Comparison of Hepatic Function and Chemotherapy-Induced Side Effects Between Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD), Topotecan (TOPO), and Gemcitabine in Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer (PROC).

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Personalized Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-19 DOI:10.3390/jpm15010039
Radu-Dumitru Dragomir, Marina Adriana Mercioni, Șerban Negru, Dorel Popovici, Sorin Săftescu, Andiana Roxana Blidari, Ioan Sas
{"title":"Comparison of Hepatic Function and Chemotherapy-Induced Side Effects Between Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin (PLD), Topotecan (TOPO), and Gemcitabine in Platinum-Resistant Ovarian Cancer (PROC).","authors":"Radu-Dumitru Dragomir, Marina Adriana Mercioni, Șerban Negru, Dorel Popovici, Sorin Săftescu, Andiana Roxana Blidari, Ioan Sas","doi":"10.3390/jpm15010039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives</b>: Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) is a major therapeutic challenge, as it responds poorly to standard platinum-based treatment, has limited treatment options, and offers a generally unfavorable prognosis. Chemotherapeutic agents like pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), topotecan (TOPO), and gemcitabine (GEM) are used for this setting, but with varying efficacy and toxicity profiles, leading to an increasing need to understand the optimal balance between treatment effectiveness and tolerability for improving patient outcomes. This study evaluates the efficacy and side effects of PLD, TOPO, and GEM, focusing on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profiles. <b>Methods</b>: We conducted a retrospective observational study that included 856 PROC patients treated with PLD (<i>n</i> = 383), TOPO (<i>n</i> = 352), or GEM (<i>n</i> = 121) at the OncoHelp Oncology Center from January 2018 to December 2023. Inclusion criteria encompass diagnosis, prior platinum therapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status (0-2). Treatment protocols followed standard dosing, with adjustments for toxicity. Primary endpoints included PFS and OS, with safety assessed by incidence of grade 3 and 4 toxicities per CTCAE v5.0. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used to compare survival, and statistical significance was set at <i>p</i> < 0.05. <b>Results</b>: TOPO showed higher toxicity than PLD and GEM, including liver damage, hematological and non-hematological side effects, while PLD induced more skin toxicity. In terms of survival, minor differences were seen between the three chemotherapeutic agents, with a slight advantage for PLD for better disease control. <b>Conclusions</b>: Given the comparable results in OS across the regimens, treatment decisions should be based on other factors such as patient tolerance and quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":16722,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11766750/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm15010039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) is a major therapeutic challenge, as it responds poorly to standard platinum-based treatment, has limited treatment options, and offers a generally unfavorable prognosis. Chemotherapeutic agents like pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), topotecan (TOPO), and gemcitabine (GEM) are used for this setting, but with varying efficacy and toxicity profiles, leading to an increasing need to understand the optimal balance between treatment effectiveness and tolerability for improving patient outcomes. This study evaluates the efficacy and side effects of PLD, TOPO, and GEM, focusing on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profiles. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study that included 856 PROC patients treated with PLD (n = 383), TOPO (n = 352), or GEM (n = 121) at the OncoHelp Oncology Center from January 2018 to December 2023. Inclusion criteria encompass diagnosis, prior platinum therapy, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status (0-2). Treatment protocols followed standard dosing, with adjustments for toxicity. Primary endpoints included PFS and OS, with safety assessed by incidence of grade 3 and 4 toxicities per CTCAE v5.0. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used to compare survival, and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: TOPO showed higher toxicity than PLD and GEM, including liver damage, hematological and non-hematological side effects, while PLD induced more skin toxicity. In terms of survival, minor differences were seen between the three chemotherapeutic agents, with a slight advantage for PLD for better disease control. Conclusions: Given the comparable results in OS across the regimens, treatment decisions should be based on other factors such as patient tolerance and quality of life.

Abstract Image

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
聚乙二醇脂质体多柔比星(PLD)、拓扑替康(TOPO)和吉西他滨治疗铂耐药卵巢癌(PROC)的肝功能和化疗副作用比较
背景/目的:铂耐药卵巢癌(PROC)是一个主要的治疗挑战,因为它对标准的铂基治疗反应不佳,治疗选择有限,并且通常预后不良。化疗药物如聚乙二醇脂质体阿霉素(PLD),拓扑替康(TOPO)和吉西他滨(GEM)用于这种情况,但具有不同的疗效和毒性,导致越来越需要了解治疗效果和耐受性之间的最佳平衡,以改善患者的预后。本研究评估PLD、TOPO和GEM的疗效和副作用,重点关注无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和安全性。方法:我们进行了一项回顾性观察性研究,纳入了2018年1月至2023年12月在OncoHelp肿瘤中心接受PLD (n = 383)、TOPO (n = 352)或GEM (n = 121)治疗的856例PROC患者。纳入标准包括诊断、既往铂治疗和东部肿瘤合作组(ECOG)状态(0-2)。治疗方案遵循标准剂量,并根据毒性进行调整。主要终点包括PFS和OS,通过CTCAE v5.0的3级和4级毒性发生率评估安全性。生存率比较采用Kaplan-Meier分析和Cox回归,p < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:TOPO的毒性高于PLD和GEM,包括肝损害、血液学和非血液学副作用,而PLD的皮肤毒性更大。在生存方面,三种化疗药物之间存在微小差异,PLD在更好的疾病控制方面具有轻微优势。结论:考虑到不同方案的OS结果具有可比性,治疗决策应基于其他因素,如患者耐受性和生活质量。
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
Journal of Personalized Medicine
Journal of Personalized Medicine Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1878
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Personalized Medicine (JPM; ISSN 2075-4426) is an international, open access journal aimed at bringing all aspects of personalized medicine to one platform. JPM publishes cutting edge, innovative preclinical and translational scientific research and technologies related to personalized medicine (e.g., pharmacogenomics/proteomics, systems biology). JPM recognizes that personalized medicine—the assessment of genetic, environmental and host factors that cause variability of individuals—is a challenging, transdisciplinary topic that requires discussions from a range of experts. For a comprehensive perspective of personalized medicine, JPM aims to integrate expertise from the molecular and translational sciences, therapeutics and diagnostics, as well as discussions of regulatory, social, ethical and policy aspects. We provide a forum to bring together academic and clinical researchers, biotechnology, diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, health professionals, regulatory and ethical experts, and government and regulatory authorities.
期刊最新文献
Coronary Atherosclerosis in Master Athletes: Current Knowledge and Future Challenges. Comparative Quality Assessment of Artificial Intelligence in Patient Education on Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) Therapy. Targeted and Personalized Therapy for Difficult Benign Brain Tumors: A Review. Leveraging Large and Diverse Biobanks to Evaluate Gene-Disease Associations in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Targeted Therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Current Approaches and Novel Directions.
×
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:604180095
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