Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
Cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer following docetaxel failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
da Silva Izael Pereira, de Amorim Lucas Guimarães Campos Roriz, Piredda Gabriel Vieira, Mass-Lindenbaum Marcelo, de Moraes Francisco Cezar Aquino, Freitas Pedro F S, Melão Bárbara Vieira Lima Aguiar, Brandão Helisandro Montenegro, da Trindade Karine Martins
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) includes chemotherapy and inhibition of the androgen receptor pathway. However, the optimal treatment sequence in this scenario is not yet fully understood. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for efficacy and safety outcomes as second-line therapy in mCRPC patients after docetaxel failure.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for interventional studies comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for patients with mCRPC who have experienced treatment failure with docetaxel as their first-line therapy. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: Eight studies, comprising 1,897 patients were included, of whom 548 (28.8%) received cabazitaxel. Mean follow-up time ranged from 3 to 16.4 months. Median age ranged from 68.1 to 73.9 years in the cabazitaxel group, and 68.0 to 73.1 years in the abiraterone or enzalutamide group. In our meta-analysis, cabazitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) rates (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.47-0.78; p < 0.001) compared to abiraterone or enzalutamide. There were no differences between groups in overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.46-1.24; p = 0.27), therapy-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) (OR 3.00; 95% CI 0.72-12.40; p = 0.12), and PSA decline ≥ 50% (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.51-2.80; p = 0.67).
CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of men with mCRPC after docetaxel failure, second-line therapy with cabazitaxel was associated with a longer PFS compared with abiraterone or enzalutamide, though without a significant difference in OS.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for interventional studies comparing cabazitaxel versus abiraterone or enzalutamide for patients with mCRPC who have experienced treatment failure with docetaxel as their first-line therapy. We computed hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS: Eight studies, comprising 1,897 patients were included, of whom 548 (28.8%) received cabazitaxel. Mean follow-up time ranged from 3 to 16.4 months. Median age ranged from 68.1 to 73.9 years in the cabazitaxel group, and 68.0 to 73.1 years in the abiraterone or enzalutamide group. In our meta-analysis, cabazitaxel significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) rates (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.47-0.78; p < 0.001) compared to abiraterone or enzalutamide. There were no differences between groups in overall survival (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.46-1.24; p = 0.27), therapy-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) (OR 3.00; 95% CI 0.72-12.40; p = 0.12), and PSA decline ≥ 50% (OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.51-2.80; p = 0.67).
CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of men with mCRPC after docetaxel failure, second-line therapy with cabazitaxel was associated with a longer PFS compared with abiraterone or enzalutamide, though without a significant difference in OS.