阿扎胞苷治疗骨髓增生异常综合征和急性髓系白血病的系统评价。

Q2 Medicine
BMC Hematology Pub Date : 2018-01-31 eCollection Date: 2018-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8
Roman M Shapiro, Alejandro Lazo-Langner
{"title":"阿扎胞苷治疗骨髓增生异常综合征和急性髓系白血病的系统评价。","authors":"Roman M Shapiro,&nbsp;Alejandro Lazo-Langner","doi":"10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>5-Azacitidine administered as a 7-day dosing regimen (7-0-0) is approved in high risk IPSS myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Alternative regimens such as a 5-day (5-0-0) or 7-day with a weekend break (5-2-2) are commonly used. No randomized controlled trial has been done directly comparing all three dosing regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacies of the 5-0-0, 5-2-2, and 7-0-0 regimens in MDS and AML.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational prospective and retrospective studies. The primary clinical outcomes were Objective Response Rate (ORR) defined as the sum of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and hematological improvement (HI) as defined by the IWG 2006 criteria. A meta-analysis of simple proportions was conducted using a random effects model with weights defined according to Laird and Mosteller. Comparisons between groups were not attempted due to the heterogeneity of study designs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The only RCT directly comparing alternative azacitidine regimens showed no difference in ORR between the 5-0-0 and 5-2-2 regimens. All other RCTs compared a dosing regimen to conventional care. The pooled proportion of ORR was 44.8% with 95% CI (42.8%, 45.5%) for 7-0-0, 41.2% with 95% CI (39.2%, 41.9%) for 5-0-0, and 45.8% with 95% CI (42.6%, 46.4%) for 5-2-2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Indirect comparison of alternative azacitidine dosing regimens in MDS and AML shows a benefit for the 7-day regimen in attaining ORR. Additional RCTs are required to definitively address this comparison.</p>","PeriodicalId":37740,"journal":{"name":"BMC Hematology","volume":"18 ","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic review of azacitidine regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia.\",\"authors\":\"Roman M Shapiro,&nbsp;Alejandro Lazo-Langner\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>5-Azacitidine administered as a 7-day dosing regimen (7-0-0) is approved in high risk IPSS myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Alternative regimens such as a 5-day (5-0-0) or 7-day with a weekend break (5-2-2) are commonly used. No randomized controlled trial has been done directly comparing all three dosing regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacies of the 5-0-0, 5-2-2, and 7-0-0 regimens in MDS and AML.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational prospective and retrospective studies. The primary clinical outcomes were Objective Response Rate (ORR) defined as the sum of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and hematological improvement (HI) as defined by the IWG 2006 criteria. A meta-analysis of simple proportions was conducted using a random effects model with weights defined according to Laird and Mosteller. Comparisons between groups were not attempted due to the heterogeneity of study designs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The only RCT directly comparing alternative azacitidine regimens showed no difference in ORR between the 5-0-0 and 5-2-2 regimens. All other RCTs compared a dosing regimen to conventional care. The pooled proportion of ORR was 44.8% with 95% CI (42.8%, 45.5%) for 7-0-0, 41.2% with 95% CI (39.2%, 41.9%) for 5-0-0, and 45.8% with 95% CI (42.6%, 46.4%) for 5-2-2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Indirect comparison of alternative azacitidine dosing regimens in MDS and AML shows a benefit for the 7-day regimen in attaining ORR. Additional RCTs are required to definitively address this comparison.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Hematology\",\"volume\":\"18 \",\"pages\":\"3\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Hematology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Hematology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12878-017-0094-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

背景:5-阿扎胞苷作为7天给药方案(7-0-0)被批准用于高风险IPSS骨髓增生异常综合征(MDS)患者。替代方案,如5天(5-5-0)或7天周末休息(5-2-2)是常用的。没有随机对照试验直接比较这三种给药方案。本研究的目的是比较5-0-0、5-2-2和7-0-0方案治疗MDS和AML的疗效。方法:采用MEDLINE、EMBASE和CENTRAL进行系统评价。符合条件的研究包括随机对照试验(RCTs)、观察性前瞻性研究和回顾性研究。主要临床结果是客观缓解率(ORR),定义为完全缓解(CR),部分缓解(PR)和血液学改善(HI)的总和,由IWG 2006标准定义。简单比例的荟萃分析使用随机效应模型,根据Laird和Mosteller定义的权重进行。由于研究设计的异质性,没有进行组间比较。结果:唯一一项直接比较阿扎胞苷替代方案的随机对照试验显示,5-0-0和5-2-2方案的ORR无差异。所有其他随机对照试验将给药方案与常规护理进行比较。7-0-0组总ORR比例为44.8%,95% CI(42.8%, 45.5%); 5-0-0组总ORR比例为41.2%,95% CI(39.2%, 41.9%); 5-2-2组总ORR比例为45.8%,95% CI(42.6%, 46.4%)。结论:在MDS和AML中,阿扎胞苷替代给药方案的间接比较显示,7天方案在达到ORR方面有优势。需要更多的随机对照试验来明确地处理这一比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Systematic review of azacitidine regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia.

Systematic review of azacitidine regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia.

Systematic review of azacitidine regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia.

Background: 5-Azacitidine administered as a 7-day dosing regimen (7-0-0) is approved in high risk IPSS myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Alternative regimens such as a 5-day (5-0-0) or 7-day with a weekend break (5-2-2) are commonly used. No randomized controlled trial has been done directly comparing all three dosing regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacies of the 5-0-0, 5-2-2, and 7-0-0 regimens in MDS and AML.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational prospective and retrospective studies. The primary clinical outcomes were Objective Response Rate (ORR) defined as the sum of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), and hematological improvement (HI) as defined by the IWG 2006 criteria. A meta-analysis of simple proportions was conducted using a random effects model with weights defined according to Laird and Mosteller. Comparisons between groups were not attempted due to the heterogeneity of study designs.

Results: The only RCT directly comparing alternative azacitidine regimens showed no difference in ORR between the 5-0-0 and 5-2-2 regimens. All other RCTs compared a dosing regimen to conventional care. The pooled proportion of ORR was 44.8% with 95% CI (42.8%, 45.5%) for 7-0-0, 41.2% with 95% CI (39.2%, 41.9%) for 5-0-0, and 45.8% with 95% CI (42.6%, 46.4%) for 5-2-2.

Conclusions: Indirect comparison of alternative azacitidine dosing regimens in MDS and AML shows a benefit for the 7-day regimen in attaining ORR. Additional RCTs are required to definitively address this comparison.

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
BMC Hematology
BMC Hematology Medicine-Hematology
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: BMC Hematology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on basic, experimental and clinical research related to hematology. The journal welcomes submissions on non-malignant and malignant hematological diseases, hemostasis and thrombosis, hematopoiesis, stem cells and transplantation.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信