Cargando…
The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (GEM) is used as a standard first-line drug to effectively alleviate symptoms and prolong survival time for advanced pancreatic cancer. Most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that GEM-based combination therapy is better than GEM alone, while some RCTs have the opposite...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9459213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36092340 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-22-624 |
_version_ | 1784786457724977152 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Zhaohuan He, Shuling Wang, Ping Zhou, Yibing |
author_facet | Zhang, Zhaohuan He, Shuling Wang, Ping Zhou, Yibing |
author_sort | Zhang, Zhaohuan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (GEM) is used as a standard first-line drug to effectively alleviate symptoms and prolong survival time for advanced pancreatic cancer. Most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that GEM-based combination therapy is better than GEM alone, while some RCTs have the opposite conclusion. This study aimed to investigate whether GEM-based combination therapy would be superior to GEM alone by a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: According to the PICOS principles, RCTs (S) focused on comparing GEM-based combination therapy (I) vs. GEM alone (C) for advanced pancreatic cancer (P) were collected from eight electronic databases, outcome variables mainly include survival status and adverse events (AEs) (O). Review Manager 5.4 was used to evaluate the pooled effects of the results among selected articles. Pooled estimate of hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as measures of effect sizes. Quality assessment for individual study was performed using the Cochrane tool for risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies including 5,197 patients were selected in this analysis. The pooled results revealed that GEM-based combination therapy significantly improved the overall survival (OS; HR =0.84; 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.90; P<0.00001), progression-free survival (PFS; HR =0.78; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.84; P<0.00001), overall response rate (ORR; OR =1.92; 95% CI: 1.61 to 2.30; P<0.00001), 1-year survival rate (OR =1.44; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.03; P=0.04), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the efficacy of GEM plus capecitabine (CAP) and GEM plus S-1 was better than that of GEM alone, while GEM plus cisplatin (CIS) did not achieve an improved effect. GEM-based combination therapy can significantly increase the incidence of AEs, such as leukopenia (P<0.001), neutropenia (P<0.001), anemia (P<0.05), nausea (P<0.001), diarrhea (P<0.05), and stomatitis (P<0.001). No publication bias existed in our meta-analysis (P>0.10). DISCUSSION: Our study supported that GEM-based combination therapy was more beneficial to improve patient’s survival than GEM alone, while there was no additional benefits in GEM plus CIS. We also found that GEM-based combination therapy increased the incidence of AEs. Clinicians need to choose the appropriate combination therapy according to the specific situation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9459213 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94592132022-09-10 The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis Zhang, Zhaohuan He, Shuling Wang, Ping Zhou, Yibing J Gastrointest Oncol Original Article BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine (GEM) is used as a standard first-line drug to effectively alleviate symptoms and prolong survival time for advanced pancreatic cancer. Most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) show that GEM-based combination therapy is better than GEM alone, while some RCTs have the opposite conclusion. This study aimed to investigate whether GEM-based combination therapy would be superior to GEM alone by a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: According to the PICOS principles, RCTs (S) focused on comparing GEM-based combination therapy (I) vs. GEM alone (C) for advanced pancreatic cancer (P) were collected from eight electronic databases, outcome variables mainly include survival status and adverse events (AEs) (O). Review Manager 5.4 was used to evaluate the pooled effects of the results among selected articles. Pooled estimate of hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as measures of effect sizes. Quality assessment for individual study was performed using the Cochrane tool for risk of bias. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies including 5,197 patients were selected in this analysis. The pooled results revealed that GEM-based combination therapy significantly improved the overall survival (OS; HR =0.84; 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.90; P<0.00001), progression-free survival (PFS; HR =0.78; 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.84; P<0.00001), overall response rate (ORR; OR =1.92; 95% CI: 1.61 to 2.30; P<0.00001), 1-year survival rate (OR =1.44; 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.03; P=0.04), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the efficacy of GEM plus capecitabine (CAP) and GEM plus S-1 was better than that of GEM alone, while GEM plus cisplatin (CIS) did not achieve an improved effect. GEM-based combination therapy can significantly increase the incidence of AEs, such as leukopenia (P<0.001), neutropenia (P<0.001), anemia (P<0.05), nausea (P<0.001), diarrhea (P<0.05), and stomatitis (P<0.001). No publication bias existed in our meta-analysis (P>0.10). DISCUSSION: Our study supported that GEM-based combination therapy was more beneficial to improve patient’s survival than GEM alone, while there was no additional benefits in GEM plus CIS. We also found that GEM-based combination therapy increased the incidence of AEs. Clinicians need to choose the appropriate combination therapy according to the specific situation. AME Publishing Company 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9459213/ /pubmed/36092340 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-22-624 Text en 2022 Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Zhang, Zhaohuan He, Shuling Wang, Ping Zhou, Yibing The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapy vs. gemcitabine alone for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9459213/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36092340 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jgo-22-624 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangzhaohuan theefficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT heshuling theefficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wangping theefficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhouyibing theefficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhangzhaohuan efficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT heshuling efficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wangping efficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhouyibing efficacyandsafetyofgemcitabinebasedcombinationtherapyvsgemcitabinealoneforthetreatmentofadvancedpancreaticcancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |