Effectiveness and Safety of Allopurinol, Febuxostat, and Rasburicase in the Prevention of Tumor Lysis Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

E. M. Masamayor, J. J. Besa, C. S. Tan-Lim, A. Pajes, Lia M. Palileo-Villanueva
{"title":"Effectiveness and Safety of Allopurinol, Febuxostat, and Rasburicase in the Prevention of Tumor Lysis Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis","authors":"E. M. Masamayor, J. J. Besa, C. S. Tan-Lim, A. Pajes, Lia M. Palileo-Villanueva","doi":"10.1055/s-0042-1750701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although prevention is vital in managing tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), no study directly compares various regimens. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of urate-lowering agents in preventing TLS. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials involving adults with hematologic or solid malignancies on chemotherapy or cytoreductive agents given allopurinol, febuxostat, or rasburicase alone or in combination at any dose, form, or frequency published in English by December 2021. Outcomes included laboratory and clinical TLS expressed as relative risks, adverse events as described by authors, and mean serum uric acid (sUA) as mean differences of area under the curve. A network of meta-analysis and post-hoc meta-analysis based on TLS risk using a random-effects model was done using Stata 14.0 and Review Manager 5.3, respectively. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Three studies with a total of 633 participants given allopurinol, febuxostat, rasburicase, or rasburicase combined with allopurinol were included. Rasburicase is more effective than allopurinol in preventing laboratory TLS (relative risk: 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32–0.81) based on moderate quality evidence. No significant differences were observed in clinical TLS. Adverse events were attributable to toxicities of chemotherapy. Rasburicase alone or in combination with allopurinol was better than allopurinol or febuxostat alone in reducing sUA level. Febuxostat is more effective than allopurinol in lowering sUA levels among patients at high-risk of TLS (mean difference −125.75; 95% CI: −223.47 to −28.02). Rasburicase may be the most effective agent in preventing laboratory TLS and maintaining low sUA levels.","PeriodicalId":31357,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1750701","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Although prevention is vital in managing tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), no study directly compares various regimens. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of urate-lowering agents in preventing TLS. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials involving adults with hematologic or solid malignancies on chemotherapy or cytoreductive agents given allopurinol, febuxostat, or rasburicase alone or in combination at any dose, form, or frequency published in English by December 2021. Outcomes included laboratory and clinical TLS expressed as relative risks, adverse events as described by authors, and mean serum uric acid (sUA) as mean differences of area under the curve. A network of meta-analysis and post-hoc meta-analysis based on TLS risk using a random-effects model was done using Stata 14.0 and Review Manager 5.3, respectively. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Three studies with a total of 633 participants given allopurinol, febuxostat, rasburicase, or rasburicase combined with allopurinol were included. Rasburicase is more effective than allopurinol in preventing laboratory TLS (relative risk: 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32–0.81) based on moderate quality evidence. No significant differences were observed in clinical TLS. Adverse events were attributable to toxicities of chemotherapy. Rasburicase alone or in combination with allopurinol was better than allopurinol or febuxostat alone in reducing sUA level. Febuxostat is more effective than allopurinol in lowering sUA levels among patients at high-risk of TLS (mean difference −125.75; 95% CI: −223.47 to −28.02). Rasburicase may be the most effective agent in preventing laboratory TLS and maintaining low sUA levels.
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
别嘌呤醇、非布司他和Rasburicase预防肿瘤溶解综合征的有效性和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析
虽然预防对治疗肿瘤溶解综合征(TLS)至关重要,但没有研究直接比较不同的治疗方案。本研究比较了降尿酸药物预防TLS的有效性和安全性。数据库检索了在2021年12月之前以英文发表的任何剂量、形式或频率,涉及接受化疗或细胞减减剂的成人血液学或实体恶性肿瘤患者的随机对照试验,这些试验单独或联合给予别嘌呤醇、非布司他或rasburicase。结果包括实验室和临床TLS表示为相对风险,作者描述的不良事件,平均血清尿酸(sUA)表示为曲线下面积的平均差异。使用Stata 14.0和Review Manager 5.3分别对基于TLS风险的随机效应模型进行网络meta分析和事后meta分析。使用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。三项研究共纳入633名受试者,给予别嘌呤醇、非布司他、毛囊酶或毛囊酶联合别嘌呤醇。Rasburicase预防实验室TLS比别嘌呤醇更有效(相对危险度:0.51;95%可信区间[CI]: 0.32-0.81)。临床TLS差异无统计学意义。不良事件可归因于化疗的毒性。Rasburicase单用或联用别嘌呤醇在降低sUA水平上优于别嘌呤醇或非布司他单用。在TLS高危患者中,非布司他比别嘌呤醇更有效地降低sUA水平(平均差- 125.75;95% CI:−223.47 ~−28.02)。Rasburicase可能是预防实验室TLS和维持低sUA水平最有效的药物。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Equitable and affordable cancer program in Assam: An initiative of Tata trusts and Government of Assam BCOR overexpression in pediatric sarcomas- a morphologic continuum of mixed round and spindle cell tumors Assessment of swallowing dysfunction using fees (flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing) in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy Hodgkin lymphoma and bone marrow tuberculosis: A coincidence Barriers to timely lung cancer diagnosis and treatment in a Philippine tertiary hospital
×
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