TACE + Lenvatinib治疗晚期肝细胞癌的安全性和有效性:系统评价和荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Di Pan, Haonan Liu, Xiao Ma, Pengfei Qu, Menghan Cao, Xiaobing Qin, Juanjuan Tang, Ronghai Pan, Qingchen Huang, Zhengxiang Han
{"title":"TACE + Lenvatinib治疗晚期肝细胞癌的安全性和有效性:系统评价和荟萃分析。","authors":"Di Pan,&nbsp;Haonan Liu,&nbsp;Xiao Ma,&nbsp;Pengfei Qu,&nbsp;Menghan Cao,&nbsp;Xiaobing Qin,&nbsp;Juanjuan Tang,&nbsp;Ronghai Pan,&nbsp;Qingchen Huang,&nbsp;Zhengxiang Han","doi":"10.15403/jgld-4729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) + lenvatinib (TACE+L) versus lenvatinib (L) monotherapy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by a meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP e-Journals Database, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched to collate literature comparing TACE+L with L alone for the treatment of advanced liver cancer. The literature search, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The Stata 16 software package was used to process and analyze the data. We assessed heterogeneity using both I2 and the p-value, performed a publication bias assessment, and conducted a sensitivity analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies were finally included, including one randomized controlled study and four retrospective studies; these involved a total of 1,167 patients, including 523 patients in the TACE+L combination group and 644 patients in the L monotherapy group. In this meta-analysis, the TACE+L group showed a significantly better objective response rate (ORR) (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.34 - 4.80) and disease control rate (DCR) compared to the L monotherapy group (OR=2.68, 95%CI: 1.75 - 4.08). The combined group had significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.40 - 0.56) and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.48, 95%CI: 0.39-0.59). In addition, there was no significant difference found in the overall adverse events of any grade between the two groups (OR=1.13, 95%CI: 0.99 - 1.29).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to L alone, TACE+L treatment resulted in better tumor response, better long-term survival, and was accompanied by controllable adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":50189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases","volume":"32 2","pages":"222-229"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and Efficacy of TACE + Lenvatinib in Treating Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta- analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Di Pan,&nbsp;Haonan Liu,&nbsp;Xiao Ma,&nbsp;Pengfei Qu,&nbsp;Menghan Cao,&nbsp;Xiaobing Qin,&nbsp;Juanjuan Tang,&nbsp;Ronghai Pan,&nbsp;Qingchen Huang,&nbsp;Zhengxiang Han\",\"doi\":\"10.15403/jgld-4729\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) + lenvatinib (TACE+L) versus lenvatinib (L) monotherapy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by a meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP e-Journals Database, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched to collate literature comparing TACE+L with L alone for the treatment of advanced liver cancer. The literature search, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The Stata 16 software package was used to process and analyze the data. We assessed heterogeneity using both I2 and the p-value, performed a publication bias assessment, and conducted a sensitivity analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies were finally included, including one randomized controlled study and four retrospective studies; these involved a total of 1,167 patients, including 523 patients in the TACE+L combination group and 644 patients in the L monotherapy group. In this meta-analysis, the TACE+L group showed a significantly better objective response rate (ORR) (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.34 - 4.80) and disease control rate (DCR) compared to the L monotherapy group (OR=2.68, 95%CI: 1.75 - 4.08). The combined group had significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.40 - 0.56) and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.48, 95%CI: 0.39-0.59). In addition, there was no significant difference found in the overall adverse events of any grade between the two groups (OR=1.13, 95%CI: 0.99 - 1.29).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to L alone, TACE+L treatment resulted in better tumor response, better long-term survival, and was accompanied by controllable adverse events.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases\",\"volume\":\"32 2\",\"pages\":\"222-229\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15403/jgld-4729\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15403/jgld-4729","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景与目的:通过荟萃分析比较经动脉化疗栓塞(TACE) + lenvatinib (TACE+L)与lenvatinib (L)单药治疗晚期肝细胞癌的疗效和安全性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、中国知网(CNKI)、VIP电子期刊数据库、万方数据,整理比较TACE+L与单独使用L治疗晚期肝癌的文献。文献检索、质量评估和数据提取由两位审稿人独立完成。采用Stata 16软件包对数据进行处理和分析。我们使用I2和p值评估异质性,进行发表偏倚评估,并进行敏感性分析。结果:最终纳入5项研究,包括1项随机对照研究和4项回顾性研究;总共涉及1167例患者,其中TACE+L联合治疗组523例,L单药治疗组644例。在本荟萃分析中,TACE+L组的客观缓解率(ORR) (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.34 ~ 4.80)和疾病控制率(DCR)明显优于L单药治疗组(OR=2.68, 95%CI: 1.75 ~ 4.08)。联合治疗组无进展生存期(PFS) (HR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.40 ~ 0.56)和总生存期(OS) (HR=0.48, 95%CI: 0.39 ~ 0.59)均有显著改善。此外,两组间任何级别的总不良事件发生率无显著差异(OR=1.13, 95%CI: 0.99 ~ 1.29)。结论:与单纯L治疗相比,TACE+L治疗可获得更好的肿瘤反应,更佳的长期生存,且不良事件可控。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Safety and Efficacy of TACE + Lenvatinib in Treating Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta- analysis.

Background and aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) + lenvatinib (TACE+L) versus lenvatinib (L) monotherapy in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma by a meta-analysis.

Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP e-Journals Database, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched to collate literature comparing TACE+L with L alone for the treatment of advanced liver cancer. The literature search, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. The Stata 16 software package was used to process and analyze the data. We assessed heterogeneity using both I2 and the p-value, performed a publication bias assessment, and conducted a sensitivity analysis.

Results: Five studies were finally included, including one randomized controlled study and four retrospective studies; these involved a total of 1,167 patients, including 523 patients in the TACE+L combination group and 644 patients in the L monotherapy group. In this meta-analysis, the TACE+L group showed a significantly better objective response rate (ORR) (OR=2.54, 95%CI: 1.34 - 4.80) and disease control rate (DCR) compared to the L monotherapy group (OR=2.68, 95%CI: 1.75 - 4.08). The combined group had significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.40 - 0.56) and overall survival (OS) (HR=0.48, 95%CI: 0.39-0.59). In addition, there was no significant difference found in the overall adverse events of any grade between the two groups (OR=1.13, 95%CI: 0.99 - 1.29).

Conclusions: Compared to L alone, TACE+L treatment resulted in better tumor response, better long-term survival, and was accompanied by controllable adverse events.

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
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases (formerly Romanian Journal of Gastroenterology) publishes papers reporting original clinical and scientific research, which are of a high standard and which contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of gastroenterology and hepatology. The field comprises prevention, diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The journal also publishes reviews, editorials and short communications on those specific topics. Case reports will be accepted if of great interest and well investigated.
×
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