Mostrar registro simples

dc.contributor.authorDebiasi, Márciopt_BR
dc.contributor.authorPolanczyk, Carisi Annept_BR
dc.contributor.authorZiegelmann, Patricia Klarmannpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorBarrios, Carlos Henrique Escosteguypt_BR
dc.contributor.authorCao, Hongyuanpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorDignam, Jamespt_BR
dc.contributor.authorBychkovsky, Brittany Louisept_BR
dc.contributor.authorFinkelstein, Dianne Madelynpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorGuindalini, Rodrigo Santa Cruzpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorNunes Filho, Paulo Ricardo Santospt_BR
dc.contributor.authorSilva, Caroline Albuquerque Moreira dapt_BR
dc.contributor.authorReinert, Tomáspt_BR
dc.contributor.authorAzambuja, Evandro dept_BR
dc.contributor.authorOlopade, Olufunmilayo L.pt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2018-08-18T03:01:25Zpt_BR
dc.date.issued2018pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn2234-943Xpt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10183/181142pt_BR
dc.description.abstractBackground: Several (neo)adjuvant treatments for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer have been compared in different randomized clinical trials. Since it is not feasible to conduct adequate pairwise comparative trials of all these therapeutic options, network meta-analysis offers an opportunity for more detailed inference for evidence-based therapy. Methods: Phase II/III randomized clinical trials comparing two or more different (neo) adjuvant treatments for HER2-positive breast cancer patients were included. Relative treatment effects were pooled in two separate network meta-analyses for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Results: 17 clinical trials met our eligibility criteria. Two different networks of trials were created based on the availability of the outcomes: OS network (15 trials: 37,837 patients); and DFS network (17 trials: 40,992 patients). Two studies—the ExteNET and the NeoSphere trials—were included only in this DFS network because OS data have not yet been reported. The concept of the dual anti-HER2 blockade proved to be the best option in terms of OS and DFS. Chemotherapy (CT) plus trastuzumab (T) and lapatinib (L) and CT + T + Pertuzumab (P) are probably the best treatment options in terms of OS, with 62.47% and 22.06%, respectively. In the DFS network, CT + T + Neratinib (N) was the best treatment option with 50.55%, followed by CT + T + P (26.59%) and CT + T + L (20.62%). Conclusion: This network meta-analysis suggests that dual anti-HER2 blockade with trastuzumab plus either lapatinib or pertuzumab are probably the best treatment options in the (neo)adjuvant setting for HER2-positive breast cancer patients in terms of OS gain. Mature OS results are still expected for the Aphinity trial and for the sequential use of trastuzumab followed by neratinib, the treatment that showed the best performance in terms of DFS in our analysis.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfpt_BR
dc.language.isoengpt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in oncology. [Lausanne : Frontiers Research Foundation]. Vol. 8 (May 2018), 156, 8 p.pt_BR
dc.rightsOpen Accessen
dc.subjectNeoplasias da mamapt_BR
dc.subjectBreast canceren
dc.subjectHER2/ERBB2en
dc.subjectReceptor erbB-2pt_BR
dc.subjectAdjuvant treatmenten
dc.subjectTrastuzumabpt_BR
dc.subjectNeoadjuvant treatmenten
dc.subjectQuimioterapia adjuvantept_BR
dc.subjectMeta-analysisen
dc.subjectNetwork meta-analysisen
dc.titleEfficacy of anti-HER2 agents in combination with adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early and locally advanced HER2-positive breast cancer patients : a network meta-analysispt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de periódicopt_BR
dc.identifier.nrb001070608pt_BR
dc.type.originEstrangeiropt_BR


Thumbnail
   

Este item está licenciado na Creative Commons License

Mostrar registro simples