首页> 外文期刊>OncoTargets and therapy >Therapeutic efficacy and safety of combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in patients with malignant melanoma: a meta-analysis
【24h】

Therapeutic efficacy and safety of combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in patients with malignant melanoma: a meta-analysis

机译:联合 BRAF 和MEK抑制治疗恶性黑色素瘤的疗效和安全性的Meta分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Recent clinical studies have shown that initial therapy with combined BRAF and mitogen-activated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (MEK) inhibition is more effective in metastatic melanoma than single-agent BRAF inhibitors. However, the response rates with single-agent BRAF are low. Thus, the objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy and adverse events risk between monotherapy and combination therapy. Materials and methods: Searches were made in PubMed and EMBASE electronic databases and conference abstracts published by the American Society of Clinical Oncology from 2000 to 2017. Outcomes included overall response, progression-free survival, and overall survival, as well as the incidence rate of adverse events. Results: Eight trials comprising 2,664 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Patients with combined therapies showed superior results compared to those with BRAF inhibitors alone for the following: overall response rate (combined relative risk [RR]?=1.34, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.24–1.45, P <0.00001), progression-free survival (combined hazards ratio [HR]?=0.58, 95% CI: 0.52–0.64, P <0.00001), and overall survival rate (combined HR?=0.70, 95% CI: 0.62–0.80, P <0.00001). Patients with combination therapies had higher incidence of adverse events including pyrexia (combined RR?=2.00, 95% CI: 1.40–2.84), nausea (combined RR?=1.41, 95% CI: 1.03–1.94), diarrhea (combined RR?=1.50, 95% CI: 1.08–2.06), and vomiting (combined RR?=1.87, 95% CI: 01.52–2.31) compared to those with BRAF inhibitors alone. Conclusion: These data suggested that the combined BRAF and MEK inhibition was associated with a significant improvement in overall response, progression-free survival, and overall survival, but increased the incidence of adverse events among the patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma. Further large-scale, high-quality, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials are needed to confirm this conclusion.
机译:背景:最近的临床研究表明,结合BRAF和丝裂原活化的细胞外信号调节激酶(MEK)抑制的初始疗法在转移性黑色素瘤中比单剂BRAF抑制剂更有效。但是,单剂BRAF的响应率很低。因此,本研究的目的是对随机对照试验进行荟萃分析,以比较单一疗法和联合疗法之间的疗效和不良事件风险。材料和方法:检索2000年至2017年在美国临床肿瘤学会出版的PubMed和EMBASE电子数据库及会议摘要中进行的研究。结果包括总体缓解,无进展生存期和总体生存期以及肝癌的发生率不良事件。结果:荟萃分析包括八项试验,包括2664名患者。与单独使用BRAF抑制剂的患者相比,联合治疗的患者在以下方面显示出更好的结果:总体缓解率(合并相对风险[RR]?= 1.34,95%置信区间[95%CI]:1.24–1.45,P <0.00001) ,无进展生存期(合并危险比[HR]?= 0.58,95%CI:0.52-0.64,P <0.00001)和总生存率(合并HR?= 0.70,95%CI:0.62-0.80,P < 0.00001)。联合疗法的患者发生不良事件的几率更高,包括发热(合并RR?= 2.00,95%CI:1.40–2.84),恶心(合并RR?= 1.41,95%CI:1.03-1.94),腹泻(合并RR?与单独使用BRAF抑制剂的患者相比,其= 1.50、95%CI:1.08–2.06)和呕吐(合并RR?= 1.87、95%CI:01.52–2.31)。结论:这些数据表明,BRAF和MEK的联合抑制与总体反应,无进展生存期和总体生存期的显着改善有关,但增加了BRAF V600突变型转移性黑色素瘤患者不良事件的发生率。需要进一步的大规模,高质量,安慰剂对照,双盲试验来证实这一结论。

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