Purpose: Intravenous (IV) chemotherapy has been compared with intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy in randomized clinical trials in advanced ovarian cancer (OC). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of IV and IP and identify differences in outcomes. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement was applied. Random-effects models were used. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and the proportion of patients with grade ≥2 acute toxicity. Results: Four randomized clinical trials representing 2461 patients were identified. The hazard ratio (HR) of PFS was 0.88 (95% CI 0.80–0.98; p = 0.01, I 2 = 24%) in favor of IP chemotherapy. IP chemotherapy was also associated with significant OS improvement compared with IV chemotherapy, with HR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.67–0.92; p = 0.003, I 2 = 0%). Globally, grade ≥2 toxicities were reduced with IV chemotherapy. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows the superiority of IP chemotherapy over IV infusion in terms of clinical outcomes but toxicity rates. Its precise role in the management of advanced OC remains to be determined.
Marchetti, C., De Felice, F., Perniola, G., Palaia, I., Musella, A., Di Donato, V., Cascialli, G., Muzii, L., Tombolini, V., Benedetti Panici, P., Role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer in the platinum-taxane-based era: A meta-analysis, <<CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY>>, n/a; 136 (N/A): 64-69. [doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.01.002] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/205129]
Role of intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer in the platinum-taxane-based era: A meta-analysis
Marchetti, Claudia;
2019
Abstract
Purpose: Intravenous (IV) chemotherapy has been compared with intraperitoneal (IP) chemotherapy in randomized clinical trials in advanced ovarian cancer (OC). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate efficacy and toxicity of IV and IP and identify differences in outcomes. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement was applied. Random-effects models were used. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and the proportion of patients with grade ≥2 acute toxicity. Results: Four randomized clinical trials representing 2461 patients were identified. The hazard ratio (HR) of PFS was 0.88 (95% CI 0.80–0.98; p = 0.01, I 2 = 24%) in favor of IP chemotherapy. IP chemotherapy was also associated with significant OS improvement compared with IV chemotherapy, with HR of 0.79 (95% CI 0.67–0.92; p = 0.003, I 2 = 0%). Globally, grade ≥2 toxicities were reduced with IV chemotherapy. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows the superiority of IP chemotherapy over IV infusion in terms of clinical outcomes but toxicity rates. Its precise role in the management of advanced OC remains to be determined.
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
