Cancer · 2013
Bortezomib-containing induction regimens in transplant-eligible myeloma patients: a meta-analysis of phase 3 randomized clinical trials.
Клиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяМетаанализРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Nooka Ajay K, Kaufman Jonathan L, Behera Madhusmita, Langston Amelia, Waller Edmund K, Flowers Christopher R, Gleason Charise, Boise Lawrence H, Lonial Sagar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The objective of this meta-analysis in patients with myeloma was to test the hypothesis that the addition of bortezomib to induction therapy not only improves the depth of response but also improves post-transplant progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes.
METHODS: Phase 3 trials that randomized newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients with myeloma to receive either a bortezomib-containing induction regimen (BCIR) or a nonbortezomib-containing induction regimen (NBCIR) were identified. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were adapted for data synthesis, and comprehensive meta-analysis software was used to report pooled data as hazard ratios or odds ratios under a random-effects model.
RESULTS: Four published phase 3 trials that included 2169 patients were analyzed. The postinduction and post-transplant pooled odds ratio for achieving a complete response/near complete response or a very good partial response or better and the overall response rate were higher with BCIR. The pooled hazard ratios for 3-year PFS and OS were 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.83; P < .00,001) and 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.96; P = .014), respectively, favoring BCIR. The odds of developing selected grade ≥ 3 toxicities (peripheral neuropathy and varicella-zoster virus reactivation) also were higher with BCIR.
CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis demonstrated that BCIR results in an improved depth of response, which translates into improved post-transplant PFS and OS outcomes despite a higher incidence of toxicity. This analysis supports the concept that the choice of induction regimen can influence post-transplant outcomes such as PFS and OS.
METHODS: Phase 3 trials that randomized newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients with myeloma to receive either a bortezomib-containing induction regimen (BCIR) or a nonbortezomib-containing induction regimen (NBCIR) were identified. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were adapted for data synthesis, and comprehensive meta-analysis software was used to report pooled data as hazard ratios or odds ratios under a random-effects model.
RESULTS: Four published phase 3 trials that included 2169 patients were analyzed. The postinduction and post-transplant pooled odds ratio for achieving a complete response/near complete response or a very good partial response or better and the overall response rate were higher with BCIR. The pooled hazard ratios for 3-year PFS and OS were 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.83; P < .00,001) and 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.96; P = .014), respectively, favoring BCIR. The odds of developing selected grade ≥ 3 toxicities (peripheral neuropathy and varicella-zoster virus reactivation) also were higher with BCIR.
CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis demonstrated that BCIR results in an improved depth of response, which translates into improved post-transplant PFS and OS outcomes despite a higher incidence of toxicity. This analysis supports the concept that the choice of induction regimen can influence post-transplant outcomes such as PFS and OS.