...
首页> 外文期刊>Radiation oncology >Network meta-analysis comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and upfront surgery in patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
【24h】

Network meta-analysis comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and upfront surgery in patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

机译:网络荟萃分析比较可切除,边界可切除和局部晚期胰腺导管腺癌患者的新辅助放化疗,新辅助化疗和前期手术

获取原文
           

摘要

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation or chemotherapy has improved the treatment efficacy of patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Due to the optimal regimen remains inconclusive, we aimed to compare these treatments in terms of margin negative (R0) resection rate and overall survival (OS) with Bayesian analysis. We reviewed literature titles and abstracts comparing three treatment strategies (neoadjuvant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and upfront surgery) in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and ClinicalTrials.gov database from 2009 to 2018 to estimate relative odds ratios (ORs) for margin negative (R0) resection rate and hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) in all include trials. A total of 14 literatures with 1056 patients were enrolled in this Bayesian analysis. In the pairwise meta-analysis from limited head-to-head studies, compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation showed superior OS significantly (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.60–0.99, p??0.001) and there was no significant difference in R0 resection rate (OR 1.02, 95%CI 0.45–2.33, I2?=?34.6%). However, in the network meta-analysis from all enrolled clinical trials, neoadjuvant chemoradiation showed significantly higher R0 resection rate over upfront surgery (HR 0.15, 95% CrI 0.02–0.56), whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not provide better efficacy in R0 resection over upfront surgery (HR 0.42, 95% CrI 0.02–4.41). For R0 resection rate, neoadjuvant chemoradiation has the highest probability of ranking one compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or upfront surgery (79% vs 21% vs 0%). For OS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has the highest probability of ranking one compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or upfront surgery (98% vs 0% vs 2%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher rates of postoperative complications (rank worst: 84%), followed by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (13%) and upfront surgery (3%). Different neoadjuvant treatment was selected based on various purposes, whether increasing R0 resection rate or not. Future clinical trials comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation with neoadjuvant chemotherapy are warranted to confirm our results.
机译:新辅助化学放疗或化学疗法改善了可切除,边缘可切除和局部晚期胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)患者的治疗效果。由于最佳治疗方案尚无定论,因此我们旨在通过贝叶斯分析比较这些治疗的切缘阴性(R0)切除率和总生存期(OS)。我们回顾了2009年至2018年期间PubMed,Embase,Cochrane图书馆,美国临床肿瘤学会和ClinicalTrials.gov数据库中三种治疗策略(新辅助化学放疗,新辅助化学疗法和前期手术)的文献标题和摘要,以评估相对优势比(在所有纳入试验中,边缘阴性(R0)切除率和总生存率(OS)的危险比(HRs)的ORs)。贝叶斯分析共纳入14篇文献,涉及1056名患者。在有限头对头研究的成对荟萃分析中,与新辅助化学疗法相比,新辅助化学放疗显着优于OS(HR 0.8,95%CI 0.60-0.99,p <0.001),且无显着差异。 R0切除率(OR 1.02,95%CI 0.45-2.33,I2 == 34.6%)。但是,在所有纳入的临床试验的网络荟萃分析中,新辅助化学放疗显示前期手术的R0切除率显着更高(HR 0.15,95%CrI 0.02-0.56),而新辅助化疗并未在前期手术中提供更好的R0切除效果。手术(HR 0.42,95%CrI 0.02–4.41)。对于R0切除率,与新辅助化疗或前期手术相比,新辅助化学放疗的可能性最高(排名第一)(79%vs 21%vs 0%)。对于OS,与新辅助放化疗或前期手术相比,新辅助化疗具有最高的排名第一的可能性(98%vs 0%vs 2%)。新辅助化疗与术后并发症发生率更高(最差:84%),其次是新辅助放化疗(13%)和前期手术(3%)。根据各种目的选择了不同的新辅助治疗方法,无论是否提高R0切除率。将来有必要将新辅助化学放疗与新辅助化学疗法进行比较,以证实我们的结果。

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