Suppr超能文献

辅助治疗切除后胆道癌患者的临床疗效:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Clinical efficacy of adjuvant treatments for patients with resected biliary tract cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, Sichuan University West China Hospital, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Department of Medicine, CSPC ZhongQi Pharmaceutical Technology (Shijiazhuang) Co., Ltd, Shijiazhuang, China.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 19;12(4):e051421. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051421.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the benefits of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected biliary tract cancer (BTC) and identify the optimal adjuvant treatment scheme.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Studies comparing different adjuvant therapies in patients with BTC were searched in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to December 2021. Additionally, the references were manually searched for the related literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible studies were identified, and data were extracted independently by two authors. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed using R software. The pooled outcomes of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were measured using the combined HRs with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Nineteen eligible studies reporting three types of adjuvant therapies were included in our network meta-analysis. Adjuvant radiotherapy (ART, HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.93), adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (ACRT; HR 0.71; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.83) and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT; HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98) were more effective in prolonging OS than that of observation, with no significant difference between the three adjuvant therapies. Moreover, the improvement in DFS was also found in ACRT and ACT compared with that of observation (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.45 to 0.75; HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.97, respectively). Furthermore, ACRT obtained a slightly better DFS benefit compared with that of ACT (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Our primary results demonstrated that, compared with that of observation, ACRT and ACT after radical resection could provide better OS and DFS benefits in patients with BTC. However, ART only showed improvement in OS, but not in DFS. Due to the lack of head-to-head studies of ACT, ACRT and ART, the above results need to be further verified by prospective randomised controlled trials.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定辅助治疗对接受胆道肿瘤(BTC)切除术患者的益处,并确定最佳辅助治疗方案。

设计

系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

数据来源

从开始到 2021 年 12 月,在 PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库和 ClinicalTrials.gov 数据库中检索比较 BTC 患者不同辅助治疗的研究。此外,还手动搜索了相关文献。

材料和方法

确定符合条件的研究,并由两位作者独立提取数据。使用 R 软件进行随机效应网络荟萃分析。使用合并 HR 及其 95%CI 测量总体生存(OS)和无病生存(DFS)的汇总结果。

结果

纳入的网络荟萃分析共包括 19 项报告三种辅助治疗的研究。辅助放疗(ART,HR 0.62;95%CI 0.42 至 0.93)、辅助放化疗(ACRT,HR 0.71;95%CI 0.54 至 0.83)和辅助化疗(ACT,HR 0.84;95%CI 0.68 至 0.98)在延长 OS 方面比观察更有效,三种辅助治疗之间无显著差异。此外,与观察相比,ACRT 和 ACT 也改善了 DFS(HR 0.60;95%CI 0.45 至 0.75;HR 0.82;95%CI 0.68 至 0.97)。此外,与 ACT 相比,ACRT 获得了稍好的 DFS 获益(HR 0.73;95%CI 0.53 至 0.95)。

结论

我们的主要结果表明,与观察相比,BTC 患者根治性切除术后的 ACRT 和 ACT 可提供更好的 OS 和 DFS 获益。然而,ART 仅在 OS 方面显示改善,而在 DFS 方面没有改善。由于缺乏 ACT、ACRT 和 ART 的头对头研究,上述结果需要进一步通过前瞻性随机对照试验来验证。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/bb74/9020290/46d318816018/bmjopen-2021-051421f01.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