Xianan Guo, Yunxiang Zhou, Kun Zhang, Wei Lu, Xi Zhong, Shijie Wu, Lu Shen, Huihui Chen, Yiding Chen
{"title":"基于CDK4/6抑制剂的一线联合用药治疗HR+/HER2-晚期乳腺癌:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析","authors":"Xianan Guo, Yunxiang Zhou, Kun Zhang, Wei Lu, Xi Zhong, Shijie Wu, Lu Shen, Huihui Chen, Yiding Chen","doi":"10.1111/jebm.12571","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>International guidelines recommend cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i)-based first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, direct drug comparisons are lacking. We aimed to identify the most effective and safe therapy through network meta-analysis (NMA).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and OpenGrey up to September 30, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing endocrine therapy alone or in combination with CDK4/6i as first-line endocrine treatment for HR+/HER2− ABC patients. The hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and relative risks for objective response rate and adverse events (AEs) were available in selected trials. We performed a Bayesian NMA following PRISMA guidelines.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirteen RCTs, involving 10 treatments, were included. Most studies were at low risk of bias. Regarding PFS, ribociclib+fulvestrant ranked first with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 85.0%, followed by dalpiciclib+nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) (SUCRA = 78.9%). Considering OS, the top three ranked treatments were ribociclib+fulvestrant (SUCRA = 94.1%), abemaciclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 69.9%), and ribociclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 68.5%). Out of four CDK4/6is, ribociclib minimized the grade 3/4 AEs, while dalpiciclib demonstrated the worst safety. Publication bias could not be ignored in our analyses, and the certainty of evidence was downgraded primarily due to imprecision.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Ribociclib+fulvestrant probably represents the best option in a first-line setting. When combined with NSAI, dalpiciclib likely showed the best efficacy but the worst safety. Abemaciclib+NSAI and ribociclib+NSAI could also be promising treatments, while palbociclib presented inferiority. (PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42022370271)</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"17 1","pages":"106-118"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"First-line CDK4/6 inhibitor-based combinations for HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Xianan Guo, Yunxiang Zhou, Kun Zhang, Wei Lu, Xi Zhong, Shijie Wu, Lu Shen, Huihui Chen, Yiding Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jebm.12571\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>International guidelines recommend cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i)-based first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, direct drug comparisons are lacking. We aimed to identify the most effective and safe therapy through network meta-analysis (NMA).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and OpenGrey up to September 30, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing endocrine therapy alone or in combination with CDK4/6i as first-line endocrine treatment for HR+/HER2− ABC patients. The hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and relative risks for objective response rate and adverse events (AEs) were available in selected trials. We performed a Bayesian NMA following PRISMA guidelines.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Thirteen RCTs, involving 10 treatments, were included. Most studies were at low risk of bias. Regarding PFS, ribociclib+fulvestrant ranked first with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 85.0%, followed by dalpiciclib+nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) (SUCRA = 78.9%). Considering OS, the top three ranked treatments were ribociclib+fulvestrant (SUCRA = 94.1%), abemaciclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 69.9%), and ribociclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 68.5%). Out of four CDK4/6is, ribociclib minimized the grade 3/4 AEs, while dalpiciclib demonstrated the worst safety. Publication bias could not be ignored in our analyses, and the certainty of evidence was downgraded primarily due to imprecision.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Ribociclib+fulvestrant probably represents the best option in a first-line setting. When combined with NSAI, dalpiciclib likely showed the best efficacy but the worst safety. Abemaciclib+NSAI and ribociclib+NSAI could also be promising treatments, while palbociclib presented inferiority. (PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42022370271)</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"106-118\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12571\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12571","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:国际指南推荐对激素受体阳性、人表皮生长因子受体2阴性(HR+/HER2-)的晚期乳腺癌(ABC)进行基于细胞周期蛋白依赖性激酶4/6抑制剂(CDK4/6i)的一线治疗。然而,目前还缺乏直接的药物比较。我们旨在通过网络荟萃分析(NMA)找出最有效、最安全的疗法:我们检索了截至 2023 年 9 月 30 日的 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 和 OpenGrey。符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验评估了内分泌治疗单独或与CDK4/6i联用作为HR+/HER2-ABC患者一线内分泌治疗的情况。部分试验提供了无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)的危险比以及客观反应率和不良事件(AEs)的相对风险。我们按照 PRISMA 指南进行了贝叶斯 NMA:结果:共纳入 13 项 RCT,涉及 10 种治疗方法。大多数研究的偏倚风险较低。在PFS方面,ribociclib+氟维司群排名第一,累积排名曲线下表面值(SUCRA)为85.0%,其次是dalpiciclib+非甾体芳香化酶抑制剂(NSAI)(SUCRA = 78.9%)。考虑到OS,排名前三的治疗方法分别是ribociclib+氟维司群(SUCRA=94.1%)、abemaciclib+NSAI(SUCRA=69.9%)和ribociclib+NSAI(SUCRA=68.5%)。在四种CDK4/6is中,ribociclib将3/4级AE降至最低,而dalpiciclib的安全性最差。我们的分析不能忽视发表偏倚,证据的确定性主要由于不精确而被降级:结论:Ribociclib+氟维司群可能是一线治疗的最佳选择。结论:Ribociclib+氟维司群可能是一线治疗中的最佳选择。当与非甾体抗炎药物(NSAI)联合使用时,dalpiciclib的疗效可能最好,但安全性最差。Abemaciclib+NSAI和ribociclib+NSAI也是很有前景的治疗方法,而palbociclib则表现较差。(PROSPERO 注册号:CRD42022370271)。
First-line CDK4/6 inhibitor-based combinations for HR+/HER2– advanced breast cancer: A Bayesian network meta-analysis
Background
International guidelines recommend cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i)-based first-line therapy for hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, direct drug comparisons are lacking. We aimed to identify the most effective and safe therapy through network meta-analysis (NMA).
Methods
We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and OpenGrey up to September 30, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing endocrine therapy alone or in combination with CDK4/6i as first-line endocrine treatment for HR+/HER2− ABC patients. The hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and relative risks for objective response rate and adverse events (AEs) were available in selected trials. We performed a Bayesian NMA following PRISMA guidelines.
Results
Thirteen RCTs, involving 10 treatments, were included. Most studies were at low risk of bias. Regarding PFS, ribociclib+fulvestrant ranked first with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 85.0%, followed by dalpiciclib+nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) (SUCRA = 78.9%). Considering OS, the top three ranked treatments were ribociclib+fulvestrant (SUCRA = 94.1%), abemaciclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 69.9%), and ribociclib+NSAI (SUCRA = 68.5%). Out of four CDK4/6is, ribociclib minimized the grade 3/4 AEs, while dalpiciclib demonstrated the worst safety. Publication bias could not be ignored in our analyses, and the certainty of evidence was downgraded primarily due to imprecision.
Conclusions
Ribociclib+fulvestrant probably represents the best option in a first-line setting. When combined with NSAI, dalpiciclib likely showed the best efficacy but the worst safety. Abemaciclib+NSAI and ribociclib+NSAI could also be promising treatments, while palbociclib presented inferiority. (PROSPERO Registration No. CRD42022370271)
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB) is an esteemed international healthcare and medical decision-making journal, dedicated to publishing groundbreaking research outcomes in evidence-based decision-making, research, practice, and education. Serving as the official English-language journal of the Cochrane China Centre and West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we eagerly welcome editorials, commentaries, and systematic reviews encompassing various topics such as clinical trials, policy, drug and patient safety, education, and knowledge translation.