Search

Background: For patients with anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC) without mutational driver genes, chemotherapy is suggested to be the first-line treatment option. However, the benefits of chemotherapy in treating ATC are limited. In this analysis, we collected the prospective data reported since 2010 to analyze the emerging chemotherapy-based treatments in ATC comprehensively., Methods: For this updated analysis, we searched PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases from 1 January 2010 to 7 February 2024 for prospective clinical studies that contained chemotherapy-based treatments. This analysis was done to pool overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORRs), disease control rates (DCRs), and grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs)., Results: Six prospective clinical trials with 232 patients were included. Chemotherapy was commonly combined with targeted therapy or radiotherapy. The pooled median OS was 6.0 months (95% CI 4.1-9.7), and the median PFS was 3.2 months (95% CI 1.9-6.0) in patients with ATC who received chemotherapy-based strategies. The integrated ORR and DCR were 21% (95% CI 15%-27%) and 64% (95% CI 55%-72%), respectively. Regarding the grade 3 or worse TRAE, the pooled incidence was 68% (95% CI 47%-86%)., Conclusion: Although the emerging chemotherapy-based treatments showed antitumor activity in patients with ATC, these strategies failed to prolong the survival time substantially. More practical, safe, and novel therapeutic regimens for patients with ATC warrant further investigations., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wang, Lin, Kuang and Cao.)

Background: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) contribute to the treatment of patients with anaplastic thyroid cancer (ATC). Although prospective clinical studies of TKIs exhibit limited efficacy, whether ATC patients benefit from TKI treatment in real-world clinical practice may enlighten future explorations. Therefore, we conducted this effective analysis based on real-world retrospective studies to illustrate the efficacy of TKI treatment in ATC patients., Methods: We systematically searched the online databases on September 03, 2023. Survival curves were collected and reconstructed to summarize the pooled curves. Responses were analyzed by using the "meta" package. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR)., Results: 12 studies involving 227 patients were enrolled in the study. Therapeutic strategies included: anlotinib, lenvatinib, dabrafenib plus trametinib, vemurafenib, pembrolizumab plus dabrafenib and trametinib, pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib, pembrolizumab plus trametinib, and sorafenib. The pooled median OS and PFS were 6.37 months (95% CI 4.19-10.33) and 5.50 months (95% CI 2.17-12.03). The integrated ORR and DCR were 32% (95% CI 23%-41%) and 40% (95% CI 12%-74%)., Conclusion: In real-world clinical practice, ATC patients could benefit from TKI therapy. In future studies, more basic experiments and clinical explorations are needed to enhance the effects of TKIs in the treatment of patients with ATC., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Kuang, Zhang, Lin, Fu, Cao and Wang.)

Background: Adding induction chemotherapy to concurrent platinum-based chemoradiotherapy has significantly prolonged the survival time of patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. In this study, we intend to evaluate the survival outcomes, responses, and incidences of toxicities of induction chemotherapy and the differences between different strategies., Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL on August 10, 2021. Single-arm or multi-arm prospective clinical trials on induction chemotherapy without targeted therapies or immune checkpoint inhibitors were included. Primary outcomes included survival outcomes, objective response rate, and disease control rate, and the secondary outcome was the rates of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events., Results: The 39 studies included in the systematic review and meta-analysis comprised 36 clinical trials and 5389 patients. The estimates for 3-year overall and fail-free survival rates were 87% and 77%. The estimates for 5-year rates of overall and fail-free survival were 81% and 73%. Gemcitabine plus platinum and docetaxel combined with 5-fluorouracil plus platinum strategies were associated with the highest rates of 3-year and 5-year overall survival. The objective response and disease control rates were 85% and 98% after the completion of induction chemotherapy. Neutropenia (27%) and nausea/vomiting (7%) were the most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related hematological and non-hematological adverse events during the induction phase., Conclusions: Different induction chemotherapeutic strategies appear to have varying effects and risks; a comprehensive summary of the survival outcomes, responses, and toxicities in clinical trials may provide a crucial guide for clinicians., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wang, Kuang, Liu, Lin and Liu.)

Background: Doxorubicin/Adriamycin (ADM) alone or combined with ifosfamide (IFO) (AI) is available for previously untreated advanced soft tissue sarcoma (ASTS). However, the clinical choice between them remains controversial. In this pooled analysis, we comprehensively compared the efficacy and tolerability of AI versus ADM in patients with ASTS., Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to April 14, 2021. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials comparing AI to ADM. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). Discontinuation rate (DR) and toxic death (TD) were explored as secondary outcomes., Results: Overall, three open-label randomized phase 2/3 clinical trials with a total of 1108 newly diagnosed ASTS patients were enrolled. Between AI and ADM, pooled hazard ratios were 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.58-1.50, p = 0.78) for OS and 0.85 (0.57-1.25, p = 0.41) for PFS. While pooled risk ratios for ORR, DR, and TD were 1.37 (0.94-1.99, p = 0.10), 1.04 (0.74-1.46, p = 0.82), and 0.68 (0.19-2.36, p = 0.54) respectively. No publication bias was observed across the studies., Conclusion: In the first-line setting, adding IFO to ADM failed to benefit ASTS patients against ADM alone, even with comparable tolerability., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wang, Kuang, Xiao and Lin.)