Several new therapies have been approved to treat advanced gastro‐entero‐pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP–NENs) in the last twenty years. In this systematic review and meta‐analysis, we searched MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more therapies for unresectable GEP–NENs. Network metanalysis was used to overcome the multiarm problem. For each arm, we described the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves. The primary endpoints were progression‐free survival and grade 3–4 of toxicity. We included nine studies involving a total of 2362 patients and 5 intervention arms: SSA alone, two IFN‐α plus SSA, two Everolimus alone, one Everolimus plus SSA, one Sunitinib alone, one177Lu‐Dotatate plus SSA, and one Bevacizumab plus SSA.177Lu‐ Dotatate plus SSA had the highest probability (99.6%) of being associated with the longest PFS. This approach was followed by Sunitinib use (64.5%), IFN‐α plus SSA one (53.0%), SSA alone (46.6%), Bevacizumab plus SSA one (45.0%), and Everolimus ± SSA one (33.6%). The placebo administration had the lowest probability of being associated with the longest PFS (7.6%). Placebo or Bevacizumab use had the highest probability of being the safest (73.7% and 76.7%), followed by SSA alone (65.0%), IFN‐α plus SSA (52.4%),177Lu‐Dotatate plus SSA (49.4%), and Sunitinib alone (28.8%). The Everolimus‐based approach had the lowest probability of being the safest (3.9%). The best approaches were SSA alone or combined with177Lu‐Dotatate.

Treatment of advanced gastro‐entero‐pancreatic neuro‐ endocrine tumors: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis of phase iii randomized controlled trials

Ricci C.;Lamberti G.;Ingaldi C.;Mosconi C.;Pagano N.;Alberici L.;Ambrosini V.;Manuzzi L.;Malvi D.;Rosini F.;Minni F.;Campana D.;Casadei R.
2021

Abstract

Several new therapies have been approved to treat advanced gastro‐entero‐pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP–NENs) in the last twenty years. In this systematic review and meta‐analysis, we searched MEDLINE, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more therapies for unresectable GEP–NENs. Network metanalysis was used to overcome the multiarm problem. For each arm, we described the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curves. The primary endpoints were progression‐free survival and grade 3–4 of toxicity. We included nine studies involving a total of 2362 patients and 5 intervention arms: SSA alone, two IFN‐α plus SSA, two Everolimus alone, one Everolimus plus SSA, one Sunitinib alone, one177Lu‐Dotatate plus SSA, and one Bevacizumab plus SSA.177Lu‐ Dotatate plus SSA had the highest probability (99.6%) of being associated with the longest PFS. This approach was followed by Sunitinib use (64.5%), IFN‐α plus SSA one (53.0%), SSA alone (46.6%), Bevacizumab plus SSA one (45.0%), and Everolimus ± SSA one (33.6%). The placebo administration had the lowest probability of being associated with the longest PFS (7.6%). Placebo or Bevacizumab use had the highest probability of being the safest (73.7% and 76.7%), followed by SSA alone (65.0%), IFN‐α plus SSA (52.4%),177Lu‐Dotatate plus SSA (49.4%), and Sunitinib alone (28.8%). The Everolimus‐based approach had the lowest probability of being the safest (3.9%). The best approaches were SSA alone or combined with177Lu‐Dotatate.
Ricci C.; Lamberti G.; Ingaldi C.; Mosconi C.; Pagano N.; Alberici L.; Ambrosini V.; Manuzzi L.; Monari F.; Malvi D.; Rosini F.; Minni F.; Campana D.; Casadei R.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
cancers-13-00358-v2.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipo: Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza: Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione (CCBY)
Dimensione 1.62 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.62 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11585/800738
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact