scholarly journals Eye, Hepatobiliary, and Renal Disorders of Erlotinib in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hye Duck Choi ◽  
Min Jung Chang

Abstract Background: Erlotinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors used to treat EGFR mutation positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Skin rash and diarrhea are well-known and common adverse events in patients receiving erlotinib, whereas other adverse events, including eye, liver, or renal disorders have not been evaluated adequately. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the ocular, hepatobiliary, and renal toxicities of erlotinib in patients with NSCLC cancers. Methods: In total, sixty studies were assessed, and the results of the included studies were quantitatively integrated using meta-analysis. The incidence of ocular, hepatobiliary (alanine aminotransferase [ALT] and bilirubin elevations; other hepatic adverse events), and renal adverse events were estimated. Additionally, the erlotinib-treated groups and the control groups (placebo or other treatment) were compared with respect to ocular disorders and ALT elevation. The study protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42018093758. Results: The overall incidence of ocular disorders was 3.30% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.20%–5.00%). The incidence of ALT elevation, bilirubin elevation, and other hepatobiliary disorders was 6.40% (95% CI 3.90%–10.4%), 3.80% (95% CI 2.30%–6.10%), and 1.00% (95% 0.60%–1.80%), respectively. The incidence of renal disorder was 3.10% (95% CI 1.90%–5.00%). The risk of ocular toxicity in the erlotinib treatment group was significantly increased (risk ratio = 2.91; 95% CI 1.70–4.98) compared to that in the control group. ALT elevation was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion: Based on the results, careful monitoring of ocular toxicity in patients receiving erlotinib should be recommended and closer monitoring of hepatic toxicity should be also recommended in patients with liver-related risk factors.

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bing-Di Yan ◽  
Xiao-Feng Cong ◽  
Sha-Sha Zhao ◽  
Meng Ren ◽  
Zi-Ling Liu ◽  
...  

Background and Objective: We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of antigen-specific immunotherapy (Belagenpumatucel-L, MAGE-A3, L-BLP25, and TG4010) in the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). </P><P> Methods: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted. Eligible studies were clinical trials of patients with NSCLC who received the antigenspecific immunotherapy. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for overall response rate (ORR) and the incidence of adverse events. </P><P> Results: In total, six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 4,806 patients were included. Pooled results showed that, antigen-specific immunotherapy did not significantly prolong OS (HR=0.92, 95%CI: 0.83, 1.01; P=0.087) and PFS (HR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.85, 1.01; P=0.088), but improved ORR (RR=1.72, 95%CI: 1.11, 2.68; P=0.016). Subgroup analysis based on treatment agents showed that, tecemotide was associated with a significant improvement in OS (HR=0.85, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.99; P=0.03) and PFS (HR=0.70, 95%CI: 0.49, 0.99, P=0.044); TG4010 was associated with an improvement in PFS (HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.75, 1.00, P=0.058). In addition, NSCLC patients who were treated with antigen-specific immunotherapy exhibited a significantly higher incidence of adverse events than those treated with other treatments (RR=1.11, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.24; P=0.046). </P><P> Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the clinical survival benefits of tecemotide and TG4010 in the treatment of NSCLC. However, these evidence might be limited by potential biases. Therefore, further well-conducted, large-scale RCTs are needed to verify our findings.


Author(s):  
Calvin S.H. Ng ◽  
John K. MacDonald ◽  
Sebastien Gilbert ◽  
Ali Z. Khan ◽  
Young T. Kim ◽  
...  

Objective Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy was introduced over 25 years ago. More recently, the technique has been modified from a multiport video-assisted thoracic surgery (mVATS) to uniportal (uVATS) and robotic (rVATS), with proponents for each approach. Additionally most lobectomies are still performed using an open approach. We sought to provide evidence-based recommendations to help define the optimal surgical approach to lobectomy for early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of articles searched without limits from January 2000 to January 2018 comparing open, mVATS, uVATS, and rVATS using sources Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were considered for inclusion. Articles were individually scrutinized by ISMICS consensus conference members, and evidence-based statements were created and consensus processes were used to determine the ensuing recommendations. The ACC/AHA Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendation Classification system was used to assess the overall quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations. Results and recommendations One hundred and forty-five studies met the predefined inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Comparisons were analyzed between VATS and open, and between different VATS approaches looking at oncological outcomes (survival, recurrence, lymph node evaluation), safety (adverse events), function (pain, quality of life, pulmonary function), and cost-effectiveness. Fifteen statements addressing these areas achieved consensus. The highest level of evidence suggested that mVATS is preferable to open lobectomy with lower adverse events (36% versus 42%; 88,460 patients) and less pain (IIa recommendation). Our meta-analysis suggested that overall survival was better (IIb) with mVATS compared with open (71.5% versus 66.7% 5-years; 16,200 patients). Different VATS approaches were similar for most outcomes, although uVATS may be associated with less pain and analgesic requirements (IIb). Conclusions This meta-analysis supports the role of VATS lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. Apart from potentially less pain and analgesic requirement with uVATS, different minimally invasive surgical approaches appear to have similar outcomes.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feiyu Shan ◽  
Bo Zhang ◽  
Leitao Sun ◽  
Lufan Xie ◽  
Minhe Shen ◽  
...  

Purpose. To evaluate the effect of combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Methods. We identified relevant studies by electronic search (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science from 1 January 1960 to 29 October 2016) and manual search. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary end point included overall survival (OS) and toxicities. The data was pooled for quantitative analysis and the final effect size was reported as hazard ratio (HR) for survival outcomes and relative risk (RR) for safety outcomes, both with a random-effects model. Results. Three randomized controlled trials enrolling 1302 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were included in this meta-analysis. An evident PFS improvement (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.63–0.83, P < 0.01) was observed in patients with pemetrexed and bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy compared with single-agent maintenance therapy, yet it did not subsequently lead to a significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.84–1.10, P = 0.66). Our analysis also showed statistically increased risks for provoking grade 3-4 adverse events in patients managed using pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination (RR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.07–2.36, P = 0.022). Conclusions. Pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy leads to significant improvement in PFS but not in OS for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, which also increases the risks of grade 3-4 adverse events. Yet, in view of the limitation of existing studies and this meta-analysis, current evidence is not adequate to support routine use of pemetrexed-bevacizumab maintenance.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document