Zhaolun Cai1, Yiqiong Yin1, Yuan Yin1, Chaoyong Shen1, Jian Wang1, Xiaonan Yin1, Zhixin Chen1, Ye Zhou1, Bo Zhang2. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. 2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. hxwcwk@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Different adjuvant treatments are available for patients with gastric cancer, but conventional meta-analyses performing direct comparisons between two alternative treatments did not have enough power to compare all the adjuvant treatments. Thus, we did a network meta-analysis summarizing the direct and indirect comparisons to identify the optimum treatment. METHODS: We systematically searched for RCTs of adjuvant treatments for gastric cancer comparing two or more of the following treatments: surgery alone, radiotherapy with fluoropyrimidine, S-1-based regimens, and XELOX. The treatments offering available indirect evidence to investigate the comparative effectiveness of adjuvant treatments mentioned above were also included. Then we performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect comparisons. We estimated hazard ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) for OS and DFS. RESULTS: 11 eligible RCTs (5620 patients) were included in the network meta-analysis. Radiotherapy with fluorouracil (5-FU/RT), S-1-based regimens, and XELOX significantly improved OS as compared with surgery alone [(HR = 0.75 with 95% CrI: 0.63-0.89), (HR = 0.63 with 95% CrI: 0.52-0.76), and (HR = 0.66 with 95% CrI: 0.51-0.85), respectively]. No treatment was clearly superior to others; however, S-1-based regimes and XELOX showed a statistically non-significant trend to better survival as compared with 5-FU/RT. CONCLUSIONS: S-1-based chemotherapy and XELOX are likely to be the most effective adjuvant treatments for patients with resected gastric cancer. 5-FU alone provided little survival benefits as compared with surgery alone. Further clinical trials may be required to investigate S-1-based and XELOX-based adjuvant treatment strategies.
BACKGROUND: Different adjuvant treatments are available for patients with gastric cancer, but conventional meta-analyses performing direct comparisons between two alternative treatments did not have enough power to compare all the adjuvant treatments. Thus, we did a network meta-analysis summarizing the direct and indirect comparisons to identify the optimum treatment. METHODS: We systematically searched for RCTs of adjuvant treatments for gastric cancer comparing two or more of the following treatments: surgery alone, radiotherapy with fluoropyrimidine, S-1-based regimens, and XELOX. The treatments offering available indirect evidence to investigate the comparative effectiveness of adjuvant treatments mentioned above were also included. Then we performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to summarize the direct and indirect comparisons. We estimated hazard ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) for OS and DFS. RESULTS: 11 eligible RCTs (5620 patients) were included in the network meta-analysis. Radiotherapy with fluorouracil (5-FU/RT), S-1-based regimens, and XELOX significantly improved OS as compared with surgery alone [(HR = 0.75 with 95% CrI: 0.63-0.89), (HR = 0.63 with 95% CrI: 0.52-0.76), and (HR = 0.66 with 95% CrI: 0.51-0.85), respectively]. No treatment was clearly superior to others; however, S-1-based regimes and XELOX showed a statistically non-significant trend to better survival as compared with 5-FU/RT. CONCLUSIONS: S-1-based chemotherapy and XELOX are likely to be the most effective adjuvant treatments for patients with resected gastric cancer. 5-FU alone provided little survival benefits as compared with surgery alone. Further clinical trials may be required to investigate S-1-based and XELOX-based adjuvant treatment strategies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adjuvant; Chemoradiotherapy, network meta-analysis; Chemotherapy; Gastric cancer
Authors: Jonathan A C Sterne; Alex J Sutton; John P A Ioannidis; Norma Terrin; David R Jones; Joseph Lau; James Carpenter; Gerta Rücker; Roger M Harbord; Christopher H Schmid; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Jonathan J Deeks; Jaime Peters; Petra Macaskill; Guido Schwarzer; Sue Duval; Douglas G Altman; David Moher; Julian P T Higgins Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-07-22
Authors: T Nakajima; T Kinoshita; A Nashimoto; M Sairenji; T Yamaguchi; J Sakamoto; T Fujiya; T Inada; M Sasako; Y Ohashi Journal: Br J Surg Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 6.939
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396