ABSTRACT
Introduction: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the complications associated with prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared to subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) in patients diagnosed with breast cancer. Materials and methods: A comprehensive search was performed in four databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL, to collect literature published up until December 31, 2024. In addition, we conducted a thorough manual examination of the bibliographies of the identified papers, as well as pertinent reviews and meta-analyses. We conducted a search on three clinical trial registries, namely ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-trials.com, and Umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm. Meta-analyses were conducted on total complications, hematoma, infection, wound healing issues, necrosis, capsular contracture, rippling, animation deformity, and reoperation. Results: A total of 40 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with SBR, PBR significantly reduced the incidence of animated malformations (OR=0.37, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.70, P=0.003, I ²=12%), but increased the incidence of ripples (OR=2.39, 95% CI: 1.53 to 3.72, P=0.0001, I ²=10%) and seroma (OR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.35, P=0.04, increasing I ²=70%). Conclusions: Our findings indicate that PBR and SBR have comparable safety profiles, with similar total complication rates. Specifically, PBR is more likely to cause rippling and seroma, whereas SBR is more prone to causing animation deformity. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024565837, identifier CRD42024565837.
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) is to assess the effectiveness and safety of various neoadjuvant treatment protocols in individuals diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive, her2 negative(HR+/HER2-) breast cancer. Materials and methods: A systematic search was conducted in four databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL) from the inception of the databases to January 16, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to various neoadjuvant therapy options in patients diagnosed with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. A network meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate pathological complete response (pCR). Results: There were 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the analysis. These trials examined 16 different treatment regimens and involved a total of 5752 participants. The analysis revealed that the six most effective neoadjuvant treatment regimens for HR+/HER2- breast cancer were: CT(A)+olaparib (82.5%), CT(A)+nivolumab (76.5%), Com (74.9%), CT (72.1%), Mono+eribulin (72.0%), and CT(A)+pembrolizumab (70.4%).Paired meta-analysis for pathological complete response (pCR) found no statistically significant distinction between treatment regimens that included both anthracycline and immunosuppressants and regimens that relied solely on anthracycline chemotherapy(OR:1.14, 95%ci 0.79-1.64, I2 = 71%, P=0.50). Similarly, there was no significant difference between platinum-based chemotherapy and anthracycline-basedchemotherapy(OR:1.37, 95%ci 0.53- 3.56, I2 = 11%, P=0.52). With regards to safety, adverse effects of grade 3-5 were observed, which included haematological toxicity, gastrointestinal reactions, skin and mucous membrane reactions, neuropathy, hepatotoxicity, and cardiac disorders. Conclusions: The CT(A)+Olaparib and CT(A)+nivolumab groups demonstrated superior efficacy in neoadjuvant therapy for HR+/HER2- breast cancer. Furthermore, it is crucial to focus on effectively managing the adverse effects of the treatment plan to enhance patient's ability to tolerate it. Given the constraints of the current research, additional well-executed and suitable RCTs are necessary to validate the findings of this investigation. Although pCR is valuable in assessing the effect of neoadjuvant therapy in some cases, prognostic prediction and efficacy assessment in patients with HR+/HER2- breast cancer should be based on a combination of broader clinical and biological characteristics. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024534539, CRD42024501740.