Medicine · 2023
Sorafenib exhibits lower toxicity and comparable efficacy to sunitinib as a first-line treatment for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Li Dailong, Wan Sha, Li Wanqiang, Cheng Chunlai, Xu Lu, Gu Peng
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: To assess the safety and efficacy of sorafenib and sunitinib as first-line treatments for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), to provide evidence-based support for clinical decision-making regarding rational drug use.
METHODS: Until May 10, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases to identify clinical studies comparing sorafenib with sunitinib as first-line treatment for mRCC. The literature was screened, data extracted, and quality evaluated independently by 2 researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted using Revman5.4 software.
RESULTS: A total of 3741 patients were enrolled in 20 studies. The meta-analysis results indicated that there were no significant differences in the 2- and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates between the sorafenib and sunitinib groups (P > .05). The disease control rate (DCR) was comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05), while the objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the sunitinib group (P = .03). However, subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in ORR, DCR, 2- and 5-year PFS, and OS rates between sorafenib and sunitinib among both Asian populations as well as European and American populations (P > .05). In terms of drug-related adverse events, the incidence of grade ≥ 3 hypertension, leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the sorafenib group compared to the sunitinib group (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: In the first-line treatment of mRCC, sorafenib exhibits comparable efficacy to sunitinib but with lower toxicity.
METHODS: Until May 10, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases to identify clinical studies comparing sorafenib with sunitinib as first-line treatment for mRCC. The literature was screened, data extracted, and quality evaluated independently by 2 researchers. Meta-analysis was conducted using Revman5.4 software.
RESULTS: A total of 3741 patients were enrolled in 20 studies. The meta-analysis results indicated that there were no significant differences in the 2- and 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates between the sorafenib and sunitinib groups (P > .05). The disease control rate (DCR) was comparable between the 2 groups (P > .05), while the objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the sunitinib group (P = .03). However, subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in ORR, DCR, 2- and 5-year PFS, and OS rates between sorafenib and sunitinib among both Asian populations as well as European and American populations (P > .05). In terms of drug-related adverse events, the incidence of grade ≥ 3 hypertension, leukopenia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, nausea and vomiting were significantly lower in the sorafenib group compared to the sunitinib group (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: In the first-line treatment of mRCC, sorafenib exhibits comparable efficacy to sunitinib but with lower toxicity.