scholarly journals Do prostatectomy suitable for localized prostate cancer patient: evidence from meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaojin Luo ◽  
Meilian Yi ◽  
Qun Hu ◽  
Weihua Yin
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patient ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Prostate Cancer Patient ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Objective:To evaluate the role of prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer patient. Methods: A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, and Web of Science through March 22, 2019 according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to identify studies reporting on prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer patient. Results: Of a total of 1827 studies, 6 were considered for evidence synthesis. A total of 4476 patients in 4 studies were included for survival analysis, 2,779 patients received prostatectomy and 1,697 patients were received no treatment but regularly followed up. Two other studies were included for adverse effects analysis. Prostatectomy displayed a significantly decreased risk of death of 35% compared with observation (OR=0.65, 95%CI 0.53-0.81, P<0.0001). Pooled data indicated prostatectomy reduced 55% risk of disease progression (OR=0.45, 95% CI 0.34-0.60, P<0.00001). Anxiety, depressed mode, wellbeing, and sense of meaningfulness for patients were no difference between prostatectomy and observation group. However, prostatectomy increased 2.77 folds risk of erection dysfunction (OR=2.77, 95% CI, 1.60–4.81, P=0.0003 Conclusion: Prostatectomy prolonged survival and deferred disease progression compared to observation for localized prostate cancer patients. Symptoms between two groups were not significant difference except for erection function. Patients should decide prostatectomy or not after balancing the survival benefit and erection dysfunction.

scholarly journals Addition of Androgen-Deprivation Therapy or Brachytherapy Boost to External Beam Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (26) ◽  
pp. 3024-3031 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Jackson ◽  
Holly E. Hartman ◽  
Robert T. Dess ◽  
Sam R. Birer ◽  
Payal D. Soni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
External Beam Radiotherapy ◽  
Localized Prostate Cancer ◽  
External Beam ◽  
Brachytherapy Boost ◽  
Meta Analyses

PURPOSE In men with localized prostate cancer, the addition of androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) or a brachytherapy boost (BT) to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) have been shown to improve various oncologic end points. Practice patterns indicate that those who receive BT are significantly less likely to receive ADT, and thus we sought to perform a network meta-analysis to compare the predicted outcomes of a randomized trial of EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic review identified published randomized trials comparing EBRT with or without ADT, or EBRT (with or without ADT) with or without BT, that reported on overall survival (OS). Standard fixed-effects meta-analyses were performed for each comparison, and a meta-regression was conducted to adjust for use and duration of ADT. Network meta-analyses were performed to compare EBRT plus ADT versus EBRT plus BT. Bayesian analyses were also performed, and a rank was assigned to each treatment after Markov Chain Monte Carlo analyses to create a surface under the cumulative ranking curve. RESULTS Six trials compared EBRT with or without ADT (n = 4,663), and 3 compared EBRT with or without BT (n = 718). The addition of ADT to EBRT improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.62 to 0.81]), whereas the addition of BT did not significantly improve OS (HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.36]). In a network meta-analysis, EBRT plus ADT had improved OS compared with EBRT plus BT (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.89]). Bayesian modeling demonstrated an 88% probability that EBRT plus ADT resulted in superior OS compared with EBRT plus BT. CONCLUSION Our findings suggest that current practice patterns of omitting ADT with EBRT plus BT may result in inferior OS compared with EBRT plus ADT in men with intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer. ADT for these men should remain a critical component of treatment regardless of radiotherapy delivery method until randomized evidence demonstrates otherwise.

scholarly journals Prognostic value of miR-21 for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
MY Cynthia Stafford ◽  
Colin E Willoughby ◽  
Colum P Walsh ◽  
Declan J McKenna
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Poor Prognosis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Clinical Biomarker ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Relationship

Elevated levels of miR-21 expression are associated with many cancers, suggesting it may be a promising clinical biomarker. In prostate cancer (PCa), however, there is still no consensus about the usefulness of miR-21 as an indicator of disease progression. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the value of miR-21 expression as a prognostic measurement in PCa patients. Medline (Ovid), EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for relevant publications between 2010 to 2021. Studies exploring the relationship between miR-21 expression, PCa prognosis and clinicopathological factors were selected for review. Those reporting hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were subject to meta-analyses. Fixed-effect models were employed to calculated pooled HRs and 95% CIs. Risk of bias in each study was assessed using QUIPS tool. Certainty of evidence in each meta-analysis was assessed using GRADE guidelines. A total of 64 studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 11 were eligible for inclusion in meta-analysis. Meta-analyses revealed that high miR-21 expression was associated with poor prognosis: HR=1.58 (95% CI=1.19-2.09) for biochemical recurrence, MODERATE certainty; HR=1.46 (95% CI=1.06-2.01) for death, VERY LOW certainty; and HR=1.26 (95% CI=0.70-2.27) for disease progression, VERY LOW certainty. Qualitative summary revealed elevated miR-21 expression was significantly positively associated with PCa stage, Gleason score and risk groups. This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that elevated levels of miR-21 are associated with poor prognosis in PCa patients. miR-21 expression may therefore be a useful prognostic biomarker in this disease.

scholarly journals Association of Body Mass Index with Clinical Outcomes in Non-Dialysis-Dependent Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seyed-Foad Ahmadi ◽  
Golara Zahmatkesh ◽  
Emad Ahmadi ◽  
Elani Streja ◽  
Connie M. Rhee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Body Mass Index ◽  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Body Mass ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Kidney Disease Progression ◽  
Meta Analyses

Background: Previous studies have not shown a consistent link between body mass index (BMI) and outcomes such as mortality and kidney disease progression in non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. Therefore, we aimed to complete a systematic review and meta-analysis study on this subject. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and screened 7,123 retrieved studies for inclusion. Two investigators independently selected the studies using predefined criteria and assessed each study's quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. We meta-analyzed the results based on the BMI classification system by the WHO. Results: We included 10 studies (with a total sample size of 484,906) in the systematic review and 4 studies in the meta-analyses. The study results were generally heterogeneous. However, following reanalysis of the largest reported study and our meta-analyses, we observed that in stage 3-5 CKD, being underweight was associated with a higher risk of death while being overweight or obese class I was associated with a lower risk of death; however, obesity classes II and III were not associated with risk of death. In addition, reanalysis of the largest available study showed that a higher BMI was associated with an incrementally higher risk of kidney disease progression; however, this association was attenuated in our pooled results. For earlier stages of CKD, we could not complete meta-analyses as the studies were sparse and had heterogeneous BMI classifications and/or referent BMI groups. Conclusion: Among the group of patients with stage 3-5 CKD, we found a differential association between obesity classes I-III and mortality compared to the general population, indicating an obesity paradox in the CKD population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document