胃癌,阿帕替尼,替吉奥,疗效,安全性,Meta分析 ," /> 胃癌,阿帕替尼,替吉奥,疗效,安全性,Meta分析 ,"/> 阿帕替尼对比替吉奥治疗进展期胃癌疗效和安全性的Meta分析

临床肿瘤学杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (9): 823-829.

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

阿帕替尼对比替吉奥治疗进展期胃癌疗效和安全性的Meta分析

  

  1. 100049  北京  航天中心医院药剂科

  • 收稿日期:2018-04-21 修回日期:2018-06-23 出版日期:2018-09-30 发布日期:2018-11-28
  • 通讯作者: 刘 桦 E-mail:zflhzflh@sina.com

Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of apatinib and S-1 as second-line or above treatment for advanced gastric cancer

  1. Department of Pharmacy, Aerospace Center Hospital, Beijing 100049, China

  • Received:2018-04-21 Revised:2018-06-23 Online:2018-09-30 Published:2018-11-28
  • Contact: LIU Hua E-mail:zflhzflh@sina.com

摘要: 目的 系统评价阿帕替尼对比替吉奥二线及二线以上治疗进展期胃癌的疗效和安全性,为临床用药提供参考。方法 计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、Pubmed、中国知网(CNKI)和万方医学网自建库至2017年12月的全部文献,收集阿帕替尼与替吉奥二线及二线以上治疗进展期胃癌的随机对照试验,按照修改后的Jadad评分量表评价纳入研究文献质量,提取纳入文献的相关资料,采用Rev Man 5.3版统计软件进行Meta分析。结果 共纳入8项随机对照研究,合计456例患者。Meta分析结果 显示,与替吉奥比较,阿帕替尼能显著提高客观缓解率,差异有统计学意义(RD=0.12,95%CI:0.03~0.20,P=0.008);阿帕替尼和替吉奥在疾病控制率(RD=0.05,95%CI:-0.03~0.13,P =0.23)和生活质量改善方面(RD=0.11,95%CI:-0.00~0.22,P =0.22)的差异无统计学意义。安全性方面,阿帕替尼组高血压的发生率显著高于替吉奥组(OR=15.27,95%CI:2.79~83.76,P =0.002),恶心呕吐的发生率显著低于替吉奥组(OR=0.38,95%CI:0.18~0.82,P =0.01),两组中性粒细胞减少、蛋白尿、手足综合征等其他不良反应发生率的差异均无统计学意义。结论 阿帕替尼二线及二线以上治疗进展期胃癌较替吉奥能更好地提高客观缓解率,且两药不良反应相当。

关键词:

胃癌')">"> 胃癌, 阿帕替尼, 替吉奥, 疗效, 安全性, Meta分析

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib and S-1 on advanced gastric cancer as second-line and above treatment in order to provide reference for clinical medication. Methods  The pertinent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about apatinib group and S-1 group as second-line and above treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Studies were retrieved from Cochrane Library, Pubmed, CNKI and Wanfang Database from inception to December 2017. The quality of included studies was evaluated according to modified Jadad scale. Then the related data was extracted and meta-analysis was performed by using Rev Man 5.3 statistical software. Results A total of 8 RCTs were included,involving 456 patients. The Results  of meta-analysis showed that the Objective  response rate was significantly improved in apatinib group compared with S-1 group (RD=0.12, 95%CI: 0.03-0.20, P=0.008). The disease control rate (RD=0.05, 95%CI:-0.03-0.13, P=0.23) and the quality of life (RD=0.11, 95%CI:-0.00-0.22, P=0.22) had no difference between the two groups. The incidence of hypertension was increased in apatinib group compared with S-1 group (OR=15.27, 95%CI: 2.79-83.76, P=0.002). However, nausea and vomiting was decreased with statistically significant difference in apatinib group (OR=0.38, 95%CI: 0.18-0.82, P=0.01). The occurrence of proteinuria, neutropenia, hand-foot syndrome and other adverse reaction had no difference between the two groups. Conclusion Apatinib can improve overall response rate more effectively compared with S-1 as second-line and above treatment for advanced gastric cancer. Meanwhile, the adverse reactions of apatinib were comparable to S-1.

Key words: Gastric cancer, Apatinib, S-1, Efficacy, Safety, Meta-analysis

No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 刘锦;李贵新;马传香. 恶性黑色素瘤腹腔转移1例[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 96 .
[2] 石 玮1,华海清2,王兴华1. 放疗对肠屏障功能的影响及研究进展[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 89 .
[3] 王杰军,李 睿. NCCN成人癌痛临床实践指南解读[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 80 .
[4] 崔传亮,迟志宏,袁香庆,斯 璐,盛锡楠,郭 军. 重组人血管内皮抑制素联合化疗一线治疗晚期黑色素瘤的Ⅱ期临床研究[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 74 .
[5]

高亚杰1,关小倩1,杨海林1,张 阳2,欧阳学农3,杨建伟4,陈 焰5,徐建明6,赵宣良7,王宝成8,刘文超9,张贺龙10,南克俊11,王湘辉12

. 注射用左亚叶酸钙联合治疗晚期胃癌和结直肠癌的Ⅱ期临床研究[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 47 .
[6]  白秀丽1,马振刚1,李际君2. 紫杉醇联合卡培他滨治疗进展期胃癌的临床观察[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 68 .
[7] 徐卫国1,杨小青2,郝世柱1,宋纪宁1,张鹏东1,胡潺潺1,王文雅1. 大肠癌组织中Neuropilin-1的表达及其与肿瘤血管生成的相关性研究[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 29 .
[8] 许景艳1,欧阳建,章宜芬2,周荣富1,陈 兵1,张启国1,杨永公1,邵小雁1,徐 勇1,关朝阳1. 原发性肋骨血管肉瘤的诊治探讨[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 70 .
[9] 徐晓明1,唐金海1,刘万花2,郑凯尔2,秦建伟1,赵祥生1,张 彤3. 触诊阴性乳腺癌的定位方法与同期手术治疗[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 43 .
[10] 张艳玲,邹 岚,肖 红,黄海辉,谭崇富,阮志华,王 希,梁后杰,庞学利. 影像引导调强放射治疗鼻咽癌[J]. 临床肿瘤学杂志, 2009, 14(1): 51 .