...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of sorafenib versus other targeted agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma
【24h】

A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of sorafenib versus other targeted agents for metastatic renal cell carcinoma

机译:索拉非尼与其他靶向药物治疗转移性肾细胞癌的疗效和安全性的荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Molecular targeted therapies were found to be efficacious and safer in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Sorafenib is the first target agent (TA) to report a benefit in this disease and has largely established a prominent role in progression-free survival (PFS). However, there have been conflicting results across the trials that evaluated the efficacy of sorafenib . Objective: The aim of the study was to perform a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in first-line treatments of mRCC. Methods: We searched online electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library updated on September 2017. Trials on the efficacy of sorafenib in first-line treatments of advanced RCC were included, of which the primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), PFS, overall survival (OS), and grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs). Results: A total of 5 trials were included in this analysis. The group of AEs showed significantly improved PFS (odds ratio [OR] = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70–0.86, P .001), as well with the ORR (OR = 1.89, 95%CI = 1.38–2.59, P .0001) compared with sorafenib . However, there was no significant difference in OS (OR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.78–1.22, P = .82). Conclusion: Sorafenib did not achieve efficacy and safety benefit in patients with mRCC compared with those treated with TAs. The role of sorafenib in first-line treatments of mRCC may change in favor of newer drugs. More research is needed to confirm whether these new TAs could replace sorafenib as the gold standard in the future.
机译:背景:发现分子靶向疗法在治疗转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)方面既有效又安全。索拉非尼是第一个报告对该疾病有益处的靶标药物(TA),并在无进展生存期(PFS)方面起了重要作用。但是,在评估索拉非尼疗效的整个试验中,存在矛盾的结果。目的:该研究的目的是进行荟萃分析,以比较索拉非尼在mRCC一线治疗中的疗效和安全性。方法:我们搜索了在线电子数据库:PubMed,Embase和Cochrane库,该数据库于2017年9月更新。包括索拉非尼在晚期RCC一线治疗中的疗效试验,其中主要结果为客观缓解率(ORR) ,PFS,总生存期(OS)和3/4级不良事件(AEs)。结果:该分析总共包括5个试验。 AE组显示PFS显着改善(赔率[OR] = 0.78,95%置信区间[CI] = 0.70-0.86,P <.001),以及ORR(OR = 1.89,95%CI = 1.38) –2.59,P <.0001)与索拉非尼相比。但是,OS没有显着差异(OR = 0.97,95%CI = 0.78–1.22,P = .82)。结论:与TAs相比,索拉非尼在mRCC患者中未获得疗效和安全性益处。索拉非尼在mRCC的一线治疗中的作用可能会改变,以支持更新的药物。需要更多的研究来确认这些新的TA将来是否可以取代索拉非尼作为黄金标准。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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