No abstract

IntroductionA modified and recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) is often used in the control of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) through intrapleural infusion.ObjectivesTo demonstrate the clinical response, survival, and safety of Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants, their optimal combinations, treatment threshold, and optimal usage, we performed a new systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodologyAll randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were collected from Chinese and English electronic databases (from inception until August 2020). We pooled the data using a series of meta-analyses and summarized the evidence quality following the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.ResultsWe included 75 RCTs recruiting 4,678 patients, which reported six combinations for Rh-endostatin plus chemical irritants. Among the six combinations, only Rh-endostatin plus cisplatin (DDP) with enough trials might improve the complete response [2.29 (1.93, 2.71)] and quality of life [3.01 (2.49, 3.63)] and reduce treatment failure [0.29 (0.25, 0.33)] and progressive disease [0.27 (0.22, 0.34)]. It might not increase the risk of adverse drug reactions. For patients with lung cancer, moderate to massive effusion, initial treatment, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score ≥60, or anticipated survival time ≥3 months, Rh-endostatin (30–45 mg each time, once or twice a week 3–4 times) plus DDP (30–60 mg/m2) obtained a significant improvement in clinical response and a reduction of failure and progressive disease. Most results had good robustness and moderate quality.ConclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that Rh-endostatin with DDP may be an optimal combination, which may improve clinical response and reduce failure and progressive disease with good safety. Rh-endostatin (30–40 mg each time, once or twice a week 3–4 times) with DDP (30–40 mg/m2) may be an optimal usage for achieving an ideal response.

Introduction: Aidi injection (Aidi) is composed of cantharidin, astragaloside, ginsenoside, and elentheroside E. As an important adjuvant therapy, Aidi in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin (GP) is often used in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Objectives: We performed a new evaluation to demonstrate the clinical efficacy and safety of the Aidi and GP combination and further explored an optimal strategy for achieving an ideal response and safety level in advanced NSCLC.Methodology: We collected all the related trials from Chinese and English-language databases, analyzed their methodological bias risk using the Cochrane evaluation Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, extracted all the data using a predefined data extraction form, pooled the data using a series of meta-analyses, and finally summarized the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.Results: We included 70 trials with 5,509 patients. Compared with GP alone, the Aidi and GP combination showed a significant improvement in the objective response rate (ORR) [1.82 (1.62–2.04)], disease control rate (DCR) [2.29 (1.97–2.67)], and quality of life (QOL) [3.03 (2.55–3.60)] and a low incidence of hematotoxicity and gastrointestinal and hepatorenal toxicity. Aidi might be more suitable for patients who are first-treated, elderly, or patients with a Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) score ≥ 60 or anticipated survival time (AST) ≥3 months. An Aidi (50 ml/day, 7–14 days/cycle for one to two cycles), gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2), and cisplatin (20–30 mg/m2, 40–50 mg/m2, or 60–80 mg/m2) might be an optimal regimen for realizing an ideal response and safety level. Most results were robust and of moderate quality.Conclusion: Current evidence indicates that Aidi's value in adjuvant chemotherapy may be broad-spectrum, not just for some regimens. The Aidi and GP combination may show a good short-term response, antitumor immunity, and safety level in patients with NSCLC. Aidi (50 ml/day, 7–14 days/cycle for one and two cycles) with GEM (1000 mg/m2) and DDP (20–30 mg/m2 or 40–50 mg/m2) may be an optimal regimen for realizing an ideal goal in patients who are first-treatment, elderly, or have a KPS score ≥ 60 or AST≥3 months.

Background: To further determine the clinical efficacy and survival of intrathoracic infusion with TPs and chemical irritants and their therapeutic threshold and optimal control regimen to achieve a desired response in malignant pleural effusion (MPE).Methods: We collected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of TPs with chemical irritants from Chinese and English databases (from inception until September 2019), and performed a new metaanalysis following the PRISMA guidelines. We measured their bias risk, summarized data using metaanalysis, and evidence quality using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Results: We collected 24 trials involving three TPs and platinum and 1,592 patients. Most trials had unclear bias risk. TPs with platinum significantly improved complete response [4.02 (3.12 to 5.18)] and quality of life [3.64 (2.34 to 5.66)], the 0.5-year overall survival (OS) rate [5.75 (3.02 to 10.92)], and 1-year OS rate [5.29, (1.71 to 16.36)], and reduced the treatment failure, myelosuppression, and gastrointestinal toxicity. For patients with moderate to large volume of pleural effusion, KPS score ≥50 to 60, or AST ≥3 months, the thymosin (200-300mg/time), thymopentin (2mg/time) or thymosin alpha 1 (3.2mg/time) with cisplatin (30-40mg/m 2 ), carboplatin (400mg/m 2 ), or oxaliplatin (100mg/m 2 ) are possible regimens for achieving a desired success, and low failure. Most results were robust and moderate quality. Conclusion: The moderate evidence suggests that the TPs with platinum is beneficial to the patient with MPE, and provides evidence for the therapeutic threshold and possible regimens that may achieve a desired success and reduce the failure. Background Malignant pleural effusion (MPE), often originates from most malignant tumors, is a common and challenging problem. Patients often suffer from breathlessness, poor quality of life (QOL) and prognosis [1-2]. Control of the effusion significantly reduces morbidity, and improves quality of life. Chemical pleurodesis is a first-line intervention for MPE without a nonexpendable lung (NEL) [3]. After draining effusion, a chemical irritant such as talc poudrage [4], tetracycline [5], bleomycin [6],

No abstract