PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比常规疗法治疗癌症的有效性和安全性的Meta分析
发布时间：2021-08-28 13:27
目的:系统性评价程序性死亡因子1/程序性死亡因子1配体（PD-1/PD-L1）抑制剂对比常规疗法治疗癌症的有效性和安全性。方法:计算机全面检索PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE数据库,收集PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗癌症的文献研究,检索时间为2000年1月1日至2019年6月30日。两位研究人员独立收集和整理资料,评价纳入文献研究的偏倚风险,应用Review Manager 5.3软件对纳入研究进行数据整理。结果:最终纳入11项随机对照试验,共6 295例研究对象,其中PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂试验组3 220例,常规疗法药物对照组3 075例。Meta分析结果显示,PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂试验组的客观反应率（ORR）[RR=1. 87,95%CI（1. 33,2. 64）,P<0. 001]、完全缓解率（CR）[RR=2. 45,95%CI（1. 27,4. 73）,P<0. 001]和部分缓解率（PR）[RR=1. 81,95%CI（1. 28,2. 54）,P<0. 001]优于常规疗法对照组,结果均有统计学差异;在疾病控制率（DCR）[RR=1. ...
【文章来源】：现代肿瘤医学. 2020,28(10)
【文章页数】：8 页
【部分图文】：
文献筛选流程图及结果
10项RCT报告了3-5级不良反应发生率,可提取数据,异质性检验分析结果表现出明显的异质性(χ2=181.94,P<0.000 01,I2=95%),故采用随机效应模型进行分析,其合并效应量RR=0.44,95%CI(0.28,0.68),差异有统计学意义(Z=3.63,P=0.000 3),说明PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂试验组在治疗癌症方面出现的3-5级不良反应发生率低于常规疗法对照组,结果提示PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对癌症患者具有更高的安全性(图9)。2.4 文献发表偏倚
表3 纳入文献的质量评价Tab.3 Quality evaluation of the included studies Included studies Study design Blind method Allocation concealment Data integrity Selective reporting Other sources of bias Achim Rittmeyer 2016 RCT Open-label Not described Unclear Unclear Unclear Antoni Ribas 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 10 people quit Unclear Unclear Bellmunt 2017 RCT Open-label Not described 21 people quit Unclear Unclear Caroline Robert 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 7 people quit Unclear Unclear Caroline Robert 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 23 people quit Unclear Unclear H Borghaei 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 27 people quit Unclear Unclear Jacob Schachter 2017 RCT Open-label Not described 23 people quit Unclear Unclear Jeffrey S Weber 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 35 people quit Unclear Unclear Julie Brahmer 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 12 people quit Unclear Unclear RJ Motzer 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 18 people quit Unclear Unclear Thomas Powles 2018 RCT Open-label Not described 29 people quit Unclear Unclear2.3.2 CR
本文编号：3368599
【文章来源】：现代肿瘤医学. 2020,28(10)
【文章页数】：8 页
【部分图文】：
文献筛选流程图及结果
10项RCT报告了3-5级不良反应发生率,可提取数据,异质性检验分析结果表现出明显的异质性(χ2=181.94,P<0.000 01,I2=95%),故采用随机效应模型进行分析,其合并效应量RR=0.44,95%CI(0.28,0.68),差异有统计学意义(Z=3.63,P=0.000 3),说明PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂试验组在治疗癌症方面出现的3-5级不良反应发生率低于常规疗法对照组,结果提示PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对癌症患者具有更高的安全性(图9)。2.4 文献发表偏倚
表3 纳入文献的质量评价Tab.3 Quality evaluation of the included studies Included studies Study design Blind method Allocation concealment Data integrity Selective reporting Other sources of bias Achim Rittmeyer 2016 RCT Open-label Not described Unclear Unclear Unclear Antoni Ribas 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 10 people quit Unclear Unclear Bellmunt 2017 RCT Open-label Not described 21 people quit Unclear Unclear Caroline Robert 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 7 people quit Unclear Unclear Caroline Robert 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 23 people quit Unclear Unclear H Borghaei 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 27 people quit Unclear Unclear Jacob Schachter 2017 RCT Open-label Not described 23 people quit Unclear Unclear Jeffrey S Weber 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 35 people quit Unclear Unclear Julie Brahmer 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 12 people quit Unclear Unclear RJ Motzer 2015 RCT Open-label Not described 18 people quit Unclear Unclear Thomas Powles 2018 RCT Open-label Not described 29 people quit Unclear Unclear2.3.2 CR
本文编号：3368599
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/yixuelunwen/zlx/3368599.html
