Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for recurrent high-grade glioma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

被引:3
作者
Xu, Yanan [1 ,2 ]
Guan, Haijing [1 ]
Yu, Kefu [1 ]
Ji, Nan [3 ]
Zhao, Zhigang [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Pharm, Beijing, Peoples R China
[2] Capital Med Univ, Sch Pharm, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Capital Med Univ, Beijing Tiantan Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
high-grade glioma; recurrent; pharmacotherapy; network meta-analysis; systematic review; efficacy; safety; CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM; PHASE-II; GLIOBLASTOMA; COMBINATION; BEVACIZUMAB; LOMUSTINE; TEMOZOLOMIDE; PROCARBAZINE; THERAPY; TRIAL;
D O I
10.3389/fphar.2023.1191480
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of treatments for patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas.Methods: Electronic databases including Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to high-grade gliomas. The inclusion of qualified literature and extraction of data were conducted by two independent reviewers. The primary clinical outcome measures of network meta-analysis were overall survival (OS) while progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and adverse event of grade 3 or higher were secondary measures.Results: 22 eligible trials were included in the systematic review, involving 3423 patients and 30 treatment regimens. Network meta-analysis included 11 treatments of 10 trials for OS and PFS, 10 treatments of 8 trials for ORR, and 8 treatments of 7 trials for adverse event grade 3 or higher. Regorafenib showed significant benefits in terms of OS in paired comparison with several treatments such as bevacizumab (hazard ratio (HR), 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21-0.73), bevacizumab plus carboplatin (HR, 0.33; 95%CI, 0.16-0.68), bevacizumab plus dasatinib (HR, 0.44; 95%CI, 0.21-0.93), bevacizumab plus irinotecan (HR, 0.4; 95%CI, 0.21-0.74), bevacizumab plus lomustine (90 mg/m(2)) (HR, 0.53; 95%CI, 0.33-0.84), bevacizumab plus lomustine (110 mg/m(2)) (HR, 0.21; 95%CI, 0.06-0.7), bevacizumab plus vorinostat (HR, 0.42; 95%CI, 0.18-0.99), lomustine (HR, 0.5; 95%CI, 0.33-0.76), and nivolumab (HR, 0.38; 95%CI, 0.19-0.73). For PFS, only the hazard ratio between bevacizumab plus vorinostat and bevacizumab plus lomustine (90 mg/m(2)) was significant (HR,0.51; 95%CI, 0.27-0.95). Lomustine and nivolumab conferred worse ORR. Safety analysis showed fotemustine as the best and bevacizumab plus temozolomide as the worst.Conclusion: The results suggested that regorafenib and bevacizumab plus lomustine (90 mg/m(2)) provide improvements in terms of survival but may have poor ORR in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] BOIARDI A, 1992, J NEURO-ONCOL, V12, P153
  • [2] Temozolomide Versus Procarbazine, Lomustine, and Vincristine in Recurrent High-Grade Glioma
    Brada, Michael
    Stenning, Sally
    Gabe, Rhian
    Thompson, Lindsay C.
    Levy, David
    Rampling, Roy
    Erridge, Sara
    Saran, Frank
    Gattamaneni, Rao
    Hopkins, Kirsten
    Beall, Sarah
    Collins, V. Peter
    Lee, Siow-Ming
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2010, 28 (30) : 4601 - 4608
  • [3] A Randomized Phase II Trial (TAMIGA) Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Continuous Bevacizumab Through Multiple Lines of Treatment for Recurrent Glioblastoma
    Brandes, Alba A.
    Gil-Gil, Miguel
    Saran, Frank
    Carpentier, Antoine F.
    Nowak, Anna K.
    Mason, Warren
    Zagonel, Vittorina
    Dubois, Francois
    Finocchiaro, Gaetano
    Fountzilas, George
    Cernea, Dana Michaela
    Chinot, Oliver
    Anghel, Rodica
    Ghiringhelli, Francois
    Beauchesne, Patrick
    Lombardi, Giuseppe
    Franceschi, Enrico
    Makrutzki, Martina
    Mpofu, Chiedzo
    Urban, Hans-Joerg
    Pichler, Josef
    [J]. ONCOLOGIST, 2019, 24 (04) : 521 - 528
  • [4] AVAREG: a phase 2, randomized, noncomparative study of fotemustine or bevacizumab for patients with recurrent glioblastoma
    Brandes, Alba A.
    Finocchiaro, Gaetano
    Zagonel, Vittorina
    Reni, Michele
    Caserta, Claudia
    Fabi, Alessandra
    Clavarezza, Matteo
    Maiello, Evaristo
    Eoli, Marica
    Lombardi, Giuseppe
    Monteforte, Marta
    Proietti, Emanuela
    Agati, Raffaele
    Eusebi, Vincenzo
    Franceschi, Enrico
    [J]. NEURO-ONCOLOGY, 2016, 18 (09) : 1304 - 1312
  • [5] Radiation therapy for glioblastoma: Executive summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline
    Cabrera, Alvin R.
    Kirkpatrick, John P.
    Fiveash, John B.
    Shih, Helen A.
    Koay, Eugene J.
    Lutz, Stephen
    Petit, Joshua
    Chao, Samuel T.
    Brown, Paul D.
    Vogelbaum, Michael
    Reardon, David A.
    Chakravarti, Arnab
    Wen, Patrick Y.
    Chang, Eric
    [J]. PRACTICAL RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2016, 6 (04) : 217 - 225
  • [6] The cost and value of glioblastoma therapy
    Cagney, Daniel N.
    Alexander, Brian M.
    [J]. EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTICANCER THERAPY, 2017, 17 (08) : 657 - 659
  • [7] Graphical Tools for Network Meta-Analysis in STATA
    Chaimani, Anna
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Mavridis, Dimitris
    Spyridonos, Panagiota
    Salanti, Georgia
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (10):
  • [8] Clinical and NGS predictors of response to regorafenib in recurrent glioblastoma
    Chiesa, Silvia
    Mangraviti, Antonella
    Martini, Maurizio
    Cenci, Tonia
    Mazzarella, Ciro
    Gaudino, Simona
    Bracci, Serena
    Martino, Antonella
    Della Pepa, Giuseppe M.
    Offi, Martina
    Gessi, Marco
    Russo, Rosellina
    Martucci, Matia
    Bartoli, Francesco Beghella
    Larocca, Luigi M.
    Lauretti, Liverana
    Olivi, Alessandro
    Pallini, Roberto
    Balducci, Mario
    D'Alessandris, Quintino Giorgio
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [9] Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
    Cumpston, Miranda
    Li, Tianjing
    Page, Matthew J.
    Chandler, Jacqueline
    Welch, Vivian A.
    Higgins, Julian P. T.
    Thomas, James
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2019, (10):
  • [10] Checking consistency in mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis
    Dias, S.
    Welton, N. J.
    Caldwell, D. M.
    Ades, A. E.
    [J]. STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2010, 29 (7-8) : 932 - 944