Search

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of celecoxib, a selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, in addition to standard anticancer therapy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of celecoxib-combined cancer therapy were systematically searched in PubMed and Embase databases. The endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), pathological complete response (pCR), and adverse events (AEs). The results of 30 RCTs containing 9655 patients showed limited benefits in celecoxib-combined cancer therapy. However, celecoxib-combined palliative therapy prolonged PFS in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) wild-type patients (HR = 0.57, 95%CI = 0.35–0.94). Moreover, despite a slight increase in thrombocytopenia (RR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.08–1.69), there was no increase in other toxicities. Celecoxib combined with adjuvant therapy indicated a better OS (HR = 0.850, 95%CI = 0.725–0.996). Furthermore, celecoxib plus neoadjuvant therapy improved the ORR in standard cancer therapy, especially neoadjuvant therapy (overall: RR = 1.13, 95%CI = 1.03–1.23; neoadjuvant therapy: RR = 1.25, 95%CI = 1.09–1.44), but not pCR. Our study indicated that adding celecoxib to palliative therapy prolongs the PFS of EGFR wild-type patients, with good safety profiles. Celecoxib combined with adjuvant therapy prolongs OS, and celecoxib plus neoadjuvant therapy improves the ORR. Thus, celecoxib-combined cancer therapy may be a promising therapy strategy.

Abstract Background Smoking is one of the well-established risk factors for gastric cancer incidence, yet whether men are more or equally susceptible to gastric cancer due to smoking compared with women is a matter of controversy. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the effect of sex on gastric cancer risk associated with smoking. Methods We conducted a systemic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases to identify studies published from inception to December 2018. We included prospective observational studies which reported effect estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations of current or former smokers with the incidence of gastric cancer by sex. We calculated the ratio of relative risk (RRR) with corresponding 95% CI based on sex-specific effect estimates for current or former smokers versus non-smokers on the risk of gastric cancer. Results We included 10 prospective studies with 3,381,345 participants in our analysis. Overall, the summary RRR (male to female) for gastric cancer risk in current smokers was significantly increased compared with non-smokers (RRR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.05–1.63; P = 0.019). Furthermore, there was no significant sex difference for the association between former smokers and gastric cancer risk (RRR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.92–1.55; P = 0.178). However, the result of sensitivity analysis indicated the pooled result was not stable, which was altered by excluding a nested case-control study (RRR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.10–1.57; P = 0.002). Conclusion This systematic review showed a potential sex difference association between current smokers and the risk of gastric cancer. The sex differential in smokers can give important clues for the etiology of gastric cancers and should be examined in further studies.

Abstract Background Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is extensively used in the treatment of patients with gastric cancer (GC), particularly in high risk, advanced gastric cancer. Previous trials testing the efficacy of NAC have reported inconsistent results. Methods This study compares the combined use of NAC and surgery with surgery alone for GC by using a meta-analytic approach. We performed an electronic search of PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on NAC published before Oct 2015. The primary outcome of the studies was data on survival rates for patients with GC. The summary results were pooled using the random-effects model. We included 12 prospective RCTs reporting data on 1538 GC patients. Results Patients who received NAC were associated with significant improvement of OS (P = 0.001) and PFS (P

Background: The preferred chemotherapy method for gastric cancer continues to be matter of debate. We performed a meta-analysis to comparing prognosis and safety between perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy to identify the better chemotherapy option for gastric cancer.Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases for eligible studies until February 2016. The main endpoints were prognostic value (hazard ratio [HR] for overall survival [OS] and 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival rate), response rate of chemotherapy, radical resection rate, post-operative complication rate, and adverse effects of chemotherapy.Results: Five randomized controlled trials and six clinical controlled trials involving 1,240 patients were eligible for analysis. Compared with the adjuvant chemotherapy group, the perioperative chemotherapy group had significantly better prognosis (HR, 0.74; 95 % CI, 0.61 to 0.89; P < 0.01). The difference between the two groups remained significant in the studies that used combination chemotherapy as the neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen (HR, 0.59; 95 % CI, 0.46 to 0.76; P < 0.01) but were not significant in the studies that used fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (HR, 0.93; 95 % CI, 0.56 to 1.55; P = 0.84). Furthermore, the two groups showed no significant differences in the post-operative complication rates (relative risk, 0.98; 95 % CI, 0.63 to 1.51; P = 0.91) or adverse effects of chemotherapy (P > 0.05 for all adverse effects).Conclusion: Perioperative chemotherapy showed improved survival compared to adjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer. In addition, combination chemotherapy resulted in better survival compared to monotherapy in the neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The clinical value of carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 in gastric cancer is controversial. We evaluated the clinicopathologic and prognostic value of CA 19-9 in gastric cancer. Methods. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase databases. Odds ratios (ORs), risk ratios (RR), hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as effect measures. Results. Thirty-eight studies were included. Results showed that there were significant differences in the incidence of high CA 19-9 levels between stages III/IV and I/II groups (OR = 3.36; 95% CI = 2.34-4.84), the pT3/T4 and pT1/T2 groups (OR = 2.40; 95% CI = 1.60-3.59), the lymph node-positive and node-negative groups (OR = 2.91; 95% CI = 2.21-3.84), the metastasis-positive and metastasis-negative groups (OR = 2.76; 95% CI = 1.12-6.82), and vessel invasion-positive and invasion-negative groups (OR = 1.66; 95% CI = 1.11-2.48). Moreover, CA 19-9 was significantly associated with poor overall survival (HR = 1.83; 95% CI = 1.56-2.15), disease-free survival (HR = 1.85; 95% CI = 1.16-2.95), and disease-specific survival (HR = 1.33; 95% CI = 1.10-1.60) in gastric cancer. Conclusions. Our meta-analysis showed that CA 19-9 indicates clinicopathologic characteristics of gastric cancer and is associated with a poor prognosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Both laparoscopic and fast-track surgery (FTS) have shown some advantages in colorectal surgery. However, the effectiveness of using both methods together is unclear. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the effects of FTS with those of traditional perioperative care in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. Methods: We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases for eligible studies until April 2014. The main end points were the duration of the postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus after surgery, time of first bowel movement, total postoperative complication rate, readmission rate, and mortality. Results: Five randomized controlled trials and 5 clinical controlled trials with 1,317 patients were eligible for analysis. The duration of the postoperative hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD], -1.64 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.25 to -1.03; p < 0.001), time to first flatus (WMD, -0.40 day; 95% CI, -0.77 to -0.04; p = 0.03), time of first bowel movement (WMD, -0.98 day; 95% CI, -1.45 to -0.52; p < 0.001), and total postoperative complication rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.80; p < 0.001) were significantly reduced in the FTS group. No significant differences were noted in the readmission rate (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41-1.01; p = 0.06) or mortality (RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.42-5.71; p = 0.51). Conclusion: Among patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, FTS is associated with a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay, more rapid postoperative recovery, and, notably, greater safety than is expected from traditional care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]