Alexis Leonard1, Johannes E Wolff. 1. Children's National Medical Center, 111 Michigan Ave NW, Washington DC 20010, USA. aleonard@cnmc.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of topoisomerase inhibitors in the treatment of high-grade gliomas (HGGs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using median overall survival (mOS) and survival gain, we compared the efficacy of chemotherapy drugs in a meta-analysis of 624 HGG studies, including 44,850 patients from studies published between 1976 and 2011. RESULTS: Patient cohorts treated with etoposide had significant improvement in mOS (15.66 months vs. 13.27 months, p=0.026, 49 vs. 795 cohorts) and significant survival gain advantage (p=0.022) over cohorts treated without etoposide. In contrast, patient cohorts treated with irinotecan had significantly worse mOS (10.20 vs. 13.55 months, p=0.008, 35 vs. 810 cohorts) and a disadvantage compared to cohorts treated without irinotecan in survival gain analysis. CONCLUSION: Results from this analysis suggest that etoposide may improve overall survival for patients with HGG, whereas the use of irinotecan might result in inferior outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of topoisomerase inhibitors in the treatment of high-grade gliomas (HGGs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using median overall survival (mOS) and survival gain, we compared the efficacy of chemotherapy drugs in a meta-analysis of 624 HGG studies, including 44,850 patients from studies published between 1976 and 2011. RESULTS:Patient cohorts treated with etoposide had significant improvement in mOS (15.66 months vs. 13.27 months, p=0.026, 49 vs. 795 cohorts) and significant survival gain advantage (p=0.022) over cohorts treated without etoposide. In contrast, patient cohorts treated with irinotecan had significantly worse mOS (10.20 vs. 13.55 months, p=0.008, 35 vs. 810 cohorts) and a disadvantage compared to cohorts treated without irinotecan in survival gain analysis. CONCLUSION: Results from this analysis suggest that etoposide may improve overall survival for patients with HGG, whereas the use of irinotecan might result in inferior outcomes.
Authors: S Deguchi; K Katsushima; A Hatanaka; K Shinjo; F Ohka; T Wakabayashi; H Zong; A Natsume; Y Kondo Journal: Oncogene Date: 2017-04-03 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Eunjee Lee; Margaret Pain; Huaien Wang; Jacob A Herman; Chad M Toledo; Jennifer G DeLuca; Raymund L Yong; Patrick Paddison; Jun Zhu Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Fengyuan Tang; Lei Zhang; Gongda Xue; Debby Hynx; Yuhua Wang; Peter D Cron; Christian Hundsrucker; Alexander Hergovich; Stephan Frank; Brian A Hemmings; Debora Schmitz-Rohmer Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2014-05-28 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Hong-Jian Wei; Pavan S Upadhyayula; Antonios N Pouliopoulos; Zachary K Englander; Xu Zhang; Chia-Ing Jan; Jia Guo; Angeliki Mela; Zhiguo Zhang; Tony J C Wang; Jeffrey N Bruce; Peter D Canoll; Neil A Feldstein; Stergios Zacharoulis; Elisa E Konofagou; Cheng-Chia Wu Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 8.013
Authors: Moatasem El-Ayadi; Marc Ansari; Dominik Sturm; Gerrit H Gielen; Monika Warmuth-Metz; Christof M Kramm; Andre O von Bueren Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-06-14