二线和更后线治疗中明显具有无进展生存期优势。在这种情况下,只有一项 III 期试验,显然需要更多的比较试验,以更好地了解现有药物和联合用药的风险效益比。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5a3c/3765173/e5f4532ce600/1471-2407-13-385-1.jpg

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