首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Molecular and Clinical Oncology >Consolidation chwemotherapy after concurrent chemoradiotherapy vs. chemoradiotherapy alone for locally advanced unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis
【2h】

Consolidation chwemotherapy after concurrent chemoradiotherapy vs. chemoradiotherapy alone for locally advanced unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

机译:同期放化疗与单独放化疗合并局部化疗治疗局部晚期不可切除的III期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

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。

摘要

Concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) has been considered to be the standard of care for locally advanced unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC). Whether consolidation chemotherapy (CCT) following CCRT is able to further improve the clinical outcome remains unclear. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to compare the two regimens for LA-NSCLC. A literature search was performed through PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Chinese Biology Medicine, from their inception to November, 2015. Irrelevant studies were excluded using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. Our primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), which was defined as the time from randomisation until death from any cause; the secondary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). All analyses were by intention-to-treat. Five phase III randomized controlled trials with 958 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. The results were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Compared with CCRT, CCT after CCRT was not associated with statistically significant differences in OS (OR=1.24; 95% CI: 0.89–1.72; P=0.21) or PFS (OR=1.16; 95% CI: 0.74–1.83; P=0.53), but increased the risk of toxicity, including infection (P=0.02), pneumonitis (P=0.003) and treatment-related death (P=0.04). There were no significant differences in terms of benefit according to particular patient characteristics, such as age, gender, performance status, tumor histology or clinical stage. Thus, the present study failed to support the use of CCT after CCRT over CCRT alone, as there was no significant OS and PFS benefit for LA-NSCLC patients, but the use of CCT after CCRT resulted in increased toxicity.
机译:并发放化疗已被认为是局部晚期不可切除的III期非小细胞肺癌(LA-NSCLC)的治疗标准。目前尚不清楚CCRT后的巩固化疗(CCT)是否能够进一步改善临床结局。因此,我们进行了荟萃分析,以比较LA-NSCLC的两种方案。从研究开始到2015年11月,通过PubMed,Embase,Cochrane图书馆和中国生物医学进行了文献检索。使用系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项将不相关的研究排除在外。我们的主要终点是总生存期(OS),它是指从随机分组到任何原因导致死亡的时间。次要终点是无进展生存期(PFS)。所有分析均按意向性进行。本荟萃分析包括五项针对958名患者的III期随机对照试验。结果表示为具有95%置信区间(CI)的优势比(OR)。与CCRT相比,CCRT后的CCT与OS(OR = 1.24; 95%CI:0.89–1.72; P = 0.21)或PFS(OR = 1.16; 95%CI:0.74–1.83; P = 0.53),但增加了中毒风险,包括感染(P = 0.02),肺炎(P = 0.003)和与治疗有关的死亡(P = 0.04)。根据特定患者的特征(例如年龄,性别,行为状态,肿瘤组织学或临床阶段),在获益方面无显着差异。因此,本研究未能支持仅在CCRT之上进行CCRT后使用CCT,因为LA-NSCLC患者没有明显的OS和PFS获益,但是在CCRT之后使用CCT导致毒性增加。

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