首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>OncoTargets and therapy >A meta-analysis of combination therapy versus single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer: results from nine randomized Phase III trials
【2h】

A meta-analysis of combination therapy versus single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer: results from nine randomized Phase III trials

机译:蒽环类和紫杉类预处理的转移性乳腺癌联合治疗与单药治疗的荟萃分析:九项随机III期试验的结果

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Nowadays, the philosophy of treating metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is slowly evolving. Especially for the anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients, no standard therapy exists in this setting. Whether to choose doublet agents or single agent as salvage treatment remains fiercely debated. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to resolve this problem. Databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library were searched for Phase III randomized clinical trials (published before August 2015) comparing the efficacy and adverse effects between the combination therapy and single-agent therapy in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated MBC patients. The primary end point was the overall survival (OS), and the secondary end points were the progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or 4 toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and pooled risk ratio (RR) were used to evaluate the efficacy. Analyses were also performed to estimate the side effects and safety of both groups. In all, nine eligible randomized clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. Improvements were proven in the doublet agents group on OS (HR 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.96, P=0.002), PFS (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.76–0.88, P<0.001), and ORR (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.34–2.21, P<0.001). Notably, subgroup analysis failed to favor the targeted agent-based combination in terms of OS (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89–1.31, P=0.365), PFS (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88–1.35, P=0.433), and ORR (RR 1.60, 95% CI 0.69–3.71, P=0.278) compared with single agent. In addition, although more hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities were observed in the doublet agents group, they were acceptable and manageable. Taken together, when compared with single-agent therapy, doublet agents should be considered a treatment option because of the superior efficacy and the manageable safety profile for the prior anthracycline- and taxane-treated MBC patients.
机译:如今,治疗转移性乳腺癌(MBC)的理念正在慢慢发展。特别是对于蒽环类和紫杉烷类预处理的MBC患者,在这种情况下不存在标准疗法。是否选择双重治疗剂或单一治疗剂作为抢救治疗方法仍在激烈争论。因此,我们进行了荟萃分析以解决此问题。搜索包括PubMed,EMBASE和Cochrane库在内的数据库以进行III期随机临床试验(于2015年8月之前发布),比较了联合治疗和单药治疗蒽环类和紫杉烷预处理的MBC患者的疗效和不良反应。主要终点为总体生存期(OS),次要终点为无进展生存期(PFS),总体缓解率(ORR)和3或4级毒性。合并风险比(HR)和合并风险比(RR)用于评估疗效。还进行了分析以估计两组的副作用和安全性。这项荟萃分析总共包括9项合格的随机临床试验。在Doublet代理商组中,OS(HR 0.90,95%置信区间[CI] 0.84–0.96,P = 0.002),PFS(HR 0.81,95%CI 0.76-0.88,P <0.001)和ORR( RR 1.72,95%CI 1.34–2.21,P <0.001)。值得注意的是,就OS(HR 1.08,95%CI 0.89–1.31,P = 0.365),PFS(HR 1.09,95%CI 0.88–1.35,P = 0.433)而言,亚组分析未能支持基于靶点的基于药物的联合治疗,与单一药物相比,ORR(RR 1.60,95%CI 0.69-3.71,P = 0.278)。另外,尽管在双线药物组中观察到了更多的血液和胃肠道毒性,但它们是可以接受和可控的。两者合计,与单药治疗相比,双联药应被视为一种治疗选择,因为以前的蒽环类和紫杉类治疗的MBC患者具有更高的疗效和可控的安全性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号