Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Publication year range
1.
Support Care Cancer ; 31(12): 640, 2023 Oct 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37851143

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: There are no well-recognized guidelines for antiemesis during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) for cervical cancer (CC) and nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) until now. The study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of fosaprepitant combined with tropisetron and dexamethasone in preventing nausea and vomiting during 5 weeks of fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant weekly low-dose cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with CC or NPC. METHODS: Patients with CC or NPC were scheduled to receive fractionated radiotherapy and weekly cisplatin (25-40 mg/m2) chemotherapy for at least 5 weeks. Patients stratified by tumor type and induction chemotherapy were 1:1 randomly assigned to receive fosaprepitant, tropisetron, and dexamethasone or tropisetron plus dexamethasone as an antiemetic regimen. Efficacy was assessed primarily by the cumulative incidence of emesis after 5 weeks of treatment, and safety by adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Between July 2020 and July 2022, 116 patients consented to the study of whom 103 were included in this interim analysis (fosaprepitant group [N = 52] vs control group [N = 51]). The cumulative incidence of emesis at 5 weeks (competing risk analysis) was 25% (95% CI 14.2-37.4) for the fosaprepitant group compared with 59% (95% CI 43.9-71.0) for the control group. There was a significantly lower cumulative risk of emesis in the fosaprepitant group (HR 0.35 [95% CI 0.19-0.64]; p < 0.001). Fosaprepitant was well tolerated as the incidences of adverse events in the two groups were comparable. CONCLUSION: The addition of fosaprepitant to tropisetron plus dexamethasone significantly reduced the risk of nausea and vomiting during 5 weeks of CCRT in patients with CC or NPC, and fosaprepitant was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on October 3, 2022, number NCT05564286.


Asunto(s)
Antieméticos , Antineoplásicos , Neoplasias Nasofaríngeas , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino , Femenino , Humanos , Cisplatino , Tropisetrón/uso terapéutico , Dexametasona , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Vómitos/inducido químicamente , Vómitos/prevención & control , Estudios Prospectivos , Náusea/etiología , Náusea/prevención & control , Náusea/tratamiento farmacológico , Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Cuello Uterino/tratamiento farmacológico , Fraccionamiento de la Dosis de Radiación , Quimioterapia Combinada
2.
Front Oncol ; 14: 1303068, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38344202

RESUMEN

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an aggressive and fatal disease that is usually diagnosed when the chances for surgical intervention has been missed. Definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is the first choice of treatment for inoperable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (LA-ESCC). Nevertheless, the local recurrence rate for esophageal cancer patients undergoing dCRT remains high at 40-60%, with a 5-year overall survival rate of solely 10-30%. Immunotherapy in combination with dCRT is a promising treatment for inoperable LA-ESCC, for that improved long-term survival is expected. The present review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolutionary trajectory of dCRT for LA-ESCC, delineates notable relevant clinical studies, addresses unresolved concerns regarding the combination of dCRT with immunotherapy, and highlights promising directions for future research. When dCRT is combined with immunotherapy, the following aspects should be carefully explored in the future studies, including the optimal irradiation dose, segmentation scheme, radiotherapy technique, timing, sequence and duration of radiotherapy, and the selection of chemotherapeutic and immunologic drugs. In addition, further investigations on the mechanisms of how dCRT combined with immunotherapy exerts synergistic anti-tumor effects and molecular biomarkers ensuring precise screening of ESCC patients are needed.

3.
Front Pharmacol ; 14: 1228225, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37829303

RESUMEN

Background: Pelareorep is an oncolytic virus that causes oncolytic effects in many solid tumors, and it has shown therapeutic benefits. However, few studies have compared pelareorep combined with chemotherapy to traditional chemotherapy alone in advanced solid tumors. Consequently, we intended to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of pelareorep plus chemotherapy in this paper. Methods: We searched four databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science comprehensively for studies comparing pelareorep combined with chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in the treatment of advanced solid tumors. The outcomes measures were 1-year overall survival (OS), 2-year OS, 4-month progression-free survival (PFS), 1-year PFS, objective response rate (ORR), any-grade adverse events (any-grade AEs), and severe AEs (grade ≥ 3). Results: There were five studies involving 492 patients included in the study. Combination therapy did not significantly improve clinical outcomes in terms of 1-year OS [RR = 1.02, 95%CI = (0.82-1.25)], 2-year OS [RR = 1.00, 95%CI = (0.67-1.49)], 4-month PFS [RR = 1.00, 95%CI = (0.67-1.49)], 1-year PFS [RR = 0.79, 95%CI = (0.44-1.42)], and ORR [OR = 0.79, 95%CI = (0.49-1.27)] compared to chemotherapy alone, and the subgroup analysis of 2-year OS, 1-year PFS, and ORR based on countries and tumor sites showed similar results. In all grades, the incidence of AEs was greater with combination therapy, including fever [RR = 3.10, 95%CI = (1.48-6.52)], nausea [RR = 1.19, 95%CI = (1.02-1.38)], diarrhea [RR = 1.87, 95%CI = (1.39-2.52)], chills [RR = 4.14, 95%CI = (2.30-7.43)], headache [RR = 1.46, 95%CI = (1.02-2.09)], vomiting [RR = 1.38, 95%CI = (1.06-1.80)] and flu-like symptoms [RR = 4.18, 95%CI = (2.19-7.98)]. However, severe adverse events did not differ significantly between the two arms. Conclusion: Pelareorep addition to traditional chemotherapy did not lead to significant improvements in OS, PFS, or ORR in advanced solid tumor patients, but it did partially increase AEs in all grades, with no discernible differences in serious AEs. Therefore, the combination treatment is not recommended in patients with advanced solid tumors. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=400841, identifier CRD42023400841.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
Detalles de la búsqueda