Targeted agents for patients with advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer: A protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Medicine
BACKGROUND:Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a devastating malignant tumor. Although surgical resection may offer a good prognosis and prolong survival, approximately 80% patients with PC are always diagnosed as unresectable tumor. National Comprehensive Cancer Network's (NCCN) recommended gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as efficient treatment. While, according to recent studies, targeted agents might be a better available option for advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis will be to examine the differences of different targeted interventions for advanced/metastatic PC patients. METHODS:We will conduct this systematic review and network meta-analysis using Bayesian method and according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. To identify relevant studies, 6 electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of science, CNKI (Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure), and CBM (Chinese Biological Medical Database) will be searched. The risk of bias in included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be assessed using the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0. And we will use GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence from network meta-analysis. Data will be analyzed using R 3.4.1 software. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:To the best of our knowledge, this systematic review and network meta-analysis will firstly use both direct and indirect evidence to compare the differences of different targeted agents and targeted agents plus chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. This is a protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis, so the ethical approval and patient consent are not required. We will disseminate the results of this review by submitting to a peer-reviewed journal.
10.1097/MD.0000000000010115
Effects of metastasectomy and other factors on survival of patients with ovarian metastases from gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Zhang Chao,Hou Wenbin,Huang Jinyu,Yin Songcheng,Wang Pengliang,Zhang Zhe,Tan Yuen,Xu Huimian
Journal of cellular biochemistry
Ovarian metastasis from gastric cancer (Krukenberg tumor [KT]) has no consensus treatment and the role of surgical treatment is still controversial. Identifying prognostic factors for KT could help guide the management of this tumor. We used a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic value of metastasectomy and other factors in patients with KT to develop a treatment plan. We searched literature in PubMed, Cochrane library and EMBASE. We analyzed hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with respect to overall survival (OS). The meta-analysis included 12 cohort studies with 1,031 patients associated with longer OS following metastasectomy (HR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.32-0.53; P < 0.001), R0 resection (HR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.26-0.53; P < 0.001), metachronous ovarian metastasis (HR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.58-0.93; P = 0.012), size of KT (<5 cm) (HR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.58-0.95; P = 0.019), ECOG PS (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status) 0 to 1 (HR = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.29-0.80; P = 0.004), tumor confined to ovary (HR = 0.40; 95% CI = 0.16-0.99; P = 0.047), and tumor confined to pelvic cavity (HR = 0.36; 95% CI = 0.14-0.92; P = 0.033). Shorter OS was associated with peritoneal carcinomatosis (HR = 2.00; 95% CI = 1.25-3.21; P = 0.004), ascites (HR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.19-2.31; P = 0.003) and positive CEA (HR = 1.41; 95% CI = 1.10-1.82; P = 0.007). Gastrectomy led to a slight improvement in OS, but without statistical significance (HR = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.47-1.02; P = 0.061). No significant difference in OS was observed in patients with signet-ring cells (HR = 1.17; 95% CI = 0.91-1.51; P = 0.226), bilateral ovarian metastasis (HR = 0.87; 95% CI = 0.70-1.08; P = 0.212), age ≥ 50 years (HR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.71-1.22; P = 0.619), positive CA19-9 (HR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.75-1.35; P = 0.960), and positive CA-125 (HR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.73-1.33; P = 0.915). Various factors affect OS in patients with KT.
10.1002/jcb.28708
Prognostic value of C-reactive protein levels in patients with bone neoplasms: A meta-analysis.
Li Wenyi,Luo Xujun,Liu Zhongyue,Chen Yanqiao,Li Zhihong
PloS one
OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of retrospective studies that investigated the association of preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels with the overall survival (OS) of patients with bone neoplasms. METHODS:A detailed literature search was performed in the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase and PubMed databases up to August 28, 2017, for related research publications written in English. We extracted the data from these studies and combined the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the correlation between CRP levels and OS in patients with bone neoplasms. RESULTS:Five studies with a total of 816 participants from several countries were enrolled in this current meta-analysis. In a pooled analysis of all the publications, increased serum CRP levels had an adverse prognostic effect on the overall survival of patients with bone neoplasms. However, the combined data showed no significant relationship between the level of CRP and OS in Asian patients (HR = 1.73; 95% CI: 0.86-3.49; P = 0.125). Similar trends were observed in patients with bone neoplasms when stratified by ethnicity, histology, metastasis and study sample size. CONCLUSIONS:The results of this meta-analysis suggest that increased CRP expression indicates a poorer prognosis in patients with bone neoplasms. More prospective studies are needed to confirm the prognostic significance of CRP levels in patients with bone neoplasms.
10.1371/journal.pone.0195769
Clinicopathological and prognostic value of lncRNA PANDAR expression in solid tumors: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Mehrad-Majd Hassan,Akhtari Javad,Haerian Monir-Sadat,Ravanshad Yalda
Journal of cellular physiology
PANDAR (promoter of CDKN1A antisense DNA damage activated RNA) has been shown to be aberrantly expressed in many types of cancer. Considering conflicting data, the current study was aimed to assess its potential role as a prognostic marker in malignant tumors. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science was performed to identify all eligible studies describing the use of PANDAR as a prognostic factor for different types of cancer. Data related to overall survival (OS) and clinicopathologic features were collected and analyzed. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and odds radio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to estimate associations. Ten original studies containing 1,231 patients were included. The results showed that in patients with cancer, high PANDAR expression is correlated with lymph node metastasis (LNM; OR = 2.57; 95% CI, 1.76-3.81; p < 0.001), tumor stage (OR = 2.90; 95% CI, 1.25-6.75; p = 0.013), and tumor size (OR = 1.79; 95% CI, 1.11-2.91; p = 0.018). However, sensitivity analysis further demonstrated a significant association between high PANDAR expression and OS, both in multivariate and univariate analysis models (pooled HR 2.01; 95% CI, 1.17-3.44 and pooled HR 2.62; 95% CI, 1.98-3.47, respectively), after omitting one study. These results suggested that PANDAR expression might be indicative of advanced disease and poor prognosis in patients with cancer. Further studies are necessary to determine the value of this risk stratification biomarker in clinical management of patients with cancer.
10.1002/jcp.27179
The role of the systemic inflammatory response in predicting outcomes in patients with advanced inoperable cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Dolan Ross D,McSorley Stephen T,Horgan Paul G,Laird Barry,McMillan Donald C
Critical reviews in oncology/hematology
INTRODUCTION:Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide. While a curative intent is the aim of any surgical treatment many patients either present with or go onto develop disseminated disease requiring systemic anti-cancer therapy with a palliative intent. Given their limited life expectancy appropriate allocation of treatment is vital. It is recognised that systemic chemoradiotherapy may shorten the quality/quantity of life in patients with advanced cancer. It is against this background that the present systematic review and meta-analysis of the prognostic value of markers of the systemic inflammatory response in patients with advanced cancer was conducted. METHODS:An extensive literature review using targeted medical subject headings was carried out in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CDSR databases until the end of 2016. Titles were examined for relevance and studies relating to duplicate datasets, that were not published in English and that did not have full text availability were excluded. Full texts of relevant articles were obtained and were then examined to identify any further relevant articles. RESULTS:The majority of studies were retrospective. The systemic inflammatory response, as evidenced by a number of markers at clinical thresholds, was reported to have independent prognostic value, across tumour types and geographical locations. In particular, C-reactive protein (CRP, 63 studies), albumin (33 studies) the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS, 44 studies) and the Neutrophil Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR, 59 articles) were consistently validated across tumour types and geographical locations. There was considerable variation in the thresholds reported to have prognostic value when CRP and albumin were examined. There was less variation in the thresholds reported for NLR and still less for the GPS. DISCUSSION:The systemic inflammatory response, especially as evidenced by the GPS and NLR, has reliable prognostic value in patients with advanced cancer. Further prospective studies of their clinical utility in randomised clinical trials and in treatment allocation are warranted.
10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.06.002
Outcomes and Treatment Options for Duodenal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Meijer Laura L,Alberga Anna J,de Bakker Jacob K,van der Vliet Hans J,Le Large Tessa Y S,van Grieken Nicole C T,de Vries Ralph,Daams Freek,Zonderhuis Barbara M,Kazemier Geert
Annals of surgical oncology
BACKGROUND:Duodenal adenocarcinoma (DA) is a rare tumor for which survival data per treatment modality and disease stage are unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarize the current literature on patient outcome after surgical, (neo)adjuvant, and palliative treatment in patients with DA. METHODS:A systematic search was performed according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, to 25 April 2017. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS), specified for treatment strategy or disease stage. Random-effects models were used for the calculation of pooled odds ratios per treatment modality. Included papers were also screened for prognostic factors. RESULTS:A total of 26 observational studies, comprising 6438 patients with DA, were included. Of these, resection with curative intent was performed in 71% (range 53-100%) of patients, and 29% received palliative treatment (range 0-61%). The pooled 5-year OS rate was 46% after curative resection, compared with 1% in palliative-treated patients (OR 0.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02-0.09, p < 0.0001). Both segmental resection and pancreaticoduodenectomy allowed adequate assessment of lymph node involvement and resulted in similar OS. Lymph node involvement correlated with worse OS (pooled 5-year survival rate 21% for nodal metastases vs. 65% for node-negative disease; OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11-0.27, p < 0.0001). In the current literature, no survival benefit for adjuvant therapy after curative resection was found. CONCLUSION:Resection with curative intent, either pancreaticoduodenectomy or segmental resection, and lack of nodal metastases, favors survival for DA. Further studies exploring multimodality (neo)adjuvant therapy are warranted to investigate their benefit.
10.1245/s10434-018-6567-6
Surgical resection versus transarterial chemoembolization for BCLC intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE:Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) is recommended as the first-line therapy for intermediate stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) according to the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) algorithm. However, in clinical practice, many such patients undergo surgical resection. A meta-analysis with a systematic search of the medical literature was conducted to compare these two procedures for BCLC intermediate stage HCC. METHODS:PubMed, Embase, Medline and Cochrane library were searched for studies comparing surgical resection with TACE for BCLC intermediate stage HCC that were published before December 2016. The primary outcome was overall survival, and the secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and 30-day mortality. RESULTS:This meta-analysis included 9 studies with 2619 patients (surgical resection, n = 1204 (46%) and TACE, n = 1415 (54%)). When compared with the TACE group, the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for the 1, 3 and 5-year OS rates in patients who underwent surgical resection were 0.62 (95% CI 0.51-0.75, P = 0.39; I = 6%, P < 0.001), 0.58 (95% CI 0.51-0.67, P = 0.25; I = 22%, P < 0.001) and 0.59 (95% CI 0.54-0.64, P = 0.18; I = 20%, P < 0.001). No significant differences in the pooled odds ratios (OR) were found between surgical resection and TACE in postoperative complications and 30-day mortality [OR 1.23 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.74, P = 0.390; I = 0%, P = 0.240) and OR 1.11 (95% CI 0.60 to 2.04, P = 0.89; I = 0%, P = 0.740), respectively]. CONCLUSION:This meta-analysis on studies on Asian HCC patients demonstrated surgical resection had better overall survival than TACE for patients with intermediate stage HCC, without any significant increase in postoperative complication or 30-day mortality rates. Further studies are needed to validate these results on Western patients, moreover, a reappraisal of the recommended treatments for BCLC intermediate stage HCC should be considered.
10.1016/j.hpb.2017.10.004
Should noncurative resection of the primary tumour be performed in patients with stage iv colorectal cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.)
PURPOSE:Surgical resection of the primary tumour in patients with advanced colorectal cancer (crc) remains controversial. This review compares survival in patients with advanced crc who underwent surgical resection of the primary tumour with that in patients not undergoing resection, and determines rates of post-operative mortality and nonfatal complications, the primary tumour complication rate, the non-resection surgical procedures rate, and quality of life (qol). METHODS:Reports in the central, medline, and embase databases were searched for relevant studies, which were selected using pre-specified eligibility criteria. The search was also restricted to publication dates from 1980 onward, the English language, and studies involving human subjects. Screening, evaluation of relevant articles, and data abstraction were performed in duplicate, and agreement between the abstractors was assessed. Articles that met the inclusion criteria were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were collected and synthesized per protocol. RESULTS:From among the 3379 reports located, fifteen retrospective observational studies were selected. Of the 12,416 patients in the selected studies, 8620 (69%) underwent surgery. Median survival was 15.2 months (range: 10-30.7 months) in the resection group and 11.4 months (range: 3-22 months) in the non-resection group. Hazard ratio for survival was 0.69 [95% confidence interval (ci): 0.61 to 0.79] favouring surgical resection. Mean rates of postoperative mortality and nonfatal complications were 4.9% (95% ci: 0% to 9.7%) and 25.9% (95%ci: 20.1% to 31.6%) respectively. The mean primary tumour complication rate was 29.7% (95% ci: 18.5% to 41.0%), and the non-resection surgical procedures rate in the non-resection group was 27.6% (95 ci: 15.4% to 39.9%). No study provided qol data. CONCLUSIONS:Although this review supports primary tumour resection in advanced crc, the results have significant biases. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm the findings.
10.3747/co.20.1469
Benefits of Surgery After Neoadjuvant Intraperitoneal and Systemic Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer Patients With Peritoneal Metastasis: A Meta-Analysis.
Gong Yingbo,Wang Pengliang,Zhu Zhi,Zhang Junyan,Huang Jinyu,Wang Tao,Chen Jisai,Xu Huimian
The Journal of surgical research
BACKGROUND:Conversion therapy is intended to allow achieving R0 resection after chemotherapy for tumors initially considered unresectable or partially resectable. Neoadjuvant intraperitoneal and systemic chemotherapy (NIPS) is the current conversion therapy for gastric cancer (GC) patients with peritoneal metastasis. This meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness and safety of NIPS-combined surgery for GC patients with peritoneal metastasis. METHODS:Standard methods were used to select and analyze studies that included GC patients with peritoneal metastasis assigned to two groups, either NIPS-combined surgery or a NIPS-only control. Publications were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register. Overall survival, conversion therapy success and R0 resection rates, and adverse events were analyzed using Stata 11.0. RESULTS:Eight of the 14 studies that were evaluated after screening the titles and abstracts of 327 retrieved publications met the selection criteria. The eight retrospective studies included 373 patients with GC and peritoneal metastasis included 265 with NIPS-combined surgery and 109 with NIPS only. Survival was significantly better with NIPS-combined surgery than with NIPS only (hazard ratio = 0.440, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.274-0.704; P = 0.0001; odds ratio = 1.960; 95% CI: 1.247-3.083; P = 0.004). Subgroup analysis revealed significantly better survival with S-1 Joint intravenous paclitaxel and intraperitoneal paclitaxel compared with other NIPS regimens. NIPS regimens had a higher conversion rate (effect size [ES] = 0.656; 95% CI: 0.495-0.817; P < 0.05), higher percentage of patients with R0 surgery (ES = 0.633; 95% CI: 0.568-0.699; P < 0.05), less severe adverse reactions to chemotherapy (ES = 0.030; 95% CI: 0.020-0.040; P < 0.05), and fewer postoperative complications (ES = 0.040; 95% CI: 0.020-0.050; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:NIPS-combined surgical treatment was effective and safe for treating GC with peritoneal metastasis. Higher quality trials, better patient selection, and multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to support standard treatment guidelines.
10.1016/j.jss.2019.07.044
Prognostic significance of tumor length in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing radical resection: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.
Medicine
BACKGROUND:The prognostic significance of tumor length in esophageal cancer (EC) remains controversial. Hence, we conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively assess the prognostic significance of tumor length in EC patients. METHOD:A systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the prognostic significance of tumor length for overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) in EC patients. RESULTS:A total of 21 articles with 22 eligible studies involving 9271 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results of our pooling analyses demonstrated that tumor length was an independent prognostic parameter for OS (HR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.24-1.54, P < .01) and DFS (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.11-1.50, P < .01) in EC patients. Moreover, our subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis showed that the pooled HRs assessing the prognostic significance of tumor length did not significantly fluctuated, suggesting our pooling analyses were stable and reliable. CONCLUSION:The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that long tumor is an independent risk of poor OS and DFS in EC patients, suggesting that it may provide additional prognostic information and thus contribute to a better stratification of EC patients, especially for those with no lymph node metastasis. However, more well-designed prospective clinical studies with large sample size are needed to strength our conclusion due to several limitations in this meta-analysis.
10.1097/MD.0000000000015029
Clinical recommendations on the treatment of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the larynx: A meta-analysis of 436 reported cases.
van der Laan Tom P,Plaat Boudewijn E C,van der Laan Bernard F A M,Halmos Gyorgy B
Head & neck
BACKGROUND:Current recommendations on the treatment of neuroendocrine carcinoma of the larynx (NCL) are based on anecdotal evidence. With this meta-analysis, our purpose was to provide clinicians with more substantiated guidelines in order to improve the treatment outcome of the patients affected with NCL. METHODS:A structured literature search for all research concerning NCL was performed against the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Available data was normalized, pooled, and statistically analyzed. RESULTS:Four hundred thirty-six cases of NCL were extracted from 182 studies, of which 23 were typical carcinoid, 163 were atypical carcinoid, 183 were small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, 29 were large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and 38 were unspecified carcinoid tumors. The 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) was 100% for typical carcinoid, 53% for atypical carcinoid, 19% for small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and 15% for large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (p < .001). Patients with an atypical carcinoid treated with surgery had better DSS than those treated with radiotherapy (60% vs 54%; p = .035). Postoperative radiotherapy did not result in better DSS in atypical carcinoid. Patients with an atypical carcinoid, not undergoing surgical treatment of the neck, developed isolated regional recurrence in 30% of cases (p = .001). Radiochemotherapy yielded the best DSS for small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma compared to other modalities (31% vs 13%; p = .001). CONCLUSION:Typical carcinoid can be treated by local excision alone. Atypical carcinoids do not seem to respond well to radiotherapy and are best managed through radical surgical excision in combination with elective neck dissection. Patients with small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma or large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma seem to benefit most from chemoradiotherapy.
10.1002/hed.23666
Dose surgical resection of hepatic metastases bring benefits to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Yu Xinzhe,Gu Jichun,Fu Deliang,Jin Chen
International journal of surgery (London, England)
OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to examine morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival after surgical resection of hepatic metastases from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. BACKGROUND:Patients with hepatic metastases from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are facing a dilemma of whether to make hepatic resection. METHODS:A systematic literature research was undertaken through computerized databases as well as manually research from unpublished data. A meta-analysis was performed to investigate the differences in the efficacy of liver resection and non-surgical treatments based on the evaluation of morbidity, 30-day mortality, and 1-, 3-, or 5-year survival. RESULTS:11 cohort studies with 1147 patients were identified in the pool. Compared with the non-surgical approach, hepatic resection can be performed in a safe and feasible manner for all pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastases (p = 0.13 for overall morbidity; p = 0.63 for mortality). For surgical group, the median 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival were 40.9%, 13.3%, 2.9%, respectively, with a median survival of 9.9 months. Surgical resection of hepatic metastases was associated with a significantly improved overall 1-year and 3-year survival (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Hepatic resection is a safe procedure; furthermore, it is worth doing such an extended surgery for PDAC patients due to additional survival benefit in the medium-term (less than 3 years). However, further randomized, controlled trials are urgently needed.
10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.10.066
Adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Parmar Ambica,Chaves-Porras Jorge,Saluja Ronak,Perry Kaitlyn,Rahmadian Amanda P,Santos Seanthel Delos,Ko Yoo-Joung,Berry Scott,Doherty Mark,Chan Kelvin K W
Critical reviews in oncology/hematology
Adjuvant chemotherapy has significantly improved outcomes following surgical resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, the optimal adjuvant strategy remains unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted to provide indirect comparative evidence across adjuvant chemotherapies. Electronic searches of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane and ASCO databases were conducted to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCT). Direct pairwise meta-analysis was conducted for disease-free survival (DFS), overall-survival (OS) and adverse events (AE). Network meta-analysis of DFS and OS was conducted to evaluate indirect comparisons. Ten publications of eleven RCT met eligibility criteria. Indirect DFS comparison demonstrated superiority of mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine-capecitabine, gemcitabine-erlotinib and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel. S-1 demonstrated a DFS benefit versus gemcitabine-capecitabine, gemcitabine-erlotinib, gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel. OS benefits were demonstrated for mFOLFIRINOX verus gemcitabine-erlotinib and for S-1 versus gemcitabine-based combination with erlotinib, capecitabine and nab-paclitaxel. In conclusion, mFOLFIRINOX is the preferred approach for adjuvant therapy. For mFOLFIRINOX-ineligible patients no additional benefit is seen with gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel.
10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.102817
Radiofrequency ablation compared to surgical resection for curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases - a meta-analysis.
van Amerongen Martinus J,Jenniskens Sjoerd F M,van den Boezem Peter B,Fütterer Jurgen J,de Wilt Johannes H W
HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association
BACKGROUND:Hepatic resection and ablative treatments, such as RFA are available treatment options for liver tumors. Advantages and disadvantages of these treatment options in patients with colorectal liver metastases need further evaluation. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the role of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) compared to surgery in the curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS:A systematic search was performed from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for studies directly comparing RFA with resection for CRLM, after which variables were evaluated. RESULTS:RFA had significantly lower complication rates (OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.26-0.75, P = 0.002) compared to resection. However, RFA showed a higher rate of any recurrence (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.15-2.40, P = 0.007), local recurrence (OR = 9.56, 95% CI = 6.85-13.35, P = 0.001), intrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.34-2.87, P = 0.001) and extrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.90-1.63, P = 0.22). Also, 5-year disease-free survival (OR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.28-3.79, P = 0.005) and overall survival (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.49-3.69, P = 0.001) were significantly lower in patients treated with RFA. CONCLUSIONS:RFA showed a significantly lower rate of complications, but also a lower survival and a higher rate of recurrence as compared to surgical resection. All the included studies were subject to possible patient selection bias and therefore randomized clinical trials are needed to accurately evaluate these treatment modalities.
10.1016/j.hpb.2017.05.011
The Role of Surgical Resection Following Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Treatment in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Journal of Cancer
The benefit of surgical resection for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) following tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) treatment was still under debate. The present meta-analysis was designed to assess the value of surgical resection for the prognosis of patients with metastatic, recurrence and unresectable GISTs. A systematic search of PubMed Central, PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library database was performed. Relevant studies of the role of surgery in advanced GISTs published before 1 May 2019 were identified. The quality of studies was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed through software Stata 15.0. A total of 6 retrospective studies including 655 patients were analyzed. The pooled result revealed that surgical resection group was associated with better PFS (HR = 2.08; 95% CI: 1.58 to 2.76; P<0.001) and better OS (HR = 2.13; 95% CI: 1.59 to 2.85; P<0.001) compared with TKIs treatment alone group. Surgical resection following TKIs treatment could significantly improve the prognosis of patients with advanced GISTs.
10.7150/jca.30040
Prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma patients with bile duct tumor thrombus after hepatic resection or liver transplantation in Asian populations: A meta-analysis.
Wang Chenglin,Yang Yu,Sun Donglin,Jiang Yong
PloS one
BACKGROUND:Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with bile duct tumor thrombus (BDTT) in the clinic is rare, and surgical treatment is currently considered the most effective treatment. However, the influence of BDTT on the prognosis of HCC patients who underwent surgery remains controversial in previous studies. Therefore, this paper uses meta-analysis method to elucidate this controversy. METHODS:In this study, we conducted a literature search on databases PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from inception until September 2016. Each study was evaluated with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The pooled effect was calculated, and the association between BDTT and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) was reevaluated using meta-analysis for hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS:A total of 11 studies was included containing 5295 patients. The (HR) for OS and DFS was 3.21 and 1.81, 95%CI was 2.34-4.39 and 1.17-2.78 respectively. CONCLUSIONS:The results showed that HCC patients with BDTT had a worse prognosis than those without BDTT after hepatic resection or liver transplantation (LT).
10.1371/journal.pone.0176827
Pooled analysis of the surgical treatment for colorectal cancer liver metastases.
Veereman G,Robays J,Verleye L,Leroy R,Rolfo C,Van Cutsem E,Bielen D,Ceelen W,Danse E,De Man M,Demetter P,Flamen P,Hendlisz A,Sinapi I,Vanbeckevoort D,Ysebaert D,Peeters M
Critical reviews in oncology/hematology
Liver metastases in colorectal cancer patients decreases the expected 5 year survival rates by a factor close to nine. It is generally accepted that resection of liver metastases should be attempted whenever feasible. This manuscript addresses the optimal therapeutic plan regarding timing of resection of synchronous liver metastases and the use of chemotherapy in combination with resection of synchronous metachronous liver metastases. The aim is to pool all published results in order to attribute a level of evidence to outcomes and identify lacking evidence areas. A systematic search of guidelines, reviews, randomised controlled, observational studies and updating a meta-analysis was performed. Data were extracted and analysed. Data failed to demonstrate an effect of timing of surgery or use of chemotherapy on overall survival. Concomitant resection of liver metastases and the primary tumour may result in lower postoperative morbidity. Systemic peri-operative chemotherapy may improve progression free survival compared to surgery alone.
10.1016/j.critrevonc.2014.12.004
Prognosis comparison between wait and watch and surgical strategy on rectal cancer patients after treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a meta-analysis.
Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology
BACKGROUND:After achieving a clinical complete response through neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, a nonoperative management approach for rectal cancer patients known as Wait and Watch (W&W) has gained increasing attention. However, the W&W strategy has been related to higher local recurrence and ambiguous long-term survival. This meta-analysis compared key prognosis indicators between W&W and surgical treatment in an effort to clarify some long-standing points of confusion. METHODS:Pubmed, Web of Science, EMbase, Cochrane Library were searched for relevant researches comparing W&W with surgery treatment, with a time criteria set from 1 January 2002 to 4 July 2019. Endpoints were 2-year local regrowth/recurrence, 2-year distant metastasis (plus local regrowth/recurrence), 3- and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS:In total, nine studies with 801 patients were enrolled, of which 348 were managed by W&W and 453 by surgery. Surgery patients were further divided into a pathological complete response (pCR) group (all included patients achieved pCR) and a surgery group (consisting of both pCR and non-pCR patients without deliberate screening). Compared with the surgery group, W&W patients have higher 3- and 5-year OS, and are not inferior on 2-year local regrowth (LR), 2-year distant metastasis (DM)/DM+LR, and 3- and 5-year DFS. On the other hand, compared with the pCR group, the W&W group is inferior on 2-year LR, 3- and 5-year DFS, and 5-year OS, and not inferior on 2-year DM/DM+LR and 3-year OS. CONCLUSIONS:In contrast with patients undergoing surgical treatment, the W&W group has higher 3- and 5-year OS, and is not inferior on other major prognostic indicators, which, however, is based on the fact that the tumor stage in the W&W group is generally earlier. surgically treated patients who acquired pCR, W&W group is inferior on all major prognostic indicators except 2-year DM/DM+LR and 3-year OS. Additionally, by comparison of cCR definitions across different studies, we conclude that implementation of the strictest cCR criteria is critical for W&W patients to acquire maximum prognostic benefit.
10.1177/1756284819892477
Tumor regression grade and survival after neoadjuvant treatment in gastro-esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis of 17 published studies.
Tomasello G,Petrelli F,Ghidini M,Pezzica E,Passalacqua R,Steccanella F,Turati L,Sgroi G,Barni S
European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
INTRODUCTION:Major pathologic regression after neoadjuvant therapy is a strong and favorable prognostic factor in several types of cancer (breast, rectal and bladder). This information is less clear and has yet to be systematically evaluated in upper gastrointestinal tumors. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic impact of tumor regression after preoperative therapy on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in gastro-esophageal cancer patients. METHODS:we searched for relevant articles in PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, CINAHL, LILACS, Ovid, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Embase up to June 2, 2016. Data of tumor regression (complete or near-complete pathologic response) that independently correlated with OS and DFS in multivariate analysis were extracted, and the proper hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were pooled according to the random effect model. RESULTS:a total of 17 studies-which included 3145 patients-were considered in the final analysis. Major pathologic response was significantly related with better OS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.32-0.66, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.26-0.62, P < 0.001). Pathologic complete response (pCR) or major tumor regression were associated with the same degree of benefit in outcome compared to no or minimal pathologic regression, regardless of histology. CONCLUSION:major pathologic response is associated with a significant improvement in OS compared to no response or minor pathologic changes after neoadjuvant therapy in gastro-esophageal cancers. This should be considered a robust prognostic factor to guide postoperative treatment and follow-up.
10.1016/j.ejso.2017.03.001
Surgical treatment of liver metastases from kidney cancer: a systematic review.
Pinotti Enrico,Montuori Mauro,Giani Alessandro,Uggeri Fabio,Garancini Mattia,Gianotti Luca,Romano Fabrizio
ANZ journal of surgery
BACKGROUND:Liver metastases are present in 20.3% of metastatic kidney cancers. The aim of this literature review was to assess the efficacy of surgical treatment for hepatic metastasis from kidney cancer. METHODS:An extended web search of the literature was independently performed in March 2018 by two authors according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. RESULTS:Through electronic searches, we identified 935 potentially relevant citations. Thirteen articles were finally included in the systematic review. Median survival after resection ranged from 15 to 142 months while the 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival ranged from 69% to 100%, 26% to 83.3% and 0% to 62%, respectively. Median disease-free survival ranged from 7.2 to 27 months. CONCLUSION:Surgical treatment of hepatic metastases is performed in approximately 1% of patients with liver metastases and in select patients may be potentially curative. Surgical resection of liver metastases from kidney cancer represents a valid option for selected patients with metastatic renal cancer.
10.1111/ans.15000
The impact of surgical excision of the primary tumor in stage IV breast cancer on survival: a meta-analysis.
Lu Shuangshuang,Wu Jiayi,Fang Yan,Wang Wei,Zong Yu,Chen Xiaosong,Huang Ou,He Jian-Rong,Chen Weiguo,Li Yafen,Shen Kunwei,Zhu Li
Oncotarget
INTRODUCTION:Approximately 5% of primary breast cancer patients present stage IV breast cancer, for whom systematic therapy is the mainstream treatment. The role of surgical excision of the primary tumor has been controversial due to inconsistent results of relevant studies. Recently, with the reports of some relevant preclinical data, retrospective studies and randomized clinical trials, we've got more evidence to reexamine the issue. Based on those above, a literature review and meta-analysis was performed to determine whether surgery of the primary tumor could improve overall survival in the setting of stage IV breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A comprehensive search of PubMed, OVID, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) symposium documents, European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) symposium documents and San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium (SABCS) symposium documents was performed to identify published literature that evaluated survival benefits from excision of the primary tumor in the setting of stage IV breast cancer. Data were extracted in review of appropriate studies by the authors independently. The primary endpoint was overall survival following surgical removal of the primary tumor. Secondary endpoints were the impacts of surgery on progression free survival (PFS) and time to progression (TTP). RESULTS:Data from 19 retrospective studies showed a pooled hazard ratio of 0.65 (95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.60-0.71, < 0.01= for overall survival (OS), indicating a 35% reduction in risk of mortality in patients who underwent surgical excision of the primary tumor. Nevertheless, the analysis of 3 randomized clinical trials revealed a pooled hazard ratio of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.59-1.21, = 0.359) for OS in the surgical group. According to the meta-regression, the survival benefit was independent of age, tumor size, site of the metastases, and PR or HER-2 status, acceptance of systematic therapies and radiotherapy and inversely correlated with the ER+ status of the population included. CONCLUSIONS:This is the first meta-analysis that includes both retrospective and prospective studies regarding the impact of surgery of the primary tumor on survival in stage IV breast cancer patients. According to the analytical results, we do not recommend surgery of the primary tumor as routine therapy for stage IV breast cancer. However, for those who are supposed to have long life expectancy, physicians could discuss it with these patients, put forward surgery as a therapy choice and perform the operation under deliberation.
10.18632/oncotarget.23189
Is the bipolar vessel sealer device an effective tool in robotic surgery? A retrospective analysis of our experience and a meta-analysis of the literature about different robotic procedures by investigating operative data and post-operative course.
Ortenzi Monica,Ghiselli Roberto,Baldarelli Maddalena,Cardinali Luca,Guerrieri Mario
Minimally invasive therapy & allied technologies : MITAT : official journal of the Society for Minimally Invasive Therapy
BACKGROUND:The latest robotic bipolar vessel sealing tools have been described to be effective allowing to perform procedures with reduced blood loss and shorter operative times. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and reliability of these devices applied in different robotic procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS:All robotic operations, between 2014 and 2016, were performed using the EndoWrist One VesselSealer (EWO, Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA), a bipolar fully wristed device. Data, including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), were collected. Robot docking time, intraoperative blood loss, robot malfunctioning and overall operative time were analyzed. A meta-analysis of the literature was carried out to point the attention to three different parameters (mean blood loss, operating time and hospital stay) trying to identify how different coagulation devices may affect them. RESULTS:In 73 robotic procedures, the mean operative time was 118.2 minutes (75-125 minutes). Mean hospital stay was four days (2-10 days). There were two post-operative complications (2.74%). CONCLUSIONS:The bipolar vessel sealer offers the efficacy of bipolar diathermy and the advantages of a fully wristed instrument. It does not require any change of instruments for coagulation or involvement of the bedside assistant surgeon. These characteristics lead to a reduction in operative time.
10.1080/13645706.2017.1329212
Surgical versus non-surgical treatment of actinic cheilitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Carvalho Marianne de Vasconcelos,de Moraes Sandra Lúcia Dantas,Lemos Cleidiel Aparecido Araujo,Santiago Júnior Joel Ferreira,Vasconcelos Belmiro Cavalcanti do Egito,Pellizzer Eduardo Piza
Oral diseases
OBJECTIVE:The aim of this systematic review was to compare outcomes between surgical and non-surgical treatment of actinic cheilitis (AC). MATERIALS AND METHODS:A systematic review and meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline were performed. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria: randomized clinical trials, prospective/retrospective studies, and case series with at least 10 patients, with a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. A weighted remission rate (RER) and recurrence rate (RR) with a 95% confidence interval was performed. Data analysis was performed using a comprehensive meta-analysis software. RESULTS:A total of 283 ACs in 10 studies were included. About 2.5% surgically treated cases underwent malignant transformation. The weighted remission rate was higher for surgical (92.8%) compared to non-surgical treatment (65.9%). The recurrence rate was lower for surgical (8.4%) compared to non-surgical treatment (19.2%). CONCLUSION:In this systematic review, the surgical treatment was more favorable than non-surgical for AC. Meanwhile, further studies are needed that should maximize methodological standardization and have greater rigor of the data collection process.
10.1111/odi.12916
Comparison of surgical and conservative treatment of Rockwood type-III acromioclavicular dislocation: A meta-analysis.
Tang Guolong,Zhang Yu,Liu Yuan,Qin Xiaodong,Hu Jun,Li Xiang
Medicine
BACKGROUND:There is no consensus on the effects of surgical versus conservative treatment on Rockwood type-III dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint in general orthopedic practice. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients managed surgically and conservatively following type-III acromioclavicular (AC) dislocation. METHODS:The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE via Ovid SP, and PubMed databases were searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Patient data were pooled using standard meta-analytic approaches. For continuous variables, the weighted mean difference was used. For dichotomous data, the odds ratio was calculated. RESULTS:The current analysis included 10 trials on this topic, and the results demonstrated that there were no significant differences between surgical and conservative treatment in terms of pain, weakness, tenderness, post-traumatic arthritis, restriction of strength, unsatisfactory function, and scores (Constant, UCLA, Imatani, SST, DASH, Larsen). Analyses of ossification of the coracoclavicular ligament (OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.01-2.61) and osteolysis of the lateral clavicle (OR = 2.87, 95% CI = 1.27-6.52) suggested better function with conservative treatment versus surgical treatment, but the latter was superior to conservative treatment with regard to loss of anatomic reduction. Only 1 study showed a higher acromioclavicular joint instability score for surgical management compared with conservative management (P < .00001). CONCLUSION:In the management of Rockwood type-III AC dislocation, conservative treatment is superior to surgical treatment. Nonoperative treatment results in a lower incidence of ossification of the coracoclavicular ligament and osteolysis of the lateral clavicle compared with operative treatment. However, there was no statistical difference between operative and nonoperative treatment in terms of clinical outcomes.
10.1097/MD.0000000000009690
Surgical treatment of active native mitral infective endocarditis: A meta-analysis of current evidence.
Liu Jian-Zhou,Li Xiao-Feng,Miao Qi,Zhang Chao-Ji
Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA
BACKGROUND:The native mitral lesion of active infective endocarditis implies a poor prognosis and is associated with adverse short- or long-term results without surgical treatment. Both mitral valvuloplasty (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) have been performed in the treatment of active native mitral infective endocarditis (ANMIE). However, the outcomes of the two approaches remain unclear. The aim of this study was to systematically review the two procedures with mortality and survival as the primary endpoints. METHODS:A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify all relevant studies with comparative data on MVP versus MVR for the treatment of ANMIE. Information on baseline characteristics of patients, operation method, quality of literature, follow-up, and so forth was abstracted using standardized protocols. Pooled odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) was calculated and possible publication bias was tested. RESULTS:Nine comparative observational studies with a total of 633 patients (MVP = 265, MVR = 368) were identified for qualitative assessment, data extraction, and analysis. The summary OR for operative mortality, comparing repair with replacement, was 0.37 (95% CI 0.0.18-0.80; p = 0.0005). Summary 1- and 5-year HRs for event-free survival were 0.43 (95% CI 0.20-0.92; p = 0.03) and 0.44 (95% CI 0.25-0.77, p = 0.004), respectively (repair vs. replacement). Summary 1- and 5-year survival HRs were 0.51 (95% CI 0.24-1.08; p = 0.08) and 0.55 (95% CI 0.32-0.96; p = 0.004), respectively (repair vs. replacement). No heterogeneity was revealed between studies, and possible publication bias was insignificant. CONCLUSIONS:This meta-analysis suggests that MVP may be associated with superior postoperative survival outcomes compared with MVR. MVP is desirable, if possible, as a durable alternative to replacement. However, we must consider the influence of different patient characteristics and surgeons' preferences on the choice of surgical approach, and additional powered clinical trials will be required to confirm these findings.
10.1016/j.jcma.2017.08.017
Comparison of Surgical versus Non-Surgical Treatment of Displaced 3- and 4-Part Fractures of the Proximal Humerus: A Meta-Analysis.
Mao Feng,Zhang De-Hua,Peng Xiao-Chun,Liao Yi
Journal of investigative surgery : the official journal of the Academy of Surgical Research
PURPOSE/AIM:This meta-analysis compares the clinical outcomes of surgical versus conservative treatment of displaced, 3- or 4-part, proximal humeral fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies published until October 2013, reporting functional outcomes of 3- or 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus in skeletally mature patients. Only randomized controlled trials were included. The treatments that were evaluated included non-surgical, open surgery, intramedullary pin, locking plate, arthroplasty, and minimally invasive surgical treatments. A meta-analysis was performed on the difference in functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) between participants undergoing surgical versus non-surgical treatment. RESULTS:Out of 254 participants in the studies who were analyzed, 127 were treated surgically. The difference in mean values of functional score showed similar results between surgical and non-surgical treatments (difference in mean values = 0.015, 95% CI = -0.232 to 0.261, p = .908).The difference in mean values of QoL showed that surgical treatment provided better post-operative QoL than non-surgical treatment (difference in mean values = 0.146, 95% CI = 0.052 to 0.240, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS:Surgical treatment of displaced, multi-fragment fractures of the proximal humerus did not improve shoulder functional outcome, based on the Constant-Murley Score, when compared with conservative and non-surgical treatments. However, health-related QoL was significantly improved with surgical treatment compared with conservative treatment.
10.3109/08941939.2015.1005781