Efficacy and Safety Assessment of the Addition of Bevacizumab to Adjuvant Therapy Agents in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Aim

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in the adjuvant cancer therapy setting within different subset of patients.

Methods & Design/ Results

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Clinical trials.gov databases were searched for English language studies of randomized controlled trials comparing bevacizumab and adjuvant therapy with adjuvant therapy alone published from January 1966 to 7^th of May 2014. Progression free survival, overall survival, overall response rate, safety and quality of life were analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models according to the PRISMA guidelines. We obtained data from 44 randomized controlled trials (30,828 patients). Combining bevacizumab with different adjuvant therapies resulted in significant improvement of progression free survival (log hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.84–0.89), overall survival (log hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94–0.98) and overall response rate (relative risk, 1.46; 95% CI: 1.33–1.59) compared to adjuvant therapy alone in all studied tumor types. In subgroup analyses, there were no interactions of bevacizumab with baseline characteristics on progression free survival and overall survival, while overall response rate was influenced by tumor type and bevacizumab dose (p-value: 0.02). Although bevacizumab use resulted in additional expected adverse drug reactions except anemia and fatigue, it was not associated with a significant decline in quality of life. There was a trend towards a higher risk of several side effects in patients treated by high-dose bevacizumab compared to the low-dose e.g. all grade proteinuria (9.24; 95% CI: 6.60–12.94 vs. 2.64; 95% CI: 1.29–5.40).

Conclusions

Combining bevacizumab with different adjuvant therapies provides a survival benefit across all major subsets of patients, including by tumor type, type of adjuvant therapy, and duration and dose of bevacizumab therapy. Though bevacizumab was associated with increased risks of some adverse drug reactions such as hypertension and bleeding, anemia and fatigue were improved by the addition of bevacizumab.     

Efficacy and Safety of Gemcitabine-Fluorouracil Combination Therapy in the Management of Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Gemcitabine (GEM) is the standard first-line chemotherapy that provides limited clinical benefits for patients with locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA/MPC). However, the fluorouracil derivatives (CAP and S-1) show promising efficacy in these patients. This study compared the efficacy and safety of GEM with GEM plus fluorouracil drugs in the treatment of LA/MPC.

Methods

Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials published on or before January 2014. The Cochrane Collaboration''s tool was used to assess the risk of bias in randomized trials. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); the secondary end points were one-year survival rate, objective response rate (ORR) and toxicity rates (TRs).

Results

A total of 8 randomized controlled trials involving 2,126 patients were included in the systematic evaluation. The results showed that OS was significantly improved (HR 0.83, P<0.01; HR 0.87, P = 0.03; HR 0.80, P = 0.01; respectively) and ORR was significantly increased (OR 0.51, P<0.01; OR 0.66, P = 0.03; OR 0.35, P<0.01; respectively) in the GEM+5-FU/CAP/S-1, GEM+CAP and GEM+S-1 groups compared to the GEM alone group. In addition, the one-year survival rate was significantly increased (OR 0.78 P = 0.01; OR 0.47, P = 0.04; respectively) in the GEM+5-FU/CAP/S-1 and GEM+S-1 groups compared to the GEM alone group. The frequency of grade 3/4 TRs were higher in GEM+5-FU/CAP/S-1 group, the significant increase of grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and diarrhea were observed.

Conclusions

GEM combined with fluorouracil drugs significantly improved OS and increased one-year survival rate and ORR compared to GEM alone in LA/MPC patients. GEM combined with fluorouracil drugs may be considered as an acceptable alternative treatment for LA/MPC patients.     

Acute Endovascular Reperfusion Therapy in Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke have had inconsistent results. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of endovascular therapy in published RCTs.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of RCTs of endovascular therapy with thrombolytic or mechanical reperfusion compared with interventions without endovascular therapy. Primary outcome was the frequency of good functional outcome (modified Rankin scale (mRS) of 0-2 at 90 days) and secondary outcomes were mortality at 90 days and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Random-effects meta-analysis was performed and the Cochrane risk of bias assessment was used to evaluate quality of evidence.

Results

Ten studies involving 1,612 subjects were included. Endovascular therapy was not significantly associated with good functional outcome (Relative Risk [RR] =1.17; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.42; p=0.10 and Absolute Risk Difference [ARD] =7%; 95%CI -0.1% to 14%; p=0.05); heterogeneity was moderate among studies (I²=30%). Mortality was unchanged with endovascular therapy (RR=0.92; 95 % CI, 0.75 to 1.13; p=0.45) and there was no difference in sICH (RR=1.20; 95 % CI, 0.79 to 1.82; p=0.39). The quality of evidence was low for all outcomes and the recommendation is weak for the use of endovascular therapy as per GRADE methodology.

Conclusions

Intra-arterial therapy did not show significant increase in good outcomes and no changes in either mortality or sICH in patients with acute ischemic stroke. We need further RCTs with better design and quality to evaluate the true efficacy of endovascular therapy.     

Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Ezetimibe on Major Cardiovascular Endpoints: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) about Ezetimibe''s efficacy on patient-oriented outcomes have given discordant results. The aim of this study was to determine the net effect of Ezetimibe and of the widely marketed combination, Ezetimibe+simvastatin, on mortality and morbidity outcomes.

Methods and Findings

We searched for RCT on Ezetimibe using MEDLINE, CCTR, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov databases up to December 2013, Merck and Novartis online registers, and personal communications. Two authors independently selected trials fulfilling these criteria: RCTs comparing Ezetimibe±statin or another lipid-lowering drug against placebo, or against the same lipid-lowering drug at the same dosage, with a follow-up at least 24 weeks and one or more of these outcomes: all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), cancer, serious adverse events (SAEs); we assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane checklist. We extracted the data for major clinical events as a dichotomous measure, with the patient the unit of analysis. Pooled analysis was done with random and fixed effect based models. Trials comparing Ezetimibe plus a lipid-lowering drug against the same lipidlowering drug representing the net effect of Ezetimibe, showed a nonsignificant tendency toward damage for cancer, MI, stroke and SAEs. Ezetimibe+simvastatin vs. simvastatin alone showed a stronger tendency towards a higher risk for all-cause death (2.52; 0.65-9.74), CV death (3.04; 0.48-19.21), non-CV death (3.03; 0.12-73.50), MI (1.91; 0.42-8.70), stroke (2.38; 0.46-12.35), cancer (RR 11.11; 0.62-198.29), and SAEs (1.45; 0.95-2.23). Limitations include small numbers of events and inadequate power of the pooling. Trials comparing Ezetimibe+simvastatin vs placebo showed non-significant effects: MI (0.81; 0.66-1.00 p = 0.051), all-cause death (1.02; 0.95-1.09), CV death (0.91; 0.80-1.04), non-CV death (108; 0.99-1.18), stroke (0.86; 0.72-1.04), cancer (1.18; 0.80-1.74), SAEs (1.01; 0.96-1.06).

Conclusions

Ezetimibe±simvastatin had inconsistent effects on important outcomes. No firm conclusions are possible, but findings indicative of damage suggest much more selective use of Ezetimibe±simvastatin.     

Clinical Efficacy of Including Capecitabine in Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Capecitabine has proven effective as a chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Though several Phase II/III studies of capecitabine as neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been conducted, the results still remain inconsistent. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to obtain more precise understanding of the role of capecitabine in neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients.

Methods

The electronic database PubMed and online abstracts from ASCO and SABCS were searched to identify randomized clinical trials comparing neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without capecitabine in early/operable breast cancer patients without distant metastasis. Risk ratios were used to estimate the association between capecitabine in neoadjuvant chemotherapy and various efficacy outcomes. Fixed- or random-effect models were adopted to pool data in RevMan 5.1.

Results

Five studies were included in the meta-analysis. Neoadjuvant use of capecitabine with anthracycline and/or taxane based therapy was not associated with significant improvement in clinical outcomes including: pathologic complete response in breast (pCR; RR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.87–1.40, p = 0.43), pCR in breast tumor and nodes (tnpCR RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.83–1.18, p = 0.90), overall response rate (ORR; RR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.94–1.07, p = 0.93), or breast-conserving surgery (BCS; RR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.93–1.04, p = 0.49).

Conclusions

Neoadjuvant treatment of breast cancer involving capecitabine did not significantly improve pCR, tnpCR, BCS or ORR. Thus adding capecitabine to neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimes is unlikely to improve outcomes in breast cancer patients without distant metastasis. Further research is required to establish the condition that capecitabine may be useful in breast cancer neoadjuvant chemotherapy.     

Acupuncture Therapy for Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ObjectiveAcupuncture has commonly been used in China, either alone or in combination with Western medicine, to treat sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL). The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the efficacy and safety of acupuncture therapy for patients with SSHL.MethodsWe searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical literature service system (SinoMed) to collect randomized controlled trials of acupuncture for SSHL published before July 2014. A meta-analysis was conducted according to the Cochrane systematic review method using RevMan 5.2 software. The evidence level for each outcome was assessed using the GRADE methodology.ResultsTwelve trials involving 863 patients were included. A meta-analysis showed that the effect of manual acupuncture combined with Western medicine comprehensive treatment (WMCT) was better than WMCT alone (RR 1.33, 95%CI 1.19–1.49) and the same as the effect of electroacupuncture combined with WMCT (RR 1.33, 95%CI 1.19–1.50). One study showed a better effect of electroacupuncture than of WMCT (RR 1.34, 95%CI 1.24–1.45). For mean changes in hearing over all frequencies, the meta-analysis showed a better effect with the combination of acupuncture and WMCT than with WMCT alone (MD 10.85, 95%CI 6.84–14.86). However, the evidence levels for these interventions were low or very low due to a high risk of bias and small sample sizes in the included studies.ConclusionThere was not sufficient evidence showing that acupuncture therapy alone was beneficial for treating SSHL. However, interventions combining acupuncture with WMCT had more efficacious results in the treatment of SSHL than WMCT alone. Electroacupuncture alone might be a viable alternative treatment besides WMCT for SSHL. However, given that there were fewer eligible RCTs and limitations in the included trials, such as methodological drawbacks and small sample sizes, large-scale RCTs are required to confirm the current findings regarding acupuncture therapy for SSHL.     

Early versus Delayed Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV and Tuberculosis Co-Infected Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ObjectiveTo compare important clinical outcomes between early and delayed initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in adults who had a co-infection of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis (TB).MethodsWe performed a systematic search for relevant publications on PubMed, EMBASE, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared early ART initiation (within four weeks after anti-TB treatment starting) and delayed ART initiation (after eight weeks but less than twelve weeks of anti-TB treatment starting) in the course of TB treatment. Pooled estimates with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated with random-effects model. Sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the stability of pooled estimates.ResultsA meta-analysis was evaluated from six RCTs with 2272 participants. Compared to delayed ART initiation, early ART initiation significantly reduces all-cause mortality in HIV-positive patients with TB [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.75, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.95; I² = 0.00%; p = 0.67], even though there is an increased risk for IRD [IRR 2.29, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.91; I²2 = 0.00%; p = 0.56]. Additionally, early ART initiation was not associated with an increased risk for grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events [IRR 0.99, 95%CI 0.83 to 1.18; I² = 0.00%; p = 0.56].ConclusionsAlthough limited evidence, our results provide support for early ART initiation in the course of anti-TB treatment. However, more well-designed cohort or intervention studies are required to further confirm our findings.     

Aerobic Exercise for Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Although some trials assessed the effectiveness of aerobic exercise for Parkinson''s disease (PD), the role of aerobic exercise in the management of PD remained controversial.

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the evidence about whether aerobic exercise is effective for PD.

Methods

Seven electronic databases, up to December 2013, were searched to identify relevant studies. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality based on PEDro scale. Standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of random-effects model were calculated. And heterogeneity was assessed based on the I² statistic.

Results

18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 901 patients were eligible. The aggregated results suggested that aerobic exercise should show superior effects in improving motor actions (SMD, −0.57; 95% CI −0.94 to −0.19; p = 0.003), balance (SMD, 2.02; 95% CI 0.45 to 3.59; p = 0.01), and gait (SMD, 0.33; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.49; p<0.0001) in patients with PD, but not in quality of life (SMD, 0.11; 95% CI −0.23 to 0.46; p = 0.52). And there was no valid evidence on follow-up effects of aerobic exercise for PD.

Conclusion

Aerobic exercise showed immediate beneficial effects in improving motor action, balance, and gait in patients with PD. However, given no evidence on follow-up effects, large-scale RCTs with long follow-up are warrant to confirm the current findings.     

Comparative Efficacy of Lamivudine and Emtricitabine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Introduction

Lamivudine and emtricitabine are considered equivalent by several guidelines, but evidence of comparable efficacy is conflicting.

Methods

We searched two databases up to June 30 2013 to identify randomized and quasi-randomized trials in which lamivudine and emtricitabine were used as part of combination antiretroviral therapy for treatment-naïve or experienced HIV-positive adult patients. We only included trials where partner drugs in the regimen were identical or could be considered to be comparable. We allowed for comparisons between tenofovir and abacavir provided the study population did not begin treatment with a viral load >100,000 copies/ml.

Results

12 trials contributed 15 different randomized comparisons providing data on 2251 patients receiving lamivudine and 2662 patients receiving emtricitabine. Treatment success was not significantly different in any of the 12 trials. In the three trials that directly compared lamivudine and emtricitabine, the relative risk for achieving treatment success was non-significant (RR 1.03 95%CI 0.96-1.10). For all trials combined, the pooled relative risk for treatment success was not significantly different (RR 1.00, 95%CI 0.97–1.02). No heterogeneity was observed (I ² = 0). Similarly, there was no difference in the pooled relative risk for treatment failure (RR 1.08, 95%CI 0.94–1.22, I ² = 3.4%).

Conclusions

The findings of this systematic review suggest that lamivudine and emtricitabine are clinically equivalent.     

The Efficacy of Resiliency Training Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Importance

Poor mental health places a burden on individuals and populations. Resilient persons are able to adapt to life’s challenges and maintain high quality of life and function. Finding effective strategies to bolster resilience in individuals and populations is of interest to many stakeholders.

Objectives

To synthesize the evidence for resiliency training programs in improving mental health and capacity in 1) diverse adult populations and 2) persons with chronic diseases.

Data Sources

Electronic databases, clinical trial registries, and bibliographies. We also contacted study authors and field experts.

Study Selection

Randomized trials assessing the efficacy of any program intended to enhance resilience in adults and published after 1990. No restrictions were made based on outcome measured or comparator used.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Reviewers worked independently and in duplicate to extract study characteristics and data. These were confirmed with authors. We conducted a random effects meta-analysis on available data and tested for interaction in planned subgroups.

Main Outcomes

The standardized mean difference (SMD) effect of resiliency training programs on 1) resilience/hardiness, 2) quality of life/well-being, 3) self-efficacy/activation, 4) depression, 5) stress, and 6) anxiety.

Results

We found 25 small trials at moderate to high risk of bias. Interventions varied in format and theoretical approach. Random effects meta-analysis showed a moderate effect of generalized stress-directed programs on enhancing resilience [pooled SMD 0.37 (95% CI 0.18, 0.57) p = .0002; I² = 41%] within 3 months of follow up. Improvement in other outcomes was favorable to the interventions and reached statistical significance after removing two studies at high risk of bias. Trauma-induced stress-directed programs significantly improved stress [−0.53 (−1.04, −0.03) p = .03; I² = 73%] and depression [−0.51 (−0.92, −0.10) p = .04; I² = 61%].

Conclusions

We found evidence warranting low confidence that resiliency training programs have a small to moderate effect at improving resilience and other mental health outcomes. Further study is needed to better define the resilience construct and to design interventions specific to it.

Registration Number

PROSPERO #CRD42014007185     

Role of Gemcitabine and Pemetrexed as Maintenance Therapy in Advanced NSCLC: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Gemcitabine and pemetrexed have been used as maintenance therapy. However, few systematic reviews and meta-analyses have assessed their effects in the newest studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to assess the role of gemcitabine and pemetrexed in the maintenance treatment of non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC).

Methods

We performed a literature search using PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases from their inceptions to September 16, 2015. We also searched the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) databases from 2008 to 2015. Two authors independently extracted the data. The Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias graph was used to assess the risk of bias. The GRADE system was used to assess the grading of evidence, and a meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 11.0 software.

Results

Eleven randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies were collected. Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis and divided into the following 4 groups: gemcitabine vs. best supportive care (BSC)/observation, pemetrexed vs. BSC/placebo, pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab and pemetrexed vs. bevacizumab. Gemcitabine exhibited significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with BSC (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, p = 0.000). Pemetrexed exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.54, p = 0.000) and OS (HR = 0.75, p = 0.000) compared with BSC. Pemetrexed + bevacizumab almost exhibited significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.71, p = 0.051) compared with bevacizumab. Pemetrexed exhibited no improvement in PFS or overall survival (OS) compared with bevacizumab. Regarding the grade, the GRADE system indicated that the gemcitabine group was "MODERATE", the pemetrexed group was "HIGH", and both the pemetrexed + bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab groups and pemetrexed vs. B groups were "LOW".

Conclusions

Gemcitabine or pemetrexed compared with BSC/observation/placebo significantly improved PFS or OS. Whether pemetrexed + bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab alone significantly improves PFS requires further investigation.     

Vitamin D and Respiratory Tract Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Low levels of 25-OH vitamin D are associated with respiratory tract infection (RTI). However, results from randomized controlled trials are inconclusive. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the preventive effect of vitamin D supplementation on RTI.

Methods

Randomized, controlled trials of vitamin D for prevention of RTI were used for the analysis. The risks of within-trial and publication bias were assessed. Odds ratios of RTI were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran''s Q and I². Meta-regressions and subgroup analyses were used to assess the influence of various factors on trial outcome. The pre-defined review protocol was registered at the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews, registration number CRD42013003530.

Findings

Of 1137 citations retrieved, 11 placebo-controlled studies of 5660 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, vitamin D showed a protective effect against RTI (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.84). There was significant heterogeneity among studies (Cohran''s Q p<0.0001, I² = 72%). The protective effect was larger in studies using once-daily dosing compared to bolus doses (OR = 0.51 vs OR = 0.86, p = 0.01). There was some evidence that results may have been influenced by publication bias.

Interpretation

Results indicate that vitamin D has a protective effect against RTI, and dosing once-daily seems most effective. Due to heterogeneity of included studies and possible publication bias in the field, these results should be interpreted with caution.     

Probiotics for Preventing Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of High-Quality Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is considered to be a worldwide issue along with the development of supportive ventilation. The preventing strategy is of great importance for its poor prognostic and difficulties in treatment. Probiotics have been advocated as one of the possible preventive measures. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the potential benefits of probiotics.

Methods

The databases, Web of science, PubMed, Ovid and Cochrane lib were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) publications that compared the effectiveness of probiotics with placebo in the prevention of VAP. The incidence of VAP was considered as the primary endpoint, mortality, length of stay in intensive care units (ICUs), etiology of the infections were considered as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 844 patients from 5 trials were subjected to meta-analysis. Probiotics did not significantly decrease the incidence of VAP (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.85-1.04, p=0.22), however, the administration of probiotics reduced the risk of VAP caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) (RR 0.30, 95%CI 0.11-0.91, P=0.03). It failed to affect any other endpoints.

Conclusion

Probiotic prophylaxis of ventilator-associated pneumonia remained inconclusive and it failed to improve the prognosis of general mechanically ventilated patients. It was noteworthy that infections caused by P. aeruginosa was reduced by administration of probiotics. In further, it is recommended that advanced studies should exploit transformation in pathogenic microorganisms owing to administration of probiotics as well as the specific population.     

Acetyl-L-Carnitine in the Treatment of Peripheral Neuropathic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

Acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC), a constructive molecule in fatty acid metabolism, is an agent potentially effective for treating peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP). Its effect, however, remains uncertain. We aimed to access the efficacy and safety of ALC for the treatment of patients with PNP.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE (1996–2014), EMBase (1974–2014), and CENTRAL (May 2014) up to June 27, 2014 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ALC with placebo or other active medications in diabetic and non-diabetic PNP patients that reported the change of pain using visual analogue scale (VAS). Mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for pooling continuous data.

Results

Four RCTs comparing ALC with placebo and reporting in three articles (n = 523) were included. Compared with placebo, ALC significantly reduced VAS scores of PNP patients (MD of VAS, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.68-1.72, P <0.00001). In the subgroup analysis, the effect of ALC on VAS was similar in different administration routes (intramuscular-oral sequential subgroup: MD, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.34-2.04, P = 0.006; oral only subgroup: pooled MD, 1.15; 95%CI, 0.33-1.96, P = 0.006), and ALC appeared more effective in diabetic PNP patients than non-diabetic PNP patients (diabetic subgroup: MD, 1.47; 95%CI, 1.06-1.87, P <0.00001; non-diabetic subgroup: MD, 0.71; 95% CI, -0.01-1.43, P = 0.05). No severe adverse events were reported related to ALC. The common adverse events were pain, headache, paraesthesia, hyperesthesia, retching, biliary colic, and gastrointestinal disorders. The rates of total adverse events were similar in ALC and control group.

Conclusion

The current evidence suggests that ALC has a moderate effect in reducing pain measured on VAS in PNP patients with acceptable safety. Larger trials with longer follow-up, however, are warranted to establish the effects.     

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery in Lung Cancer Resection: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES:: This meta-analysis sought to determine whether video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) improves clinical and resource outcomes compared with thoracotomy (OPEN) in adults undergoing lobectomy for nonsmall cell lung cancer. METHODS:: A comprehensive search was undertaken to identify all randomized (RCT) and nonrandomized (non-RCT) controlled trials comparing VATS with OPEN thoracotomy available up to April 2007. The primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes included any other reported clinical outcome and resource utilization. Odds ratios (OR), weighted mean differences (WMD), or standardized mean differences (SMD), and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were analyzed as appropriate. RESULTS:: Baseline prognosis was more favorable for VATS (more females, smaller tumor size, less advanced stage, histology associated with peripheral location and with more indolent disease) than for OPEN in non-RCTs, but not RCT. Postoperative complications were significantly reduced in the VATS group compared with OPEN surgery when both RCT and non-RCT were considered in aggregate (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.70). Although overall blood loss was significantly reduced with VATS compared with OPEN (-80 mL, 95% CI -110 to -50 mL), the incidence of excessive blood loss (generally defined as >500 mL) and incidence of re-exploration for bleeding was not significantly reduced. Pain measured via visual analog scales (10-point VAS) was significantly reduced by <1 point on day 1, by >2 points at 1 week, and by <1 point at week 2 to 4. Similarly, analgesia requirements were significantly reduced in the VATS group. Postoperative vital capacity was significantly improved (WMD 20, 95% CI 15-25), and at 1 year was significantly greater for VATS versus OPEN surgery (WMD 7, 95% CI 2-12). The incidence of patients reporting limited activity at 3 months was reduced (OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.82), and time to full activity was significantly reduced in the VATS versus OPEN surgery (WMD -1.5, 95% CI -2.1 to -0.9). Overall patient-reported physical function scores did not differ between groups at 3 years follow-up. Hospital length of stay was significantly reduced by 2.6 days despite increased 16 minutes of operating time for VATS versus OPEN. The incidence of cancer recurrence (local or distal) was not significantly different, but chemotherapy delays were significantly reduced for VATS versus OPEN (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.38). The need for chemotherapy reduction was also decreased (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16-0.87), and the number of patients who did not receive at least 75% of their planned chemotherapy without delays were reduced (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.93). The risk of death was not significantly reduced when RCTs were considered alone; however, when non-RCTs (n = 18) were included, the risk of death at 1 to 5 years was significantly reduced (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.94; P = 0.02) for VATS versus OPEN. Stage-specific survival to 5 years was not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS:: This meta-analysis suggests that there may be some short term, and possibly even long-term, advantages to performing lung resections with VATS techniques rather than through conventional thoracotomy. Overall, VATS for lobectomy may reduce acute and chronic pain, perioperative morbidity, and improve delivery of adjuvant therapies, without a decrease in stage specific long-term survival. However, the results are largely dependent on non-RCTs, and future adequately powered randomized trials with long-term follow-up are encouraged.