RESUMO
Comprehensive understanding of cancer-specific survival differences in gender is critical for cancer prevention and treatment. Based on the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database, we included data from the most prevalent cancers (lung, esophageal, liver, pancreatic, stomach, colorectal, kidney, and bladder cancer). Cox proportional hazards regression models were constructed to estimate hazard ratios, simultaneously adjusting for demographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Overall, male patients had a worse cancer-specific survival than female patients. After adjustment for cancer prevalence with 1:1 matching, gender remained a significant factor in cancer-specific survival. Among the included cancer types, female patients showed survival benefit in lung, liver, colorectal, pancreatic, stomach, and esophageal cancer, and male patients showed better survival in bladder cancer. Except for kidney cancer, the gender disparity was consistent between cancer patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic disease. Overall, gender appears to be a significant factor influencing cancer-specific survival, and the prognosis of female patients is better than male patients in most cancers. This work might inspire the development of strategies for gender-specific precision cancer prevention and treatment.
RESUMO
Several new drugs and combination strategies can be used to treat patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the second-line treatment. Questions regarding the relative efficacy and safety of any two of the multiple second-line treatment strategies have emerged. This study aims to compare second-line treatments for patients with platinum-resistant recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify relevant articles. Direct and indirect evidence in terms of the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and treatment-related adverse events grade ≥ 3 (grade ≥ 3 trAE) were analyzed in this Bayesian network meta-analysis. A total of twenty-three trials involving 5039 patients were included. These studies compared 20 different treatments, including the standard of care (SOC: docetaxel, methotrexate, or cetuximab), PD-1 inhibitors (nivolumab or pembrolizumab), durvalumab, tremelimumab, durvalumab + tremelimumab, palbociclib + SOC, tivantinib + SOC, sorafenib + SOC, EMD1201081 + SOC, vandetanib + SOC, PX-866 + SOC, 5-fluorouracil + SOC, cixutumumab + SOC, gefitinib + SOC, cabazitaxel, nolatrexed, duligotuzumab, zalutumumab, gefitinib, and afatinib. Among the currently available treatment options, compared to the standard of care (SOC: docetaxel, methotrexate, or cetuximab), the PD inhibitor significantly improved OS, ORR, and grade ≥ 3 trAE. Afatinib presented a better PFS and ORR than the SOC. Compared with afatinib, the PD-1 inhibitor had a better OS but a worse PFS. In conclusion, compared to the SOC, the PD-1 inhibitor significantly improved the OS, ORR, and grade ≥ 3 trAE. Afatinib presented a better PFS and ORR than the SOC. Compared with afatinib, the PD-1 inhibitor had a better OS but a worse PFS.