Suppr超能文献

西妥昔单抗剂量(每两周与每周)在 KRAS 野生型转移性结直肠癌患者中的疗效和安全性:一项荟萃分析。

Efficacy and Safety of Cetuximab Dosing (biweekly vs weekly) in Patients with KRAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology & Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center & Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

出版信息

Oncologist. 2022 May 6;27(5):371-379. doi: 10.1093/oncolo/oyab030.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cetuximab 500 mg/m2 biweekly (Q2W) plus chemotherapy is commonly used and recommended by NCCN guidelines. This meta-analysis compares efficacy and safety between Q2W versus weekly (Q1W) cetuximab dosing.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed on Pubmed and RightFind (2007-2017) for patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC who received Q2W or Q1W cetuximab and other treatments. Observational studies and case reports were excluded. Randomized trials comparing Q2W and Q1W dosing, and single-arm trials with only Q2W schedule were included. CRYSTAL, a phase 3 randomized study with Q1W cetuximab dosing was paired with each single-arm study with a Q2W schedule and reweighted to achieve similar demographic/baseline characteristics. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) with hazard ratios (HR), overall response rate (ORR) with odds ratios, and risk difference of adverse events of special interest (AESI) between Q2W versus Q1W cetuximab were analyzed.

RESULTS

Five phase 2 studies with cetuximab Q2W/Q1W dosing schedules were identified: CECOG (phase 2; Q2W, n = 77; Q1W, n = 75), NORDIC 7.5 (phase 2; Q2W, n = 152) and NORDIC 7 (arm C of phase 3; Q1W, n = 109), CELINE (n = 60), OPTIMIX (n = 99), and APEC (n = 289) all phase 2, Q2W, single-arm studies paired with CRYSTAL Q1W dosing (n = 303). Efficacy was similar between Q2W versus Q1W administration; OS HR = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.89, 1.04]; PFS HR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.87, 1.05]; ORR odds ratio 1.16, 95% CI [0.96, 1.41]. Mean differences (Q2W-Q1W) across AESI rates were not clinically meaningful with no obvious directionality.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated no significant differences in efficacy and safety between Q2W versus Q1W cetuximab administration in mCRC patients.

摘要

背景

西妥昔单抗 500mg/m2 每两周(Q2W)加化疗是常用的方法,也符合 NCCN 指南的推荐。本荟萃分析比较了 Q2W 与每周(Q1W)西妥昔单抗剂量之间的疗效和安全性。

方法

对 Pubmed 和 RightFind(2007-2017 年)进行了系统的文献检索,纳入接受 Q2W 或 Q1W 西妥昔单抗治疗且 KRAS 野生型 mCRC 的患者。排除观察性研究和病例报告。纳入比较 Q2W 和 Q1W 剂量的随机试验,以及仅 Q2W 方案的单臂试验。CRYSTAL 是一项 Q1W 西妥昔单抗剂量的 3 期随机研究,与每个 Q2W 方案的单臂研究进行配对,并重新加权以达到相似的人口统计学/基线特征。使用风险比(HR)分析总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)、优势比分析总缓解率(ORR)、以及 Q2W 与 Q1W 西妥昔单抗之间特殊关注不良事件(AESI)的风险差异。

结果

确定了五项 Q2W/Q1W 西妥昔单抗剂量方案的 2 期研究:CECOG(2 期;Q2W,n=77;Q1W,n=75)、NORDIC 7.5(2 期;Q2W,n=152)和 NORDIC 7(3 期的 C 组;Q1W,n=109)、CELINE(n=60)、OPTIMIX(n=99)和 APEC(n=289)均为 2 期、Q2W、单臂研究,与 CRYSTAL Q1W 剂量配对(n=303)。Q2W 与 Q1W 给药的疗效相似;OS HR=0.96,95%置信区间(CI)[0.89,1.04];PFS HR=0.96,95%CI[0.87,1.05];ORR 比值比 1.16,95%CI[0.96,1.41]。AESI 发生率的平均差异(Q2W-Q1W)没有明显的方向性,且无临床意义。

结论

本荟萃分析表明,在 mCRC 患者中,Q2W 与 Q1W 西妥昔单抗给药在疗效和安全性方面没有显著差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3059/9074967/905df7523a26/oyab030f0001.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