Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
What Is Known And Objective: Whether maintenance therapy with bevacizumab (Bev) + pemetrexed (Pem) can achieve greater clinical benefits than Bev or Pem alone for stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. We assessed the antitumour effect and toxicity of maintenance Bev+Pem versus maintenance with single-agent Bev/Pem in this meta-analysis.
Methods: Appropriate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were screened using electronic databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane and Web of Science). The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs).
Results And Discussion: We included six RCTs that contained 2,447 patients receiving induction therapy with platinum-based combination therapies. The maintenance therapy Bev+Pem group had prolonged PFS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.80, p < 0.00001) and OS (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.83-0.99, p = 0.02) compared with the Bev/Pem group. Moreover, we further analysed the PFS rate (PFSR) and OS rate (OSR) and found that the Bev+Pem group exhibited improved PFSR-0.5y, PFSR-1y, PFSR-1.5y, PFSR-2y and OS-2y, with preferable trends in OS-1y, OS-3y and OS-4y compared with the Bev/Pem single-agent maintenance therapy. In addition, subgroup analyses indicated that the Bev+Pem group had greater PFS and OS among patients aged <65 years, patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0, and patients who never smoked. Regarding adverse events (AEs), the Bev+Pem group exhibited an increased occurrence of anaemia, fatigue, thrombocytopenia and anorexia.
What Is New And Conclusion: For stage IIIB/IV nonsquamous NSCLC patients, maintenance therapy with Bev+Pem offers an increased survival outcome (PFS, OS) compared with monotherapy. However, the increased incidence of AEs should not be neglected.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcpt.13534 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!