دورية أكاديمية

A network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety for first-line and maintenance therapies in patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: A network meta-analysis of efficacy and safety for first-line and maintenance therapies in patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases
المؤلفون: Yunlin Jiang, Taihang Shao, Mingye Zhao, Yahong Xue, Xueping Zheng
المصدر: Frontiers in Pharmacology, Vol 15 (2024)
بيانات النشر: Frontiers Media S.A., 2024.
سنة النشر: 2024
المجموعة: LCC:Therapeutics. Pharmacology
مصطلحات موضوعية: metastatic colorectal cancer, unresectable liver metastases, network meta-analysis, firstline treatment, maintenance treatment, Therapeutics. Pharmacology, RM1-950
الوصف: Background: Evidence comparing the efficacy of different treatments for patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) receiving first-line or maintenance therapy is sparse. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of these treatments, with a distinct focus on evaluating first-line and maintenance treatments separately.Methods: We conducted Bayesian network meta-analyses, sourcing English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through July 2023 from databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and key conference proceedings. Phase Ⅱ or Ⅲ trials that assessed two or more therapeutic regimens were included. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), adverse events graded as 3 or above (SAE), and R0 liver resection rate. Hazards Ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as effect size for OS and PFS, Odds Ratios (ORs) and 95% CI were used for ORR, SAEs and R0 resection rate. Subgroup and sensitive analyses were conducted to analysis the model uncertainty (PROSPERO: CRD42023420498).Results: 56 RCTs were included (50 for first-line treatment, six for maintenance therapies), with a total of 21,323 patients. Regarding first-line, for OS, the top three mechanisms were: local treatment + single-drug chemotherapy (SingleCT), Targeted therapy (TAR)+SingleCT, and TAR + multi-drug chemotherapy (MultiCT). Resection or ablation (R/A)+SingleCT, S1, and Cetuximab + intensified fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy (ICTFU) were identified as the best treatments. For PFS, the top three mechanisms were: Immune therapy + TAR + MultiCT, multi-targeted therapy (MultiTAR), TAR + SingleCT. The top three treatments were: Atezolizumab + Bevacizumab + fluorouracil-based combination chemotherapy (CTFU), TAS-102+bevacizumab, Bevacizumab + ICTFU. Cetuximab + CTFU was the best choice for RAS/RAF wild-type patients. Regarding maintenance treatment, Bevacizumab + SingleCT and Adavosertib were the best options for OS and PFS, respectively. For safety, MultiCT was the safest, followed by local treatment + MultiCT, TAR + MultiCT caused the most SAEs. Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy was found to be the safest among all targeted combination therapies.Conclusion: In first-line, local treatment or targeted therapsy plus chemotherapy are the best mechanisms. R/A + SingleCT or CTFU performed the best for OS, Atezolizumab + Bevacizumab + ICTFU was the best option regarding PFS. For RAS/RAF wild-type patients, Cetuximab + CTFU was the optimal option. Monotherapy may be preferred choice for maintenance treatment. Combination therapy resulted in more SAEs when compared to standard chemotherapy.
نوع الوثيقة: article
وصف الملف: electronic resource
اللغة: English
تدمد: 1663-9812
Relation: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2024.1374136/full; https://doaj.org/toc/1663-9812
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1374136
URL الوصول: https://doaj.org/article/8822b2b82406424c8e34d0352a873248
رقم الأكسشن: edsdoj.8822b2b82406424c8e34d0352a873248
قاعدة البيانات: Directory of Open Access Journals
الوصف
تدمد:16639812
DOI:10.3389/fphar.2024.1374136