Cargando…

The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is the second common cancer in liver cancer. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatments for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, while fluorouracil (FU)-based and gemcitabine (GEM)-based treatments are most widely applied. This NMA aimed to figure out whether the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun, Xin-Fang, He, Zhi-Kuan, Sun, Jin-Ping, Ge, Quan-Xing, Shen, Er-Dong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Impact Journals LLC 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5725052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246010
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.20445
_version_ 1783285465867091968
author Sun, Xin-Fang
He, Zhi-Kuan
Sun, Jin-Ping
Ge, Quan-Xing
Shen, Er-Dong
author_facet Sun, Xin-Fang
He, Zhi-Kuan
Sun, Jin-Ping
Ge, Quan-Xing
Shen, Er-Dong
author_sort Sun, Xin-Fang
collection PubMed
description Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is the second common cancer in liver cancer. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatments for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, while fluorouracil (FU)-based and gemcitabine (GEM)-based treatments are most widely applied. This NMA aimed to figure out whether the addition of platinum (PLA) and target agents (TAR) can influence the efficacy and safety of standard chemotherapy. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted based on the records from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Eligible data was extracted from available qualified trials and outcomes. Software R 3.2.3 and STATA 13.0 were used to conduct the Bayesian NMA, calculating odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible interval (CrI) to evaluate different treatments.Almost all treatments were superior to best supportive care (BSC) and FU in terms of 1-OS, 2-OS and 1-PFS. GEM+PLA and GEM+PLA+TAR exhibited better efficacy than most treatments in 1-OS, 2-OS and 1-PFS, and yielded better results than BSC and GEM+FU in terms of 2-PFS. Most drug-containing treatments reported higher overall response rate (ORR) than BSC. GEM and GEM+FU were associated with a higher risk of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia compared to FU, FU+PLA and GEM+PLA. No statistical difference was detected in terms of nausea and vomiting.GEM+PLA and GEM+PLA+TAR were both efficacious and were associated with fewer adverse events. In conclusion, the addition of PLA can significantly improve the efficacy of FU and GEM-based treatments, and the addition of TAR to GEM+PLA can contribute to further improvement, but with a mild increase of adverse events.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5725052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Impact Journals LLC
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57250522017-12-14 The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis Sun, Xin-Fang He, Zhi-Kuan Sun, Jin-Ping Ge, Quan-Xing Shen, Er-Dong Oncotarget Meta-Analysis Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is the second common cancer in liver cancer. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatments for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, while fluorouracil (FU)-based and gemcitabine (GEM)-based treatments are most widely applied. This NMA aimed to figure out whether the addition of platinum (PLA) and target agents (TAR) can influence the efficacy and safety of standard chemotherapy. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted based on the records from PubMed, Embase and Cochrane. Eligible data was extracted from available qualified trials and outcomes. Software R 3.2.3 and STATA 13.0 were used to conduct the Bayesian NMA, calculating odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% credible interval (CrI) to evaluate different treatments.Almost all treatments were superior to best supportive care (BSC) and FU in terms of 1-OS, 2-OS and 1-PFS. GEM+PLA and GEM+PLA+TAR exhibited better efficacy than most treatments in 1-OS, 2-OS and 1-PFS, and yielded better results than BSC and GEM+FU in terms of 2-PFS. Most drug-containing treatments reported higher overall response rate (ORR) than BSC. GEM and GEM+FU were associated with a higher risk of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia compared to FU, FU+PLA and GEM+PLA. No statistical difference was detected in terms of nausea and vomiting.GEM+PLA and GEM+PLA+TAR were both efficacious and were associated with fewer adverse events. In conclusion, the addition of PLA can significantly improve the efficacy of FU and GEM-based treatments, and the addition of TAR to GEM+PLA can contribute to further improvement, but with a mild increase of adverse events. Impact Journals LLC 2017-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5725052/ /pubmed/29246010 http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.20445 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Sun et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) 3.0 (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Sun, Xin-Fang
He, Zhi-Kuan
Sun, Jin-Ping
Ge, Quan-Xing
Shen, Er-Dong
The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title_full The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title_fullStr The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title_short The efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: A network meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy and safety of different pharmacological interventions for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer: a network meta-analysis
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5725052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29246010
http://dx.doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.20445
work_keys_str_mv AT sunxinfang theefficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT hezhikuan theefficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT sunjinping theefficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT gequanxing theefficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT shenerdong theefficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT sunxinfang efficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT hezhikuan efficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT sunjinping efficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT gequanxing efficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT shenerdong efficacyandsafetyofdifferentpharmacologicalinterventionsforpatientswithadvancedbiliarytractcanceranetworkmetaanalysis