Search

Purpose. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to compare the efficacy, quality of life (QOL), symptom improvement and toxicities of gefitinib with docetaxel in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Methods. The PubMed database, the Cochrane Library and references of published trials were searched. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the trials and extracted data. The hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), relative risks (RRs) for overall response rate, QOL and symptom improvement, and odds ratios (ORs) for main toxicities were pooled using STATA package. Results. Four multicenter, randomized controlled trials involving 2257 patients with previously treated advanced NSCLC were ultimately analyzed. The pooled HRs showed no significant difference in OS and PFS between the two groups (HR == 1.02, 95% CI == 0.92--1.12, p == 0.70; HR == 0.97, 95% CI == 0.88--1.07, p == 0.57, respectively). Gefitinib significantly improved overall response rate (RR == 1.58, 95% CI == 1.02--2.45, p == 0.04) and QOL (RR == 1.55, 95% CI == 1.27--1.88, p == 0.00 by Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung and RR == 1.86, 95% CI == 1.43--2.42, p == 0.00 by Trial Outcome Index, respectively). Gefitinib had fewer grade 3 or 4 neutropenia and fatigue (OR == 0.02, 95% CI == 0.01--0.03, p == 0.00; and OR == 0.47, 95% CI == 0.32--0.70, p == 0.00, respectively), but more grade 3 or 4 rash (OR == 2.87, 95% CI == 1.24--6.63, p == 0.01) than docetaxel. The grade 3 or 4 nausea, vomiting and diarrhea and symptom improvement were comparable between the two drugs. Conclusions. In conclusion, although similar OS and PFS, gefitinib showed an advantage over docetaxel in terms of objective response rate, QOL and tolerability. Therefore, gefitinib is an important and valid treatment option for previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Although some randomized controlled trials had compared the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab plus chemotherapy (R-chemo) to chemotherapy alone for B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, the curative effects of R-chemo were still controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to examine the efficacy of using R-chemo compared with the identical chemotherapy alone in the patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Material and methods. Medical databases and conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials which compared R-chemo with chemotherapy alone in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Endpoints were overall survival, overall response, disease control, and adverse events. Results. Twelve eligible trials were identified, reporting outcomes of 4 996 patients. Fixed-effects analysis showed overall survival to be superior for R-chemo-treated patients (relative risks [RR], 1.09; 95%confidence interval [CI], 1.06–1.12, p <0.00001). Superiority was also observed for the patients receiving R-chemo with respect to overall response (RR, 1.17; 95%CI, 1.10–1.25, p <0.00001), complete response (RR, 1.52; 95%CI, 1.27–1.82, p <0.00001), and disease control (RR, 1.36; 95%CI, 1.26–1.46, p <0.00001). R-chemo improved overall survival, overall response and disease control in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (RR, 1.11, 95%CI: 1.06–1.16, p <0.0001; RR, 1.09, 95%CI: 1.01–1.19, p = 0.03 and RR, 2.00, 95%CI: 1.59–2.53, p< 0.00001, respectively) and follicular lymphoma (RR, 1.08, 95%CI: 1.04–1.12, p <0.0001; RR, 1.19, 95%CI: 1.07–1.33, p =0.001 and RR, 2.58, 95%CI: 1.61–4.12, p <0.0001, respectively). Meanwhile, R-chemo improved overall response in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (RR, 1.22, 95%CI: 1.07–1.40, p =0.004). Conclusion. R-chemo is superior to chemotherapy alone in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, especially for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]