Efficacy of Anti-VEGF Drugs Based Combination Therapies in Recurrent Glioblastoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Vinod Solipuram, Ramin Soltani, B P Venkatesulu, Saketh Annam, Firoozeh Alavian, Sorayya Ghasemi
{"title":"Efficacy of Anti-VEGF Drugs Based Combination Therapies in Recurrent Glioblastoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Vinod Solipuram, Ramin Soltani, B P Venkatesulu, Saketh Annam, Firoozeh Alavian, Sorayya Ghasemi","doi":"10.2174/2772432817666220517163609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (rGBM) has a grim prognosis, with current therapies offering no survival benefit. Several combination therapies involving anti-VEGF agents have been studied with mixed results.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, ISI, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, without language limitations. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), objective response ratio (ORR), and grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Estimates for PFS and OS were calculated as random effects hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the generic inverse variance method. Estimates for ORR and grade ≥ 3 adverse events were calculated using a random-effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and a total of 1994 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant improvement in PFS (HR 0.84; 95% CI (0.68, 1.03); I<sup>2</sup>=81%), OS (HR 0.99; 95% CI (0.88, 1.12); I<sup>2</sup>=0%), and ORR (RR 1.36; 95% CI (0.96, 1.92); I<sup>2</sup>=61%) in the combination therapy group when compared to the control group. Significantly higher grade ≥ 3 adverse events (RR 1.30; 95% CI (1.14, 1.48); I<sup>2</sup>=47%) were seen in the combination therapy when compared to the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our analysis showed that the use of combination therapy with anti-VEGF agents did not offer any benefit in PFS, OS, or ORR. In contrast, it had significantly higher grade 3-5 adverse events. Further studies are needed to identify effective therapies in rGBM that can improve survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":29871,"journal":{"name":"Current Reviews in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology","volume":"1 1","pages":"173-183"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Reviews in Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/2772432817666220517163609","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (rGBM) has a grim prognosis, with current therapies offering no survival benefit. Several combination therapies involving anti-VEGF agents have been studied with mixed results.

Methods: A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, ISI, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, without language limitations. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), objective response ratio (ORR), and grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Estimates for PFS and OS were calculated as random effects hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the generic inverse variance method. Estimates for ORR and grade ≥ 3 adverse events were calculated using a random-effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method.

Results: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and a total of 1994 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant improvement in PFS (HR 0.84; 95% CI (0.68, 1.03); I2=81%), OS (HR 0.99; 95% CI (0.88, 1.12); I2=0%), and ORR (RR 1.36; 95% CI (0.96, 1.92); I2=61%) in the combination therapy group when compared to the control group. Significantly higher grade ≥ 3 adverse events (RR 1.30; 95% CI (1.14, 1.48); I2=47%) were seen in the combination therapy when compared to the control group.

Conclusion: Our analysis showed that the use of combination therapy with anti-VEGF agents did not offer any benefit in PFS, OS, or ORR. In contrast, it had significantly higher grade 3-5 adverse events. Further studies are needed to identify effective therapies in rGBM that can improve survival.

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
抗vegf药物联合治疗复发性胶质母细胞瘤的疗效:系统评价和荟萃分析。
背景复发性多形性胶质母细胞瘤(rGBM)预后不佳,目前的治疗方法对生存没有益处。已经研究了几种涉及抗VEGF药物的联合疗法,结果喜忧参半。方法使用PubMed、Scopus、ISI、Embase和Cochrane Library五个电子数据库进行系统搜索,不受语言限制。感兴趣的主要结果是无进展生存期(PFS)。次要结果为总生存率(OS)、客观缓解率(ORR)和≥3级不良事件。PFS和OS的估计值采用通用逆方差法计算为具有95%置信区间(CI)的随机效应危险比(HR)。ORR≥3级不良事件的估计值采用随机效应风险比(RR),95%置信区间(CI)采用Mantel Haenszel方法计算。结果这些研究符合纳入标准,共有1994名患者被纳入分析。PFS无统计学显著改善(HR 0.84;95%CI(0.68,1.03);I2=81%),OS(HR 0.99;95%CI(0.88,1.12);I2=0%),ORR(rr1.36;95%CI(0.96,1.92);I2=61%)。≥3次不良事件分级明显更高(RR 1.30;95%CI(1.14,1.48);I2=47%)。结论我们的分析表明,联合使用抗VEGF药物对PFS、OS或ORR没有任何益处。相反,它有明显更高的3-5级不良事件。需要进一步的研究来确定可以提高生存率的rGBM的有效治疗方法。
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
4.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
55
期刊最新文献
Frontiers in Pulmonary Hypertension: A Comprehensive Insight of Etiological Advances. Pharmacogenetic Variations in Arab Populations: Clinical Implications for Personalized Drug Therapy. Probiotic: A Gut Microbiota-Based Therapeutic Approaches for the Treatment of Parkinson's Disease. Influence of the Gut Microbiota, Metabolism and Environment on Neuropsychiatric Disorders. Clinical Application of Pharmacogenomics in the Administration of Common Cardiovascular Medications.
×
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