Cargando…

Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches

Background: In recent years, reduction of nuclear power generation and the use of coal-fired power for filling the power supply gap might have increased the risk of lung cancer. This study aims to explore the most effective treatment for different stages of lung cancer patients. Methods: We searched...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chang, Chuan-Hsin, Chang, Yue-Cune
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9657796/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36361201
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114324
_version_ 1784829786444529664
author Chang, Chuan-Hsin
Chang, Yue-Cune
author_facet Chang, Chuan-Hsin
Chang, Yue-Cune
author_sort Chang, Chuan-Hsin
collection PubMed
description Background: In recent years, reduction of nuclear power generation and the use of coal-fired power for filling the power supply gap might have increased the risk of lung cancer. This study aims to explore the most effective treatment for different stages of lung cancer patients. Methods: We searched databases to investigate the treatment efficacy of lung cancer. The network meta-analysis was used to explore the top three effective therapeutic strategies among all collected treatment methodologies. Results: A total of 124 studies were collected from 115 articles with 171,757 participants in total. The results of network meta-analyses showed that the best top three treatments: (1) in response rate, for advanced lung cancer were Targeted + Targeted, Chemo + Immuno, and Targeted + Other Therapy with cumulative probabilities 82.9, 80.8, and 69.3%, respectively; for non-advanced lung cancer were Chemoradio + Targeted, Chemoradi + Immuno, and Chemoradio + Other Therapy with cumulative probabilities 69.0, 67.8, and 60.7%, respectively; (2) in disease-free control rate, for advanced lung cancer were Targeted + Others, Chemo + Immuno, and Targeted + Targeted Therapy with cumulative probabilities 93.4, 91.5, and 59.4%, respectively; for non-advanced lung cancer were Chemo + Surgery, Chemoradio + Targeted, and Surgery Therapy with cumulative probabilities 80.1, 71.5, and 43.1%, respectively. Conclusion: The therapeutic strategies with the best effectiveness will be different depending on the stage of lung cancer patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9657796
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96577962022-11-15 Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches Chang, Chuan-Hsin Chang, Yue-Cune Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Background: In recent years, reduction of nuclear power generation and the use of coal-fired power for filling the power supply gap might have increased the risk of lung cancer. This study aims to explore the most effective treatment for different stages of lung cancer patients. Methods: We searched databases to investigate the treatment efficacy of lung cancer. The network meta-analysis was used to explore the top three effective therapeutic strategies among all collected treatment methodologies. Results: A total of 124 studies were collected from 115 articles with 171,757 participants in total. The results of network meta-analyses showed that the best top three treatments: (1) in response rate, for advanced lung cancer were Targeted + Targeted, Chemo + Immuno, and Targeted + Other Therapy with cumulative probabilities 82.9, 80.8, and 69.3%, respectively; for non-advanced lung cancer were Chemoradio + Targeted, Chemoradi + Immuno, and Chemoradio + Other Therapy with cumulative probabilities 69.0, 67.8, and 60.7%, respectively; (2) in disease-free control rate, for advanced lung cancer were Targeted + Others, Chemo + Immuno, and Targeted + Targeted Therapy with cumulative probabilities 93.4, 91.5, and 59.4%, respectively; for non-advanced lung cancer were Chemo + Surgery, Chemoradio + Targeted, and Surgery Therapy with cumulative probabilities 80.1, 71.5, and 43.1%, respectively. Conclusion: The therapeutic strategies with the best effectiveness will be different depending on the stage of lung cancer patients. MDPI 2022-11-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9657796/ /pubmed/36361201 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114324 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Chang, Chuan-Hsin
Chang, Yue-Cune
Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title_full Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title_fullStr Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title_short Comparing the Therapeutic Efficacies of Lung Cancer: Network Meta-Analysis Approaches
title_sort comparing the therapeutic efficacies of lung cancer: network meta-analysis approaches
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9657796/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36361201
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192114324
work_keys_str_mv AT changchuanhsin comparingthetherapeuticefficaciesoflungcancernetworkmetaanalysisapproaches
AT changyuecune comparingthetherapeuticefficaciesoflungcancernetworkmetaanalysisapproaches