Yuan Ye, Long Xin, Wei Mengya, Chen Li, Zhang Ji, Liu Xumei
Sichuan Integrative Medicine Hospital, China.
Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, China.
Cancer Treat Rev. 2025 Jul;138:102975. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2025.102975. Epub 2025 Jun 5.
Direct comparisons between nab-paclitaxel and solvent-based taxanes are scarce, with inconsistent results from mostly retrospective studies. High-level evidence comparing their efficacy in HER2-positive breast cancer remains lacking. Our study represents the first systematic review and meta-analysis to directly compare the long-term and short-term efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel versus solvent-based paclitaxel in combination with trastuzumab and pertuzumab for neoadjuvant treatment of HER2-positive breast cancer.
We performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wan Fang, and VIP databases to identify relevant studies published up to February 10, 2025. The search focused on studies involving patients with HER2-positive breast cancer who had not undergone prior treatments for their condition. These studies compared neoadjuvant therapies using either nab-paclitaxel-based chemotherapy (Nab-p arm) or solvent-based paclitaxel-based chemotherapy (Sb-p arm), both combined with pertuzumab and trastuzumab. The primary outcomes measured were event-free survival, disease-free survival, overall survival, and total pathological complete response. Secondary outcomes included objective response rate and adverse events. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.
A total of six studies, including 3 RCTs, 1 prospective cohort study and 2 real-world studies, involving 1556 patients were included. The Nab-p arm demonstrated numerically more favorable EFS, DFS compared to the Sb-p arm. There was no significant difference in OS between the Nab-p arm and the Sb-p arm. The Nab-p arm showed significant improvements in pCR (RR: 1.18, 95 % CI: 1.08-1.29, p < 0.001), pCR (with only RCTs) (RR: 1.13, 95 % CI: 1.03-1.24, p = 0.009), and ORR (RR: 1.30, 95 % CI: 1.07-1.57, p = 0.007) compared to the Sb-p arm. The Nab-p arm showed a lower grade III/IV diarrhea rate (RR: 0.59, 95 % CI: 0.42-0.83, p = 0.003), grade III/IV thrombocytopenia rate (RR: 0.46, 95 % CI: 0.24-0.89, p = 0.02), grade I/II allergic reactions rate (RR: 0.60, 95 % CI: 0.46-0.78, p < 0.001) and grade III/IV allergic reactions rate (RR: 0.33, 95 % CI: 0.14-0.82, p = 0.02), compared to the Sb-p arm. The Nab-p arm showed a higher grade I/II neuropathy rate (RR: 1.21, 95 % CI: 1.12-1.30, p < 0.001) and grade III/IV neuropathy rate (RR: 2.61, 95 % CI: 1.23-5.52, p = 0.001), compared to the Sb-p arm.The outcome of pCR had moderate-quality evidence and the outcome of pCR (with only RCTs) had high-quality evidence.
Nab-paclitaxel exhibits short-term efficacy advantages over paclitaxel, but no significant long-term benefits. The two regimens have different safety profile.
纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇与溶剂型紫杉烷之间的直接比较较少,大多回顾性研究结果并不一致。目前仍缺乏比较它们在HER2阳性乳腺癌中疗效的高级别证据。我们的研究是第一项系统评价和荟萃分析,旨在直接比较纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇与溶剂型紫杉醇联合曲妥珠单抗和帕妥珠单抗用于HER2阳性乳腺癌新辅助治疗的长期和短期疗效及安全性。
我们在PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网、万方和维普数据库中进行了全面的文献检索,以识别截至2025年2月10日发表的相关研究。检索重点是涉及未接受过针对其病情的先前治疗的HER2阳性乳腺癌患者的研究。这些研究比较了使用纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇化疗(纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组)或溶剂型紫杉醇化疗(溶剂型紫杉醇组)的新辅助治疗,两者均联合帕妥珠单抗和曲妥珠单抗。测量的主要结局为无事件生存期、无病生存期、总生存期和总病理完全缓解率。次要结局包括客观缓解率和不良事件。使用GRADE方法评估证据质量。
共纳入6项研究,包括3项随机对照试验、1项前瞻性队列研究和2项真实世界研究,涉及1556例患者。与溶剂型紫杉醇组相比,纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组在无事件生存期、无病生存期方面在数值上更有利。纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组和溶剂型紫杉醇组在总生存期方面无显著差异。与溶剂型紫杉醇组相比,纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组在总病理完全缓解率(RR:1.18,95%CI:1.08 - 1.29,p < 0.001)、总病理完全缓解率(仅随机对照试验)(RR:1.13,95%CI:1.03 - 1.24,p = 0.009)和客观缓解率(RR:1.30,95%CI:1.07 - 1.57,p = 0.007)方面有显著改善。与溶剂型紫杉醇组相比,纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组III/IV级腹泻发生率较低(RR:0.59,95%CI:0.42 - 0.83,p = 0.003),III/IV级血小板减少发生率较低(RR:0.46,95%CI:0.24 - 0.89,p = 0.02),I/II级过敏反应发生率较低(RR:0.60,95%CI:0.46 - 0.78,p < 0.001)以及III/IV级过敏反应发生率较低(RR:0.33,95%CI:0.14 - 0.82,p = 0.02)。与溶剂型紫杉醇组相比,纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇组I/II级神经病变发生率较高(RR:1.21,95%CI:1.12 - 1.30,p < 0.001)以及III/IV级神经病变发生率较高(RR:2.61,95%CI:1.23 - 5.52,p = 0.001)。总病理完全缓解率的结局有中等质量证据,总病理完全缓解率(仅随机对照试验)的结局有高质量证据。
纳米白蛋白结合型紫杉醇在短期疗效上优于紫杉醇,但无显著长期益处。两种治疗方案的安全性不同。