Comparison of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in early-stage cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tjog.2021.11.006
Qingmin Guo , Rui Wang , Dongmei Jin , Zhengfang Yin , Bao Hu , Ruifeng Li , Dongyue Wu
{"title":"Comparison of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in early-stage cervical cancer patients with intermediate-risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Qingmin Guo ,&nbsp;Rui Wang ,&nbsp;Dongmei Jin ,&nbsp;Zhengfang Yin ,&nbsp;Bao Hu ,&nbsp;Ruifeng Li ,&nbsp;Dongyue Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.tjog.2021.11.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The presence of intermediate risk factors reduces the predictability of radical hysterectomy, demanding the use of adjuvant therapy for treatment of Early stage cervical cancer (ESCC) patients. Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has been widely used with varied efficacy and safety issues. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the available evidence and assess the effect of post-surgical adjuvant RT versus adjuvant CRT on survival rate and complications/toxicities in management of ESCC patients with intermediate risk factors. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science (WOS) and CENTRAL were searched using a combination of relevant keywords. All studies comparing outcomes of adjuvant RT versus CRT in ESCC patients with intermediate-risk factors in terms of recurrence free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicities/complications were included. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis was carried out. The risk of bias assessment was done using Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) for retrospective cohort studies and Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used for randomized clinical trials. Eleven retrospective cohort studies and two randomized clinical trials were included in this review. Adjuvant CRT was found to have better RFS with ESCC patients with multiple intermediate risk factors with OR 3.11 95% CI [1.04, 4.99], p &lt; 0.0001; i2 = 6%. However, similar benefit was observed between both regimens in presence of a single intermediate risk factor OR 1.80 95% CI [0.96, 3.36], p = 0.07; i2 = 0%. Grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicity among patients receiving post-surgical adjuvant RT versus adjuvant CRT showed increased association of toxicity with adjuvant CRT with OR 7.73 95%CI [3.40, 17.59], p &lt; 0.0001; i2 = 62%. Adjuvant CRT shows favourable RFS and OS in ESCC patients with multiple intermediate risk factors. CRT also showed greater incidence of grade 3 or 4 haematological and non-haematiological toxicity, however, the same could be well tolerated when used within the recommended dosage.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49449,"journal":{"name":"Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology","volume":"61 1","pages":"Pages 15-23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1028455921003107/pdfft?md5=b05cc884a8290257cc9491634cd4e8ec&pid=1-s2.0-S1028455921003107-main.pdf","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1028455921003107","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

The presence of intermediate risk factors reduces the predictability of radical hysterectomy, demanding the use of adjuvant therapy for treatment of Early stage cervical cancer (ESCC) patients. Adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) has been widely used with varied efficacy and safety issues. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the available evidence and assess the effect of post-surgical adjuvant RT versus adjuvant CRT on survival rate and complications/toxicities in management of ESCC patients with intermediate risk factors. PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science (WOS) and CENTRAL were searched using a combination of relevant keywords. All studies comparing outcomes of adjuvant RT versus CRT in ESCC patients with intermediate-risk factors in terms of recurrence free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicities/complications were included. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis was carried out. The risk of bias assessment was done using Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) for retrospective cohort studies and Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was used for randomized clinical trials. Eleven retrospective cohort studies and two randomized clinical trials were included in this review. Adjuvant CRT was found to have better RFS with ESCC patients with multiple intermediate risk factors with OR 3.11 95% CI [1.04, 4.99], p < 0.0001; i2 = 6%. However, similar benefit was observed between both regimens in presence of a single intermediate risk factor OR 1.80 95% CI [0.96, 3.36], p = 0.07; i2 = 0%. Grade 3 or 4 haematological toxicity among patients receiving post-surgical adjuvant RT versus adjuvant CRT showed increased association of toxicity with adjuvant CRT with OR 7.73 95%CI [3.40, 17.59], p < 0.0001; i2 = 62%. Adjuvant CRT shows favourable RFS and OS in ESCC patients with multiple intermediate risk factors. CRT also showed greater incidence of grade 3 or 4 haematological and non-haematiological toxicity, however, the same could be well tolerated when used within the recommended dosage.

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
辅助放化疗与放疗对早期宫颈癌中危险因素患者的比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
中间危险因素的存在降低了根治性子宫切除术的可预测性,要求对早期宫颈癌(ESCC)患者使用辅助治疗。辅助放疗(RT)和放化疗(CRT)已被广泛应用,但存在不同的疗效和安全性问题。因此,本系统回顾和荟萃分析的目的是更新现有证据,并评估术后辅助RT与辅助CRT对ESCC中间危险因素患者的生存率和并发症/毒性的影响。结合相关关键词检索PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science (WOS)和CENTRAL。所有在无复发生存期(RFS)、总生存期(OS)和毒性/并发症方面比较辅助RT与CRT对具有中等危险因素的ESCC患者的结果的研究都被纳入。进行了定性和定量分析。回顾性队列研究采用Newcastle-Ottawa量表(NOS)进行偏倚风险评估,随机临床试验采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具。本综述纳入了11项回顾性队列研究和2项随机临床试验。辅助CRT对合并多种中间危险因素的ESCC患者有更好的RFS, OR为3.11 95% CI [1.04, 4.99], p <0.0001;i2 = 6%然而,存在单一中间危险因素的两种方案之间观察到相似的益处OR为1.80 95% CI [0.96, 3.36], p = 0.07;i2 = 0%。术后接受辅助放射治疗的患者与接受辅助放射治疗的患者相比,3级或4级血液学毒性与辅助放射治疗的相关性增加,or为7.73 95%CI [3.40, 17.59], p <0.0001;i2 = 62%。辅助CRT显示有多种中间危险因素的ESCC患者有良好的RFS和OS。CRT也显示出更高的3级或4级血液学和非血液学毒性发生率,然而,在推荐剂量内使用时,同样可以很好地耐受。
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
3.60
自引率
23.80%
发文量
207
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology is a peer-reviewed journal and open access publishing editorials, reviews, original articles, short communications, case reports, research letters, correspondence and letters to the editor in the field of obstetrics and gynecology. The aims of the journal are to: 1.Publish cutting-edge, innovative and topical research that addresses screening, diagnosis, management and care in women''s health 2.Deliver evidence-based information 3.Promote the sharing of clinical experience 4.Address women-related health promotion The journal provides comprehensive coverage of topics in obstetrics & gynecology and women''s health including maternal-fetal medicine, reproductive endocrinology/infertility, and gynecologic oncology. Taiwan Association of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board 45,X/47,XXX/46,XX at amniocentesis in a pregnancy associated with a favorable fetal outcome and the karyotype of 45,X/46,XX in the placenta Prenatal diagnosis and molecular cytogenetic characterization of mosaicism for a small supernumerary marker chromosome derived from chromosome 21q11.2-q21.1 in a pregnancy Prenatal diagnosis of a familial Xp22.12 duplication in a pregnancy with a favorable fetal outcome Mosaic 17q24.3q25.3 duplication at amniocentesis in a pregnancy associated with a favorable fetal outcome in a male fetus
×
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