PURPOSE: Hand-foot syndrome (HSF) is a distinctive adverse event relatively frequent to some chemotherapeutic agents as capecitabine, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, sorafenib and other tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Since the prevention of HFS would be crucial to avoid treatment interruptions and delays, many studies have been conducted with this purpose. METHODS: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the clinical efficacy of prevention strategies for HFS, through a wide search of electronic databases as well as congress abstracts. The endpoints evaluated were the dichotomic data for mild (Grade 1), moderate to severe (Grades 2 to 3) and all-grade HFS. Meta-analysis was calculated through RevMan v5.1 software. RESULTS: Amongst 295 studies identified, only ten met the inclusion criteria. Celecoxib prevented both moderate to severe (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.73, P = 0.003) and all-grade HFS (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.29-0.78, P = 0.003), whereas pyridoxine and topical urea/lactic acid formulations failed to prove efficacy. There were no proven benefits in mild HFS. The use of topical antiperspirant has not been shown to improve results, according to a single trial. CONCLUSIONS: From all available possibilities for the prevention of HFS, celecoxib appears to be the most promising, with statistically significant results. Larger, multicentric studies are required to reinforce this finding.
PURPOSE:Hand-foot syndrome (HSF) is a distinctive adverse event relatively frequent to some chemotherapeutic agents as capecitabine, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, sorafenib and other tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Since the prevention of HFS would be crucial to avoid treatment interruptions and delays, many studies have been conducted with this purpose. METHODS: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the clinical efficacy of prevention strategies for HFS, through a wide search of electronic databases as well as congress abstracts. The endpoints evaluated were the dichotomic data for mild (Grade 1), moderate to severe (Grades 2 to 3) and all-grade HFS. Meta-analysis was calculated through RevMan v5.1 software. RESULTS: Amongst 295 studies identified, only ten met the inclusion criteria. Celecoxib prevented both moderate to severe (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.20-0.73, P = 0.003) and all-grade HFS (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.29-0.78, P = 0.003), whereas pyridoxine and topical urea/lactic acid formulations failed to prove efficacy. There were no proven benefits in mild HFS. The use of topical antiperspirant has not been shown to improve results, according to a single trial. CONCLUSIONS: From all available possibilities for the prevention of HFS, celecoxib appears to be the most promising, with statistically significant results. Larger, multicentric studies are required to reinforce this finding.
Authors: U Jacobi; E Waibler; P Schulze; J Sehouli; G Oskay-Ozcelik; T Schmook; W Sterry; J Lademann Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2005-04-27 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Vivian von Gruenigen; Heidi Frasure; Nancy Fusco; Robert DeBernardo; Elisa Eldermire; Susan Eaton; Steven Waggoner Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: C-H Köhne; J De Greve; J T Hartmann; I Lang; P Vergauwe; K Becker; D Braumann; E Joosens; L Müller; J Janssens; C Bokemeyer; P Reimer; H Link; E Späth-Schwalbe; H-J Wilke; H Bleiberg; J Van Den Brande; M Debois; U Bethe; E Van Cutsem Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-12-06 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Y-F Chen; P Jobanputra; P Barton; S Bryan; A Fry-Smith; G Harris; R S Taylor Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Vincent Sibaud; Nicole R Lebœuf; Henri Roche; Viswanath R Belum; Laurence Gladieff; Marion Deslandres; Marion Montastruc; Audrey Eche; Emmanuelle Vigarios; Florence Dalenc; Mario E Lacouture Journal: Eur J Dermatol Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 3.328
Authors: Kathryn A Guerriero; Steven R Wilson; Nabil E Boutagy; Chi Liu; Albert J Sinusas; Caroline J Zeiss Journal: Comp Med Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 0.982
Authors: C Riese; B Weiß; U Borges; A Beylich; R Dengler; K Hermes-Moll; M Welslau; W Baumann Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-09 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: S Jung; J Sehouli; R Chekerov; F Kluschke; A Patzelt; H Fuss; F Knorr; J Lademann Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-06-26 Impact factor: 3.603