Review of Network Meta-Analyses on the Efficacy of Chemopreventive Agents on Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Cancer Control Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-20 DOI:10.1177/10732748251344481
Yibing Ruan, Chantelle Carbonell, Karen Brown, Robert J Hilsden, Darren R Brenner
{"title":"Review of Network Meta-Analyses on the Efficacy of Chemopreventive Agents on Colorectal Adenomas and Cancer.","authors":"Yibing Ruan, Chantelle Carbonell, Karen Brown, Robert J Hilsden, Darren R Brenner","doi":"10.1177/10732748251344481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Colorectal adenomas (CRAs) are a crucial precursor for CRC and a target for preventive strategies. Recent network meta-analyses (NMAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that chemopreventive agents (CPAs) are associated with reductions in CRC incidence. However, the quality of this evidence is low due to significant variability in the methods and types of studies assessed.PurposeOur study reviewed the efficacy and safety of CPAs on CRAs or CRCs evaluated in NMAs of RCTs and assessed the quality of all published NMAs on CPAs.Research DesignWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published from inception to July 29, 2024. We included all NMAs assessing the efficacy and safety of CPAs on CRC in both average-risk (general population) and high-risk (previous history of adenoma/CRC) populations. ResultsNine NMAs comparing 15 different interventions were included. Aspirin and non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as celecoxib were the most studied. Aspirin demonstrated efficacy against the development of any CRA and low-dose aspirin was consistently more protective than high-dose aspirin. However, the effect of aspirin against advanced CRA was not statistically significant. Concerns for long-term aspirin use included an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and ulceration, but when evaluating all serious adverse events (SAEs), aspirin users did not have an increased risk compared to controls. Non-aspirin NSAIDs showed better efficacy against advanced CRA. However, the use of non-aspirin NSAIDs such as celecoxib was associated with significantly increased risk of SAEs, particularly cardiovascular disease events.ConclusionsConsidering the balance of efficacy and safety, low-dose aspirin is currently the best option for chemoprevention of CRA/CRC. Future research is needed to better characterize the patient subgroups that benefit most and to develop new, more effective CPAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":49093,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Control","volume":"32 ","pages":"10732748251344481"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12093012/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10732748251344481","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Colorectal adenomas (CRAs) are a crucial precursor for CRC and a target for preventive strategies. Recent network meta-analyses (NMAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) suggest that chemopreventive agents (CPAs) are associated with reductions in CRC incidence. However, the quality of this evidence is low due to significant variability in the methods and types of studies assessed.PurposeOur study reviewed the efficacy and safety of CPAs on CRAs or CRCs evaluated in NMAs of RCTs and assessed the quality of all published NMAs on CPAs.Research DesignWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published from inception to July 29, 2024. We included all NMAs assessing the efficacy and safety of CPAs on CRC in both average-risk (general population) and high-risk (previous history of adenoma/CRC) populations. ResultsNine NMAs comparing 15 different interventions were included. Aspirin and non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as celecoxib were the most studied. Aspirin demonstrated efficacy against the development of any CRA and low-dose aspirin was consistently more protective than high-dose aspirin. However, the effect of aspirin against advanced CRA was not statistically significant. Concerns for long-term aspirin use included an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and ulceration, but when evaluating all serious adverse events (SAEs), aspirin users did not have an increased risk compared to controls. Non-aspirin NSAIDs showed better efficacy against advanced CRA. However, the use of non-aspirin NSAIDs such as celecoxib was associated with significantly increased risk of SAEs, particularly cardiovascular disease events.ConclusionsConsidering the balance of efficacy and safety, low-dose aspirin is currently the best option for chemoprevention of CRA/CRC. Future research is needed to better characterize the patient subgroups that benefit most and to develop new, more effective CPAs.

化学预防药物对结直肠腺瘤和癌症疗效的网络荟萃分析综述。
结直肠癌(CRC)是全球第三大确诊癌症,也是癌症相关死亡的第二大原因。结直肠腺瘤(CRAs)是结直肠癌的重要前兆,也是预防策略的目标。最近随机对照试验(rct)的网络荟萃分析(NMAs)表明,化学预防药物(cpa)与CRC发病率的降低有关。然而,由于评估的研究方法和类型存在显著差异,证据的质量较低。目的本研究回顾了注册会计师对cra或nma评价的CRCs的疗效和安全性,并评估了所有已发表的nma对注册会计师的质量。研究设计我们检索了PubMed, Embase和Cochrane图书馆从成立到2024年7月29日发表的研究。我们纳入了所有评估cpa在平均风险(一般人群)和高风险(既往腺瘤/CRC病史)人群中治疗CRC的有效性和安全性的nma。结果纳入了9例nma,比较了15种不同的干预措施。阿司匹林和非阿司匹林非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)如塞来昔布研究最多。阿司匹林被证明对任何CRA的发生都有效,低剂量阿司匹林的保护作用始终比高剂量阿司匹林更强。然而,阿司匹林对晚期CRA的影响没有统计学意义。对长期服用阿司匹林的担忧包括胃肠道出血和溃疡的风险增加,但在评估所有严重不良事件(SAEs)时,与对照组相比,阿司匹林使用者的风险没有增加。非阿司匹林类非甾体抗炎药对晚期CRA疗效更好。然而,非阿司匹林类非甾体抗炎药(如塞来昔布)的使用与SAEs,特别是心血管疾病事件的风险显著增加相关。结论综合考虑疗效和安全性,低剂量阿司匹林是目前CRA/CRC化学预防的最佳选择。未来的研究需要更好地描述受益最多的患者亚组,并开发新的,更有效的注册会计师。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Cancer Control
Cancer Control ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
148
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Control is a JCR-ranked, peer-reviewed open access journal whose mission is to advance the prevention, detection, diagnosis, treatment, and palliative care of cancer by enabling researchers, doctors, policymakers, and other healthcare professionals to freely share research along the cancer control continuum. Our vision is a world where gold-standard cancer care is the norm, not the exception.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信