Cargando…
Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review
BACKGROUND: Melanoma is a potentially fatal malignancy with poor prognosis. Several recent studies have demonstrated that combination therapy of BRAF and MEK inhibition achieved better curative effect and appeared less toxic effects. We conducted a meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety b...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745835/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31393083 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2248 |
_version_ | 1783451601523965952 |
---|---|
author | Yu, Qingliang Xie, Jiayi Li, Jiangmiao Lu, Yunxin Liao, Liang |
author_facet | Yu, Qingliang Xie, Jiayi Li, Jiangmiao Lu, Yunxin Liao, Liang |
author_sort | Yu, Qingliang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Melanoma is a potentially fatal malignancy with poor prognosis. Several recent studies have demonstrated that combination therapy of BRAF and MEK inhibition achieved better curative effect and appeared less toxic effects. We conducted a meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety between BRAF inhibition plus MEK inhibition combination therapy and BRAF inhibition monotherapy in melanoma patients. METHODS: We performed the search in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from January 2010 to January 2019. Inclusion and exclusion of studies, assessment of quality, outcome measures, data extraction, and synthesis were independently accomplished by two reviewers. Revman 5.3 software was used for the meta‐analysis. RESULTS: Totally, seven randomized controlled trials involving 3146 patients met our inclusion criteria. Comparing the results of combination therapy and monotherapy, combination therapy significantly improved OS (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08, 1.19; P < 0.00001), ORR (RR = 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28, 1.45; P < 0.00001), PFS (RR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52, 0.63; P < 0.00001) and reduced deaths (RR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69, 0.88; P < 0.0001). Skin‐related adverse events such as hyperkeratosis, cutaneous squamous‐cell carcinoma were less compared with monotherapy. However, gastrointestinal events like nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting were at a higher frequency. CONCLUSION: Doublet BRAF and MEK inhibition achieved better survival outcomes over single‐agent BRAF inhibition and occurred less skin‐related events, but gastrointestinal events were more in combination therapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6745835 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-67458352019-09-18 Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review Yu, Qingliang Xie, Jiayi Li, Jiangmiao Lu, Yunxin Liao, Liang Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research BACKGROUND: Melanoma is a potentially fatal malignancy with poor prognosis. Several recent studies have demonstrated that combination therapy of BRAF and MEK inhibition achieved better curative effect and appeared less toxic effects. We conducted a meta‐analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety between BRAF inhibition plus MEK inhibition combination therapy and BRAF inhibition monotherapy in melanoma patients. METHODS: We performed the search in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from January 2010 to January 2019. Inclusion and exclusion of studies, assessment of quality, outcome measures, data extraction, and synthesis were independently accomplished by two reviewers. Revman 5.3 software was used for the meta‐analysis. RESULTS: Totally, seven randomized controlled trials involving 3146 patients met our inclusion criteria. Comparing the results of combination therapy and monotherapy, combination therapy significantly improved OS (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08, 1.19; P < 0.00001), ORR (RR = 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28, 1.45; P < 0.00001), PFS (RR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.52, 0.63; P < 0.00001) and reduced deaths (RR = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.69, 0.88; P < 0.0001). Skin‐related adverse events such as hyperkeratosis, cutaneous squamous‐cell carcinoma were less compared with monotherapy. However, gastrointestinal events like nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting were at a higher frequency. CONCLUSION: Doublet BRAF and MEK inhibition achieved better survival outcomes over single‐agent BRAF inhibition and occurred less skin‐related events, but gastrointestinal events were more in combination therapy. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6745835/ /pubmed/31393083 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2248 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Yu, Qingliang Xie, Jiayi Li, Jiangmiao Lu, Yunxin Liao, Liang Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title | Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title_full | Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title_fullStr | Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title_short | Clinical outcomes of BRAF plus MEK inhibition in melanoma: A meta‐analysis and systematic review |
title_sort | clinical outcomes of braf plus mek inhibition in melanoma: a meta‐analysis and systematic review |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745835/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31393083 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2248 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yuqingliang clinicaloutcomesofbrafplusmekinhibitioninmelanomaametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT xiejiayi clinicaloutcomesofbrafplusmekinhibitioninmelanomaametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT lijiangmiao clinicaloutcomesofbrafplusmekinhibitioninmelanomaametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT luyunxin clinicaloutcomesofbrafplusmekinhibitioninmelanomaametaanalysisandsystematicreview AT liaoliang clinicaloutcomesofbrafplusmekinhibitioninmelanomaametaanalysisandsystematicreview |