舒尼替尼替代方案(AS)在亚洲和非亚洲患者群体中治疗转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)的安全性和有效性的比较评价:一项荟萃分析

IF 1.1 Q4 ONCOLOGY Kidney Cancer Pub Date : 2022-01-20 DOI:10.3233/kca-210122
A. Joshi, Ishan J. Patel, Pratiksha Kapse, Manmohan Singh
{"title":"舒尼替尼替代方案(AS)在亚洲和非亚洲患者群体中治疗转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)的安全性和有效性的比较评价:一项荟萃分析","authors":"A. Joshi, Ishan J. Patel, Pratiksha Kapse, Manmohan Singh","doi":"10.3233/kca-210122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using traditional schedule (TS, 4/2) of Sunitinib is associated with higher adverse effects compared to the alternate schedule (AS, 2/1 upfront or when switched from TS). Objective: This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety, efficacy, and percentage of patients requiring dose reduction or dose interruption between Asian (AP) and non-Asian population (NAP) receiving AS of sunitinib. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were searched to identify studies published in the English language between May 2009- May 2019, which included patients (>18 years) with mRCC receiving AS of sunitinib. Data were analyzed using the random effect model and t-test. P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 1922, 16 studies were included (eight AP, eight NAP). Among all grade AEs, mucositis (RR:0.22; 95% CI:0.12–0.40), cardiotoxicity (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.31–0.88), nausea (RR:0.21; 95% CI: 0.10–0.44), hand-foot syndrome (RR:0.33; 95% CI:0.13–0.83), rash (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.34–0.79), and aspartate transaminase (RR:0.57; 95% CI:0.33–0.98) were more common in AP. Leukopenia (RR:2.57; 95% CI:1.47–4.49), proteinemia (RR:4.45; 95% CI:2.12–9.33), and stomatitis (RR:4.33; 95% CI:2.6–7.23) occurred more commonly in NAP. Further, PFS was significantly longer in NAP, while longer OS was observed in AP (p <  0.001). Dose reduction was significantly higher in AP than NAP (52.08% vs. 40.6%, p = 0.0088). Conclusion: Safety profile of AS of sunitinib was similar with variations in the efficacy, dose reduction between AP and NAP. Sunitinib dose or schedule modification may mitigate AEs and enhance efficacy outcomes in mRCC by extending the treatment duration.","PeriodicalId":17823,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Alternate Schedule (AS) of Sunitinib in Asian and Non-Asian Patient Population for the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer (mRCC): A Meta-Analysis\",\"authors\":\"A. Joshi, Ishan J. Patel, Pratiksha Kapse, Manmohan Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/kca-210122\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using traditional schedule (TS, 4/2) of Sunitinib is associated with higher adverse effects compared to the alternate schedule (AS, 2/1 upfront or when switched from TS). Objective: This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety, efficacy, and percentage of patients requiring dose reduction or dose interruption between Asian (AP) and non-Asian population (NAP) receiving AS of sunitinib. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were searched to identify studies published in the English language between May 2009- May 2019, which included patients (>18 years) with mRCC receiving AS of sunitinib. Data were analyzed using the random effect model and t-test. P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 1922, 16 studies were included (eight AP, eight NAP). Among all grade AEs, mucositis (RR:0.22; 95% CI:0.12–0.40), cardiotoxicity (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.31–0.88), nausea (RR:0.21; 95% CI: 0.10–0.44), hand-foot syndrome (RR:0.33; 95% CI:0.13–0.83), rash (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.34–0.79), and aspartate transaminase (RR:0.57; 95% CI:0.33–0.98) were more common in AP. Leukopenia (RR:2.57; 95% CI:1.47–4.49), proteinemia (RR:4.45; 95% CI:2.12–9.33), and stomatitis (RR:4.33; 95% CI:2.6–7.23) occurred more commonly in NAP. Further, PFS was significantly longer in NAP, while longer OS was observed in AP (p <  0.001). Dose reduction was significantly higher in AP than NAP (52.08% vs. 40.6%, p = 0.0088). Conclusion: Safety profile of AS of sunitinib was similar with variations in the efficacy, dose reduction between AP and NAP. Sunitinib dose or schedule modification may mitigate AEs and enhance efficacy outcomes in mRCC by extending the treatment duration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/kca-210122\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/kca-210122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:使用舒尼替尼的传统方案(TS, 4/2)治疗转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)与替代方案(AS, 2/1前期或从TS切换时)相比,不良反应更高。目的:本荟萃分析旨在比较亚洲(AP)和非亚洲(NAP)人群接受舒尼替尼AS治疗的安全性、有效性和需要减量或中断剂量的患者百分比。方法:检索电子数据库(PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library),以确定2009年5月至2019年5月期间以英语发表的研究,其中包括接受舒尼替尼治疗的mRCC患者(bb0 - 18岁)。数据分析采用随机效应模型和t检验。P < 0.05为差异有统计学意义。结果:1922年共纳入16项研究(8项AP, 8项NAP)。在所有ae中,粘膜炎(RR:0.22;95% CI: 0.12-0.40),心脏毒性(RR: 0.52;95% CI: 0.31-0.88),恶心(RR:0.21;95% CI: 0.10-0.44),手足综合征(RR:0.33;95% CI: 0.13-0.83),皮疹(RR: 0.52;95% CI: 0.34-0.79)和天冬氨酸转氨酶(RR:0.57;95% CI: 0.33-0.98)在AP中更为常见。白细胞减少(RR:2.57;95% CI: 1.47-4.49),蛋白血症(RR:4.45;95% CI: 2.12-9.33)和口炎(RR:4.33;95% CI: 2.6-7.23)更常见于NAP。此外,NAP患者的PFS明显更长,AP患者的OS更长(p < 0.001)。AP组的剂量减少率明显高于NAP组(52.08%比40.6%,p = 0.0088)。结论:舒尼替尼的AS安全性相似,但AP与NAP在疗效、剂量减少方面存在差异。调整舒尼替尼的剂量或方案可以通过延长治疗时间来减轻mRCC的不良反应并提高疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparative Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Alternate Schedule (AS) of Sunitinib in Asian and Non-Asian Patient Population for the Treatment of Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer (mRCC): A Meta-Analysis
Background: Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) using traditional schedule (TS, 4/2) of Sunitinib is associated with higher adverse effects compared to the alternate schedule (AS, 2/1 upfront or when switched from TS). Objective: This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety, efficacy, and percentage of patients requiring dose reduction or dose interruption between Asian (AP) and non-Asian population (NAP) receiving AS of sunitinib. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) were searched to identify studies published in the English language between May 2009- May 2019, which included patients (>18 years) with mRCC receiving AS of sunitinib. Data were analyzed using the random effect model and t-test. P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Of 1922, 16 studies were included (eight AP, eight NAP). Among all grade AEs, mucositis (RR:0.22; 95% CI:0.12–0.40), cardiotoxicity (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.31–0.88), nausea (RR:0.21; 95% CI: 0.10–0.44), hand-foot syndrome (RR:0.33; 95% CI:0.13–0.83), rash (RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.34–0.79), and aspartate transaminase (RR:0.57; 95% CI:0.33–0.98) were more common in AP. Leukopenia (RR:2.57; 95% CI:1.47–4.49), proteinemia (RR:4.45; 95% CI:2.12–9.33), and stomatitis (RR:4.33; 95% CI:2.6–7.23) occurred more commonly in NAP. Further, PFS was significantly longer in NAP, while longer OS was observed in AP (p <  0.001). Dose reduction was significantly higher in AP than NAP (52.08% vs. 40.6%, p = 0.0088). Conclusion: Safety profile of AS of sunitinib was similar with variations in the efficacy, dose reduction between AP and NAP. Sunitinib dose or schedule modification may mitigate AEs and enhance efficacy outcomes in mRCC by extending the treatment duration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Kidney Cancer
Kidney Cancer Multiple-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
期刊最新文献
Emerging Antibody-Drug Conjugate Therapies and Targets for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Genomic and Transcriptomic Characteristics of Tumors of Patients with Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma Clinically Benefiting from First-Line Treatment with Ipilimumab Plus Nivolumab Nephrotoxicity Associated with Contemporary Renal Cell Carcinoma Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Targeted Literature Review of Outcomes to Initial Systemic Therapy for Advanced/Metastatic Non-Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma in Observational Studies Fibrinogen Levels in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Nivolumab: Results of a Multicenter Prospective Trial
×
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