A systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials on adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4614-4614 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. D. Yan ◽  
D. Black ◽  
P. H. Sugarbaker ◽  
Y. Yonemura ◽  
J. Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Abdominal Abscess ◽  
Term Survival

4614 Objectives: Despite the use of adjuvant systemic chemotherapy or radiotherapy, the long-term survival in patients with stage III and IV gastric cancer remains limited. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness and safety of adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Studies eligible for this systematic review included those in which patients with gastric cancer were randomly assigned to receive surgery combined with intraperitoneal chemotherapy versus surgery without intraperitoneal chemotherapy. All forms of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in addition to surgery were included. There were no language restrictions. Quality of the trials was assessed by a predetermined checklist. The primary end-point of the meta-analysis was overall survival, defined as the time from random assignment to the last follow-up or death. Secondary end-points were the differences in the incidence of recurrence, morbidity and mortality. Results: Thirteen reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included for appraisal and data extraction. Ten reports were judged fair-quality and subjected to the meta-analysis. A significant improvement in survival was associated with hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIIC) alone (HR = 0.60; 95% CI = 0.43 to 0.83; p = 0.002) or combined with early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (EPIC) (HR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.29 to 0.68; p = 0.0002). Survival improvement was marginally significant (HR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.44 to 1.01; p = 0.06) with normothermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy, but not significant with EPIC alone or delayed postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy was also found to be associated with higher risks for intra-abdominal abscess (RR = 2.37; 95% CI = 1.32 to 4.26; p = 0.003) and neutropenia (RR = 4.33; 95% CI = 1.49 to 12.61; p = 0.007). Conclusion: The present meta-analysis indicates that HIIC with or without EPIC after resection of advanced gastric primary cancer is associated with an improved overall survival. However, increased risks of intra-abdominal abscess and neutropenia are demonstrated. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals Impact of surgical margin status on the survival outcome after surgical resection of gastric cancer: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e040282
Author(s):  
Zhiyuan Jiang ◽  
Zhaolun Cai ◽  
Yuan Yin ◽  
Chaoyong Shen ◽  
Jinming Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Curative Intent ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Effect Model ◽  
Statistical Heterogeneity ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionGenerally, complete resection with cancer cell negative (R0) margin has been accepted as the most effective treatment of gastric cancer and positive resection (R1/R2) margin has been associated with decreased survival to varied degrees. However, the independent impact of microscopical positive (R1) margin on long-term survival may be confounded. No meta-analysis has worked at the association between R1 margin and outcomes of gastric cancer and the available evidence are scant. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantitatively explore the role of R1 margin on gastric (including oesophagogastric junction) cancer survival after curative intent resection.Methods and analysisThe protocol was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases will be performed from their inceptions to 30 April 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case–control studies focusing on the impact of R1 margin on survival of gastric cancer after curative intent resection. The primary outcome will be the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) and the secondary outcomes will be 5-year OS rate and 5-year DFS rate. The Cochrane tool for bias assessment in randomised trials and Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-I for the assessment of bias in non-randomised studies (NRS) will be used. Statistical heterogeneity will be assessed by visual inspection of forest plots and measured using the I2 statistics. A fixed-effect model will be used when heterogeneity is low, otherwise, a random-effect model will be chosen. Publication bias will be assessed by funnel plots, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis will be performed in the right context. For each outcome, we will perform data synthesis separately for RCTs and NRS using Rev Man V.5.3 software and compile ‘summary of findings’ tables separately for RCTs and NRS using GRADEpro software. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations considerations will also be used to make an overall assessment of the quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationThere is no requirement for ethics approval because no patient data will be collected at an individual level in this systematic review and meta-analysis.The results of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences, any deviations from the protocol will be clearly documented and explained in its final report.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020165110.

Chemotherapy in Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Aggregate Data

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18) ◽  
pp. 2903-2909 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna D. Wagner ◽  
Wilfried Grothe ◽  
Johannes Haerting ◽  
Gerhard Kleber ◽  
Axel Grothey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Continuous Infusion ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Drug Combination ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Fixed Effect Model

Purpose This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods Randomized phase II and III clinical trials on first-line chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer were identified by electronic searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and Cancerlit; hand searches of relevant abstract books and reference lists; and contact to experts. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed-effect model. Overall survival, reported as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% CI, was the primary outcome measure. Results Analysis of chemotherapy versus best supportive care (HR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.52) and combination versus single agent, mainly fluorouracil (FU) -based chemotherapy (HR = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.93) showed significant overall survival benefits in favor of chemotherapy and combination chemotherapy, respectively. In addition, comparisons of FU/cisplatin-containing regimens with versus without anthracyclines (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.95) and FU/anthracycline-containing combinations with versus without cisplatin (HR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76 to 0.91) both demonstrated a significant survival benefit for the three-drug combination. Comparing irinotecan-containing versus nonirinotecan-containing combinations (mainly FU/cisplatin) resulted in a nonsignificant survival benefit in favor of the irinotecan-containing regimens (HR = 0.88; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.06), but they have never been compared against a three-drug combination. Conclusion Best survival results are achieved with three-drug regimens containing FU, an anthracycline, and cisplatin. Among these, regimens including FU as bolus exhibit a higher rate of toxic deaths than regimens using a continuous infusion of FU, such as epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous-infusion FU.

scholarly journals First-line systemic therapy for advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175883591987772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji Cheng ◽  
Ming Cai ◽  
Xiaoming Shuai ◽  
Jinbo Gao ◽  
Guobin Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
First Line ◽  
Systemic Treatments ◽  
Platinum Doublet

Background: Systemic therapy is the standard treatment against advanced gastric cancer. Fluoropyrimidine plus platinum doublet has been recommended as the preferred first-line strategy. However, there is still a lack of a comprehensive and hierarchical evidence that compares all eligible literature simultaneously. Methods: Record retrieval was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, ASCO, and ESMO meeting library from inception to October 2018. Randomized controlled trials featuring comparisons between different first-line systemic treatments against advanced gastric cancer were eligible. Overall survival was utilized as the primary endpoint. Pairwise and network calculations were based on a random-effects model and the hierarchical ranking was numerically indicated by P-score. All procedures were conducted according to Cochrane Handbook 5.1 and PRISMA for Network Meta-analysis (Registration identifier: CRD42018084951). Results: A total of 119 studies were eligible for our pooled analysis. Concerning general analysis, ‘fluoropyrimidine plus platinum-based triplet’ topped the overall survival hierarchy (HR 0.91 [0.83–0.99], P-score = 0.903, p = 0.04) while it ranked in second place for progression-free survival and objective response rate. However, it displayed worse tolerability against ‘fluoropyrimidine plus platinum doublet’. More specifically, ‘Capecitabine plus cisplatin-based triplet plus targeted medication’ topped the ranking among all fluoropyrimidine plus platinum-based regimens in additional analysis. Nevertheless, it did not reach statistical advantage against fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin doublet in terms of survival benefits, while still displaying significantly worse safety profile. Conclusions: Taken together, fluoropyrimidine plus oxaliplatin doublet (especially capecitabine or S-1) should still be considered as the preferred first-line regimen owing to its comparable survival benefits and lower toxicity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document