The impact of time to adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) on survival in colorectal cancer (CRC): A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 364-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. J. Biagi ◽  
M. Raphael ◽  
W. D. King ◽  
W. Kong ◽  
W. J. Mackillop ◽  
...  

364 Background: The optimal timing from CRC surgery to initiation of AC is unknown. We report a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the relationship between time to adjuvant chemotherapy (TTAC) and survival. Methods: A systematic review of literature was done to identify studies that described the relationship between TTAC and survival. Studies were only included if the distribution of relevant prognostic factors was adequately described, and either comparative groups were balanced or results adjusted for the prognostic factors. Hazard ratio (HR) and TTAC for overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) from each study were converted to a regression coefficient (β) and standard error (SE) corresponding to a continuous representation per 4 weeks of TTAC. The adjusted β from individual studies were combined using a fixed-effect model. Inverse-variance (1/SE2) was used to weight individual studies. The possible effect of publication bias was investigated using the trim and fill approach. Results: We identified 9 eligible studies involving 14,357 patients (4 published articles, 5 abstracts). Two studies were randomized trials and 7 were cohort studies. Six studies reported TTAC as a binary variable and 3 reported TTAC as ≥3 categories. An estimate of HR for OS was derived from all 9 studies and estimate for DFS was derived from 5 studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated that a 4-week increase in TTAC was associated with a significant decrease in both OS (HR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.09-1.15), and DFS (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.11-1.20). The analysis showed no significant heterogeneity among studies. These TTAC associations remained significant after analysis for potential publication bias, and when the analysis was repeated excluding the two studies of largest weight. Conclusions: This study demonstrates a 12% increase in the risk of death for each 4 week of delay in the start of AC for CRC. These findings indicate the need for clinicians and health systems managers to take the steps necessary to keep TTAC as short as reasonably achievable. In addition, our results suggest there may be some benefit to AC after a 3-month TTAC delay. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
YongCheng Su ◽  
XiaoGang Zheng

Abstract PURPOSE: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the impact of delaying surgery in operable breast tumor patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on survival. METHODS:An electronic literature retrieval was conducted on PubMed/Medline and EMBASE((between January 2000 and June 2020).The primary end point was overall survival(OS),secondary end points included disease-free survival (DFS) or recurence-free survival (RFS).The HR with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model. RESULTS:The combined HR for OS was 1.51 (95% CI:1.30-1.76; P=0.000) by fixed effects model.No statistically significant heterogeneity was found (P=0.168, I 2 =31.3%).The pooled HR for RFS/DFS was 1.59 (95%CI:1.30-1.95,I 2 = 66.0%) by random-effects model,with significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSION:Our meta-analysis revealed a significant adverse association between longer TTS after NAC and more inferior OS and RFS/DFS in patients with breast cancer.Clinicians and patients should minimize surgical delay after NAC as much as possible.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
YongCheng Su ◽  
XiaoGang Zheng

Abstract PURPOSE: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the impact of delaying surgery in operable breast tumor patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on survival.METHODS: An electronic literature retrieval was conducted on PubMed/Medline and EMBASE((between January 2000 and June 2020).The primary end point was overall survival(OS),secondary end points included disease-free survival (DFS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS).The HR with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model.RESULTS: The combined HR for OS was 1.52(95% CI 1.29-1.78; P = 0.000) by fixed-effects model.No statistically significant heterogeneity was found (P=0.114;I2=39.8%).The pooled HR for RFS/DFS was 1.47 (95%CI: 1.27- 1.71,I2=61.9%) by random-effects model, with significant heterogeneity.CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis revealed a significant adverse association between longer TTS after NAC and more inferior OS and RFS/DFS in patients with breast cancer.Clinicians and patients should minimize surgical delay after NAC as much as possible.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 1141
Author(s):  
Gianpaolo Marte ◽  
Andrea Tufo ◽  
Francesca Steccanella ◽  
Ester Marra ◽  
Piera Federico ◽  
...  

Background: In the last 10 years, the management of patients with gastric cancer liver metastases (GCLM) has changed from chemotherapy alone, towards a multidisciplinary treatment with liver surgery playing a leading role. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy of hepatectomy for GCLM and to analyze the impact of related prognostic factors on long-term outcomes. Methods: The databases PubMed (Medline), EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant articles from January 2010 to September 2020. We included prospective and retrospective studies that reported the outcomes after hepatectomy for GCLM. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of prognostic factors was performed. Results: We included 40 studies, including 1573 participants who underwent hepatic resection for GCLM. Post-operative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 24.7% and 1.6%, respectively. One-year, 3-years, and 5-years overall survival (OS) were 72%, 37%, and 26%, respectively. The 1-year, 3-years, and 5-years disease-free survival (DFS) were 44%, 24%, and 22%, respectively. Well-moderately differentiated tumors, pT1–2 and pN0–1 adenocarcinoma, R0 resection, the presence of solitary metastasis, unilobar metastases, metachronous metastasis, and chemotherapy were all strongly positively associated to better OS and DFS. Conclusion: In the present study, we demonstrated that hepatectomy for GCLM is feasible and provides benefits in terms of long-term survival. Identification of patient subgroups that could benefit from surgical treatment is mandatory in a multidisciplinary setting.


2021 ◽  
pp. 097226292198987
Author(s):  
Sakshi Vashisht ◽  
Poonam Kaushal ◽  
Ravi Vashisht

This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the relationship between emotional intelligence, personality variables (Big V personality traits, self-esteem, self-efficacy, optimism and proactive personality) and career adaptability of students. Data were coded on CMA software version 3.0. Product–moment correlation coefficient (r) was considered as the effect size measure for this study. Publication bias was assessed using Egger’s regression test along with Orwin’s fail-safe N, but no significant publication bias was detected. From the results of 54 studies, it was found that all variables of the study had meta-analytic correlation with career adaptability of students. For heterogeneity, subgroup analysis was conducted, and significant differences were found.


2003 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Winter-Roach ◽  
L. Hooper ◽  
H. Kitchener

A systematic review and meta analysis has been undertaken in order to evaluate the effectiveness of adjuvant therapy following surgery for early ovarian cancer. Trials reported since 1990 have been of a higher quality enabling a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs adjuvant radiotherapy and a meta analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy vs observation. There was no significant difference between radiotherapy and chemotherapy, though these comprised studies which demonstrated considerable heterogeneity. Chemotherapy did confer significant benefit over observation in terms of both overall and disease free survival. Except for women in whom adequate surgical staging has revealed well differentiated disease confined to one or both ovaries with intact capsule, platinum chemotherapy should be offered to reduce risk of recurrence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 4462
Author(s):  
Konstantinos G. Kyriakoulis ◽  
Anastasios Kollias ◽  
Garyphallia Poulakou ◽  
Ioannis G. Kyriakoulis ◽  
Ioannis P. Trontzas ◽  
...  

The role of immunomodulatory agents in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been of increasing interest. Anakinra, an interleukin-1 inhibitor, has been shown to offer significant clinical benefits in patients with COVID-19 and hyperinflammation. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis regarding the impact of anakinra on the outcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 was conducted. Studies, randomized or non-randomized with adjustment for confounders, reporting on the adjusted risk of death in patients treated with anakinra versus those not treated with anakinra were deemed eligible. A search was performed in PubMed/EMBASE databases, as well as in relevant websites, until 1 August 2021. The meta-analysis of six studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria (n = 1553 patients with moderate to severe pneumonia, weighted age 64 years, men 66%, treated with anakinra 50%, intubated 3%) showed a pooled hazard ratio for death in patients treated with anakinra at 0.47 (95% confidence intervals 0.34, 0.65). A meta-regression analysis did not reveal any significant associations between the mean age, percentage of males, mean baseline C-reactive protein levels, mean time of administration since symptoms onset among the included studies and the hazard ratios for death. All studies were considered as low risk of bias. The current evidence, although derived mainly from observational studies, supports a beneficial role of anakinra in the treatment of selected patients with COVID-19.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mu-Hung Tsai ◽  
Shang-Yin Wu ◽  
Tsung Yu ◽  
Sen-Tien Tsai ◽  
Yuan-Hua Wu

Abstract Background and purpose Concurrent chemoradiotherapy is the established treatment for locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, there is no evidence supporting routine adjuvant chemotherapy. We aimed to demonstrate the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival and distant metastasis in high-risk N3 NPC patients. Materials and methods We linked the Taiwan Cancer Registry and Cause of Death database to obtain data. Clinical N3 NPC patients were divided as those receiving definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with adjuvant 5-fluorouracil and platinum (PF) chemotherapy and those receiving no chemotherapy after CCRT. Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. We compared overall survival, disease-free survival, local control, and distant metastasis in both groups using Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Results We included 431 patients (152 and 279 patients in the adjuvant PF and observation groups, respectively). Median follow-up was 4.3 years. The 5-year overall survival were 69.1% and 57.4% in the adjuvant PF chemotherapy and observation groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Adjuvant PF chemotherapy was associated with a lower risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43–0.84; p = 0.003), even after adjusting for baseline prognostic factors (HR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43–0.86; p = 0.005). Distant metastasis-free survival at 12 months was higher in the adjuvant PF chemotherapy group than in the observation group (98% vs 84.8%; p < 0.001). After adjusting for baseline prognostic factors, adjuvant PF chemotherapy was associated with freedom from distant metastasis (HR = 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02–0.46; p = 0.003). Conclusion Prospective evaluation of adjuvant PF chemotherapy in N3 NPC patients treated with definitive CCRT is warranted because adjuvant PF chemotherapy was associated with improved overall survival and decreased risk of distant metastasis.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha Marcella Vaselli ◽  
Daniel Hungerford ◽  
Ben Shenton ◽  
Arwa Khashkhusha ◽  
Nigel A. Cunliffe ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundA year following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, new infections and deaths continue to increase in Europe. Serological studies, through providing evidence of past infection, can aid understanding of the population dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infection.ObjectivesThis systematic review of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence studies in Europe was undertaken to inform public health strategies including vaccination, that aim to accelerate population immunity.MethodsWe searched the databases Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and grey literature sources for studies reporting seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Europe published between 01/12/2019 - 30/09/20. We provide a narrative synthesis of included studies. Studies were categorized into subgroups including healthcare workers (HCWs), community, outbreaks, pregnancy and children/school. Due to heterogeneity in other subgroups, we only performed a random effects meta-analysis of the seroprevalence amongst HCWs stratified by their country.Results109 studies were included spanning 17 European countries, that estimated the seroprevalence of SAR-CoV2 from samples obtained between November 2019 – August 2020. A total of 53/109 studies included HCWs with a reported seroprevalence among HCWs ranging from 0.7% to 45.3%, which did not differ significantly by country. In community studies significant heterogeneity was reported in the seroprevalence among different age groups and the majority of studies reported there was no significant difference by gender.ConclusionThis review demonstrates a wide heterogeneity in reported seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies between populations. Continued evaluation of seroprevalence is required to understand the impact of public health measures and inform interventions including vaccination programmes.


Author(s):  
Fernando Magro ◽  
Maria Manuela Estevinho ◽  
Cláudia Camila Dias ◽  
Luís Correia ◽  
Paula Lago ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and Aims Interest in histology for ulcerative colitis [UC] has increased recently. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess, for the first time, whether histological outcomes are more informative than endoscopic and clinical outcomes in distinguishing the impact of intervention over placebo in induction trials. Methods MEDLINE, ScienceDirect and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify randomized placebo-controlled trials [RCTs] enrolling moderate-to-severe UC patients. Studies were assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs. We analysed the pooled proportion of patients achieving clinical, endoscopic and histological remission and response after a pharmacological intervention and compared the results with those of placebo-treated patients by using a random-effects model. Results From 889 identified records, 13 RCTs were included. The odds ratio [OR] for remission was higher in patients receiving intervention than in those under placebo for clinical (OR 2.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.33–3.43), endoscopic [OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.19–11.18] and histological remission [OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.20–2.84]. Significant differences were observed for all response outcomes [clinical: OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.84–2.85; endoscopic: OR 2.16, 95% CI 1.51–3.10; histological: OR 3.63, 95% CI, 1.41–9.36]. No significant heterogeneity existed; no subgroup effects were found for duration of the induction or histological scale [p &gt; 0.05]. Clinical and histological remission and endoscopic response were concordant in discriminating interventions from placebo. Conclusion Histological outcomes are informative in trials of moderate-to-severe UC. Further studies analysing histology at the end of induction are needed to confirm its relevance in distinguishing the efficacy of an intervention over placebo in comparison to clinical and endoscopic outcomes and to explore its prognostic value.


BMJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. m2980 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reed AC Siemieniuk ◽  
Jessica J Bartoszko ◽  
Long Ge ◽  
Dena Zeraatkar ◽  
Ariel Izcovich ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective To compare the effects of treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Design Living systematic review and network meta-analysis. Data sources WHO covid-19 database, a comprehensive multilingual source of global covid-19 literature, up to 3 December 2020 and six additional Chinese databases up to 12 November 2020. Study selection Randomised clinical trials in which people with suspected, probable, or confirmed covid-19 were randomised to drug treatment or to standard care or placebo. Pairs of reviewers independently screened potentially eligible articles. Methods After duplicate data abstraction, a bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. Risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using a modification of the Cochrane risk of bias 2.0 tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. For each outcome, interventions were classified in groups from the most to the least beneficial or harmful following GRADE guidance. Results 85 trials enrolling 41 669 patients met inclusion criteria as of 21 October 2020; 50 (58.8%) trials and 25 081 (60.2%) patients are new from the previous iteration; 43 (50.6%) trials evaluating treatments with at least 100 patients or 20 events met the threshold for inclusion in the analyses. Compared with standard care, corticosteroids probably reduce death (risk difference 17 fewer per 1000 patients, 95% credible interval 34 fewer to 1 more, moderate certainty), mechanical ventilation (29 fewer per 1000 patients, 54 fewer to 1 more, moderate certainty), and days free from mechanical ventilation (2.6 fewer, 0.2 fewer to 5.0 fewer, moderate certainty). The impact of remdesivir on mortality, mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay, and duration of symptoms is uncertain, but it probably does not substantially increase adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation (0 more per 1000, 9 fewer to 40 more, moderate certainty). Azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, interferon-beta, and tocilizumab may not reduce risk of death or have an effect on any other patient-important outcome. The certainty in effects for all other interventions was low or very low. Conclusion Corticosteroids probably reduce mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with covid-19 compared with standard care, whereas azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine, interferon-beta, and tocilizumab may not reduce either. Whether or not remdesivir confers any patient-important benefit remains uncertain. Systematic review registration This review was not registered. The protocol is included as a supplement. Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is the second update of the original article published on 30 July 2020 ( BMJ 2020;370:m2980), and previous versions can be found as data supplements. When citing this paper please consider adding the version number and date of access for clarity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document