Objective. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of standard therapy (radiotherapy/RT/CT) with that of antiepidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (NPC) therapy in patients with advanced nasopharyngeal cancer. Methods. A meta-analysis was performed to meet the objective of this study. The English databases PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched. The literature review compared anti-EGFR-targeted therapy with conventional therapy practices. The main outcome measure was overall survival (OS). Secondary goals were progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and adverse events (grade 3). Results. The database search resulted in 11 studies, with a total of 4219 participants. It was found that combining an anti-EGFR regimen with conventional therapy did not enhance OS ( hazard ratio HR = 1.18 ; 95 % confidence interval CI = 0.51 – 2.40 ; p = 0.70 ) or PFS appreciably ( HR = 0.95 ; 95 % CI = 0.51 – 1.48 ; p = 0.88 ) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. While LRRFS increased considerably ( HR = 0.70 ; 95 % CI = 0.67 – 1.00 ; p = 0.01 ), the combined regimen did not improve DMFS ( HR = 0.86 ; 95 % CI = 0.61 – 1.12 ; p = 0.36 ). Treatment-related adverse events included haematological toxicity ( RR = 0.2 ; 95 % CI = 0.08 – 0.45 ; p = 0.01 ), cutaneous reactions ( RR = 7.05 ; 95 % CI = 2.15 – 23.09 ; p = 0.01 ), and mucositis ( RR = 1.96 ; 95 % CI = 1.58 – 2.09 ; p = 0.01 ). Conclusions. Individuals who have nasopharyngeal cancer do not have an increased chance of surviving until a local recurrence of their disease if they get normal therapy in addition to an anti-EGFR regimen. However, this combination does not enhance overall survival. On the other hand, this factor adds to an increase in the number of adverse effects.
Purpose To describe plain and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) findings of chemotherapy drug-related acute pancreatitis in patients with malignances. Methods Twenty-two patients with first clinical and/or biochemical evidence of pancreatitis who underwent plain and/or contrast-enhanced CT while being treated with chemotherapy were retrospectively included in the study. Chemotherapy drug-related acute pancreatitis (CDRAP) diagnosis was obtained based on clinical, imaging, and biochemical findings. CT features of CDRAPwere recorded as follows: normal pancreas morphology, pancreatic enlargement (diffuse or focal), enhancing but heterogeneous parenchyma (diffuse or focal), peripancreatic stranding, acute peripancreatic fluid collection, pseudocyst, acute necrotic collections (pancreatic necrosis and peripancreatic necrosis) and main pancreatic duct dilatation. In addition, the baseline demographics, clinical, biochemical, other complications, chemotherapy drugs, and outcomes of the pancreas were also included. Results CT showed that five (23%) patients demonstrated normal pancreas, whereas 17 (77%) patients presented with acute pancreatitis changes in clinically diagnosed CDRAP patients. The CT findingsof 22 CDRAPs were as follows: diffuse (n=7) or focal (n=8) pancreatic enlargement, diffuse (n=6) or focal (n=1) heterogeneousenhancement, peripancreatic stranding (n=5), acute peripancreatic fluid collection (n=7), and pseudocyst (n=1). No patients developed acute necrotic collections or dilatation of the main pancreatic duct. The severity classification of acute pancreatitis in most people (81%) wasmild pancreatitis. Other complications were drug-induced hepatitis (n=3), polycranial neuropathy (n=1), and death (n=1).Regarding theoutcomes of the pancreas, two patients developed acute pancreatitis changes on CT in five initial normal pancreas morphologies. Conclusion Chemotherapy-related acute pancreatitis mainly presented as interstitial edematous pancreatitis and/or a normal pancreas on CT. Most living patients experienced mild acute pancreatitis. Patients with other risk factors for acute pancreatitis might easily develop CDRAP, which needs more attention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.