Suppr超能文献

预防性策略在手足综合征/皮肤反应与全身癌症治疗相关:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。

Prophylactic strategies for hand-foot syndrome/skin reaction associated with systemic cancer treatment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

机构信息

Cancer Institute, Section of Medical Oncology, St. Luke's Medical Center, Quezon City, Philippines.

出版信息

Support Care Cancer. 2022 Nov;30(11):8655-8666. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07175-3. Epub 2022 Jun 2.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) and hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) are common toxicities of several systemic cancer treatments. Multikinase inhibitor-induced HFSR is distinguished from chemotherapy-induced HFS in terms of pathogenesis, symptomatology, and treatment. Multiple trials have investigated the efficacy of preventive strategies such as COX-inhibitors, pyridoxine, and urea cream; however, no consensus has been made. This meta-analysis evaluated data from high-quality trials to provide strong evidence in forming recommendations to prevent systemic cancer therapy-induced HFS/HFSR.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, clinical trials databases, and hand searching were utilized to identify randomized trials (RCTs) investigating prophylactic strategies for HFS/HFSR in cancer patients receiving systemic treatment. Trials published until August 2021 were included. Using the random effects model, pooled odds ratios were calculated for rates of all-grade and severe HFS/HFSR. Subgroup analysis based on type of cancer treatment given was done.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs were included (N=2814). For all-grade HFS/HFSR, celecoxib (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32-0.85, p=0.009) and urea cream (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.39-0.60, p<0.00001) both showed statistically significant risk reduction. Celecoxib was effective in preventing HFS in patients who received capecitabine (50.5% vs 65%, p=0.05), while urea cream was effective in both capecitabine HFS (22.3% vs 39.5%, p=0.02) and sorafenib-induced HFSR (54.9% vs 71.4%, p<0.00001). Pyridoxine at higher doses showed a trend towards benefit in preventing all grade HFS (69.6% vs 74.1%, p=0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Urea cream and celecoxib are both effective in preventing HFS/HFSR in patients receiving systemic cancer treatment. Particularly, celecoxib is more effective in preventing all-grade capecitabine-induced HFS, while urea cream shows more benefit in preventing moderate to severe sorafenib-induced HFSR. Studies investigating optimal dosing for celecoxib and urea cream are recommended. There is inadequate evidence to make recommendations regarding pyridoxine.

摘要

目的

手足综合征(HFS)和手足皮肤反应(HFSR)是多种全身癌症治疗的常见毒性反应。多激酶抑制剂引起的 HFSR 在发病机制、症状和治疗方面与化疗引起的 HFS 不同。多项试验已经研究了预防策略的疗效,如 COX 抑制剂、吡哆醇和尿素乳膏;然而,尚未达成共识。本荟萃分析评估了高质量试验的数据,为制定预防全身癌症治疗引起的 HFS/HFSR 的建议提供了有力证据。

方法

系统检索 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane、临床试验数据库和手工检索,以确定接受全身治疗的癌症患者中预防 HFS/HFSR 的预防性策略的随机试验(RCT)。纳入截至 2021 年 8 月发表的试验。使用随机效应模型,计算所有等级和严重 HFS/HFSR 的汇总比值比。根据所给予的癌症治疗类型进行亚组分析。

结果

纳入了 16 项 RCT(N=2814)。对于所有等级的 HFS/HFSR,塞来昔布(OR 0.52,95%CI 0.32-0.85,p=0.009)和尿素乳膏(OR 0.48,95%CI 0.39-0.60,p<0.00001)均显示出统计学意义上的风险降低。塞来昔布可有效预防接受卡培他滨治疗的患者发生 HFS(50.5%比 65%,p=0.05),而尿素乳膏可有效预防卡培他滨引起的 HFS(22.3%比 39.5%,p=0.02)和索拉非尼引起的 HFSR(54.9%比 71.4%,p<0.00001)。高剂量吡哆醇在预防所有等级 HFS 方面显示出获益趋势(69.6%比 74.1%,p=0.23)。

结论

尿素乳膏和塞来昔布均可有效预防接受全身癌症治疗的患者发生 HFS/HFSR。特别是,塞来昔布在预防所有等级卡培他滨引起的 HFS 方面更有效,而尿素乳膏在预防中重度索拉非尼引起的 HFSR 方面显示出更大的益处。建议进行研究以确定塞来昔布和尿素乳膏的最佳剂量。目前尚无足够证据推荐使用吡哆醇。

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