Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY Translational cancer research Pub Date : 2024-07-31 Epub Date: 2024-07-26 DOI:10.21037/tcr-24-747
Jing-Jing Zhang, Yu-Lan Qian, Zi-Yang Wu, Yue Li, Ying-Jie Guan, Cui Sun, Kai-Li Fu, Tong-Lin Mei, Gaurav Goyal, Paolo Bernasconi, Daniela Damiani, Jian-Guo Zhu
{"title":"Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Jing-Jing Zhang, Yu-Lan Qian, Zi-Yang Wu, Yue Li, Ying-Jie Guan, Cui Sun, Kai-Li Fu, Tong-Lin Mei, Gaurav Goyal, Paolo Bernasconi, Daniela Damiani, Jian-Guo Zhu","doi":"10.21037/tcr-24-747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have become the preferred drugs for the treatment of chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of different TKIs as first-line treatments for CML using network meta-analysis (NMA), providing a basis for the precise clinical use of TKIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Databases (VIP), SinoMed and ClinicalTrials.gov to include RCTs that compared the different TKIs as first line treatment for CML. The search timeline was from inception to 21 July 2023. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the frequentist NMA methods, the efficacy and safety of different TKIs were compared, including the rates of major molecular response (MMR), complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), all grade adverse events, grade 3 or higher hematologic adverse events and liver toxicity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 RCTs involving 6,823 patients with CML and 6 types of TKIs were included. In terms of efficacy, second-generation TKIs such as dasatinib, nilotinib, and radotinib showed certain advantages in improving patients' MMR and CCyR compared to imatinib. Additionally, imatinib 800 mg provided better MMRs and CCyRs than imatinib 400 mg. As far as safety was concerned, there was no significant difference in the incidence of all grade adverse events among the different TKIs. All TKIs can cause serious grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. Dasatinib more likely caused anemia, bosutinib thrombocytopenia, and imatinib neutropenia, whereas nilotinib and flumatinib might have better safety profiles in terms of severe hematologic adverse events. For liver toxicity, radotinib 400 mg and imatinib 800 mg, respectively, had the highest likelihood of ranking first in incidence rates of all grade ALT and AST elevation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In CML, second-generation TKIs are more clinically effective than imatinib even if this last drug has a relatively better safety profile. Thus, as each second-generation TKI has a distinct clinical efficacy and safety, and is associated with different economic factors, its choice should be dictated by the specific patient clinical conditions (patient's specific disease characteristics, comorbid conditions, potential drug interactions, as well as their adherence). Nevertheless, due to the limited number of original research, additional high-quality studies are needed to achieve any firm conclusion on which second-generation TKI is the best choice for that peculiar patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":23216,"journal":{"name":"Translational cancer research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11319984/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Translational cancer research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-24-747","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have become the preferred drugs for the treatment of chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of different TKIs as first-line treatments for CML using network meta-analysis (NMA), providing a basis for the precise clinical use of TKIs.

Methods: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Databases (VIP), SinoMed and ClinicalTrials.gov to include RCTs that compared the different TKIs as first line treatment for CML. The search timeline was from inception to 21 July 2023. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and the frequentist NMA methods, the efficacy and safety of different TKIs were compared, including the rates of major molecular response (MMR), complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), all grade adverse events, grade 3 or higher hematologic adverse events and liver toxicity.

Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 6,823 patients with CML and 6 types of TKIs were included. In terms of efficacy, second-generation TKIs such as dasatinib, nilotinib, and radotinib showed certain advantages in improving patients' MMR and CCyR compared to imatinib. Additionally, imatinib 800 mg provided better MMRs and CCyRs than imatinib 400 mg. As far as safety was concerned, there was no significant difference in the incidence of all grade adverse events among the different TKIs. All TKIs can cause serious grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. Dasatinib more likely caused anemia, bosutinib thrombocytopenia, and imatinib neutropenia, whereas nilotinib and flumatinib might have better safety profiles in terms of severe hematologic adverse events. For liver toxicity, radotinib 400 mg and imatinib 800 mg, respectively, had the highest likelihood of ranking first in incidence rates of all grade ALT and AST elevation.

Conclusions: In CML, second-generation TKIs are more clinically effective than imatinib even if this last drug has a relatively better safety profile. Thus, as each second-generation TKI has a distinct clinical efficacy and safety, and is associated with different economic factors, its choice should be dictated by the specific patient clinical conditions (patient's specific disease characteristics, comorbid conditions, potential drug interactions, as well as their adherence). Nevertheless, due to the limited number of original research, additional high-quality studies are needed to achieve any firm conclusion on which second-generation TKI is the best choice for that peculiar patient.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
慢性髓性白血病一线酪氨酸激酶抑制剂的疗效和安全性比较:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
背景:酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(TKIs)已成为治疗慢性期慢性髓性白血病(CML)的首选药物。本研究旨在通过网络荟萃分析(NMA)比较不同TKIs作为CML一线治疗的安全性和有效性,为TKIs的精确临床应用提供依据:在PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Embase、中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)、万方数据库、中国科技期刊数据库(VIP)、SinoMed和ClinicalTrials.gov上进行系统检索,纳入比较不同TKIs作为CML一线治疗的RCT。检索时间从开始至2023年7月21日。采用系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)和频数主义NMA方法,比较了不同TKIs的疗效和安全性,包括主要分子反应(MMR)、完全细胞遗传学反应(CCyR)、所有级别不良事件、3级或以上血液学不良事件和肝脏毒性的发生率:共纳入了25项研究,涉及6823名CML患者和6种TKIs。在疗效方面,与伊马替尼相比,达沙替尼、尼洛替尼和拉罗替尼等第二代 TKIs 在改善患者 MMR 和 CCyR 方面具有一定优势。此外,与伊马替尼 400 毫克相比,伊马替尼 800 毫克可提供更好的 MMR 和 CCyR。在安全性方面,不同的 TKIs 在所有级别不良事件的发生率上没有显著差异。所有 TKIs 都可能导致严重的 3-4 级血液学不良事件,包括贫血、血小板减少和中性粒细胞减少。达沙替尼更可能导致贫血,博苏替尼导致血小板减少,伊马替尼导致中性粒细胞减少,而尼洛替尼和氟马替尼在严重血液学不良事件方面可能具有更好的安全性。在肝脏毒性方面,尼洛替尼400毫克和伊马替尼800毫克在所有级别的ALT和AST升高发生率中排名第一的可能性最大:结论:在 CML 中,第二代 TKIs 比伊马替尼更有效,即使后者的安全性相对更好。因此,由于每种第二代 TKI 都具有不同的临床疗效和安全性,并与不同的经济因素相关,因此应根据患者的具体临床条件(患者的具体疾病特征、合并症、潜在的药物相互作用以及患者的依从性)来决定其选择。尽管如此,由于原始研究数量有限,因此还需要进行更多高质量的研究,才能就哪种第二代 TKI 是特定患者的最佳选择得出确切结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
252
期刊介绍: Translational Cancer Research (Transl Cancer Res TCR; Print ISSN: 2218-676X; Online ISSN 2219-6803; http://tcr.amegroups.com/) is an Open Access, peer-reviewed journal, indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). TCR publishes laboratory studies of novel therapeutic interventions as well as clinical trials which evaluate new treatment paradigms for cancer; results of novel research investigations which bridge the laboratory and clinical settings including risk assessment, cellular and molecular characterization, prevention, detection, diagnosis and treatment of human cancers with the overall goal of improving the clinical care of cancer patients. The focus of TCR is original, peer-reviewed, science-based research that successfully advances clinical medicine toward the goal of improving patients'' quality of life. The editors and an international advisory group of scientists and clinician-scientists as well as other experts will hold TCR articles to the high-quality standards. We accept Original Articles as well as Review Articles, Editorials and Brief Articles.
期刊最新文献
A nomogram for overall survival of second primary cancers following upper-tract urothelial carcinoma: a SEER population-based study. A novel tumor-derived exosomal gene signature predicts prognosis in patients with pancreatic cancer. AIBP promotes cell proliferation and migration through the ERK1/2-MAPK signaling pathway in hepatocellular carcinoma. An ensemble learning model for predicting cancer-specific survival of muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients undergoing bladder preservation therapy. Analysis of the ideal cutoff age as a predictor of differentiated thyroid cancer using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1