Cargando…

Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate the safety and efficiency of sunitinib and sorafenib in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Databases were searched up till February 28, 2018. Two reviewers independently assessed trials for eligibility, quality, and extracted relevant data. Results are expressed as risk ratio (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Xiu-Lan, Xue, Hui-Ying, Chu, Qian, Liu, Jin-Yu, Li, Juan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7220148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32221075
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000019570
_version_ 1783533097387556864
author Liu, Xiu-Lan
Xue, Hui-Ying
Chu, Qian
Liu, Jin-Yu
Li, Juan
author_facet Liu, Xiu-Lan
Xue, Hui-Ying
Chu, Qian
Liu, Jin-Yu
Li, Juan
author_sort Liu, Xiu-Lan
collection PubMed
description To evaluate the safety and efficiency of sunitinib and sorafenib in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Databases were searched up till February 28, 2018. Two reviewers independently assessed trials for eligibility, quality, and extracted relevant data. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six studies including 3112 patients were accessed. Sorafenib group exhibited higher median progression-free survival (mPFS) compared to sunitinib group (MD, −1.30; 95% CI, −2.56 to −0.03), especially in the first-line treatment (MD, −1.33; 95% CI, −2.61 to −0.04). However, sunitinib significantly reduced the risk of progression-free survival (PFS) compared to sorafenib (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.6–0.82). Sunitinib also significantly reduced risk of overall survival (OS) compared to sorafenib (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65–0.92), while median OS was similar in both groups (MD, −0.48; 95% CI, −3.40–2.43). With regards to safety, the risk of rash (RR, 0.31, 95% CI, 0.12–0.79) was greater in sunitinib than sorafenib group, while the risk of decreased appetite (RR 2.10, 95% CI: 1.33–3.30) and dehydration (RR 2.73, 95% CI: 1.14–6.56) was smaller in contrast. Based on risk of PFS and OS, sunitinib was a better treatment option for RCC treatment while patients faced with severe skin reaction. And for those Asian patients classified under MSKCC moderate risk, whether in first or second-line treatment, had difficulty in feeding, sorafenib is a better choice for prolong mPFS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7220148
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72201482020-06-15 Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis Liu, Xiu-Lan Xue, Hui-Ying Chu, Qian Liu, Jin-Yu Li, Juan Medicine (Baltimore) 4200 To evaluate the safety and efficiency of sunitinib and sorafenib in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Databases were searched up till February 28, 2018. Two reviewers independently assessed trials for eligibility, quality, and extracted relevant data. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six studies including 3112 patients were accessed. Sorafenib group exhibited higher median progression-free survival (mPFS) compared to sunitinib group (MD, −1.30; 95% CI, −2.56 to −0.03), especially in the first-line treatment (MD, −1.33; 95% CI, −2.61 to −0.04). However, sunitinib significantly reduced the risk of progression-free survival (PFS) compared to sorafenib (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.6–0.82). Sunitinib also significantly reduced risk of overall survival (OS) compared to sorafenib (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.65–0.92), while median OS was similar in both groups (MD, −0.48; 95% CI, −3.40–2.43). With regards to safety, the risk of rash (RR, 0.31, 95% CI, 0.12–0.79) was greater in sunitinib than sorafenib group, while the risk of decreased appetite (RR 2.10, 95% CI: 1.33–3.30) and dehydration (RR 2.73, 95% CI: 1.14–6.56) was smaller in contrast. Based on risk of PFS and OS, sunitinib was a better treatment option for RCC treatment while patients faced with severe skin reaction. And for those Asian patients classified under MSKCC moderate risk, whether in first or second-line treatment, had difficulty in feeding, sorafenib is a better choice for prolong mPFS. Wolters Kluwer Health 2020-03-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7220148/ /pubmed/32221075 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000019570 Text en Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
spellingShingle 4200
Liu, Xiu-Lan
Xue, Hui-Ying
Chu, Qian
Liu, Jin-Yu
Li, Juan
Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparative efficacy and safety of sunitinib vs sorafenib in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic 4200
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7220148/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32221075
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000019570
work_keys_str_mv AT liuxiulan comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsunitinibvssorafenibinrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT xuehuiying comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsunitinibvssorafenibinrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chuqian comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsunitinibvssorafenibinrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liujinyu comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsunitinibvssorafenibinrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lijuan comparativeefficacyandsafetyofsunitinibvssorafenibinrenalcellcarcinomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis