Second-Line Treatments For Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis Of Overall Survival Using Parametric Modelling Methods

Abstract

Introduction: Advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is one of the most common forms of cancer and remains difficult to cure. There is currently no recommended therapy for second-line AGC in the UK despite the availability of various interventions. This paper aims to compare different interventions for treatment of second-line AGC using more complex methods to estimate relative efficacy, fitting various parametric models and to compare results to those published adopting conventional methods of synthesis. Methods: Seven studies were identified in an existing literature review evaluating seven comparators, which formed a connected network of evidence. Citations were limited to randomised controlled trials in previously-treated AGC patients. Evidence quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Studies were assessed for the

Third-line systemic treatment in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer: a comprehensive review

“…Combination of paclitaxel plus ramucirumab showed superior efficacy in prolonging OS when compared with single-agent chemotherapy or ramucirumab. 9–11…”

“…Combination of paclitaxel plus ramucirumab showed superior efficacy in prolonging OS when compared with single-agent chemotherapy or ramucirumab. [9][10][11] Third-line systemic treatment in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer: a comprehensive review With the development of new chemotherapies or targeted agents which are potentially more effective and less toxic, many patients can still maintain a good general condition after failing second-line therapies. According to previous studies, around 20-90% patients were able to continue on active third-line or further lines of treatment.…”

Efficacy of Systemic Oncological Treatments in Patients With Advanced Esophageal or Gastric Cancers at High Risk of Dying in the Middle and Short Term: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

“…According to the eligibility criteria, we included 16 SRs in this overview. (15,(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37) Table 1 and Appendix 5 summarise the general characteristics of included SRs. Of the included reviews, two were Cochrane SRs (15,29), and four were network meta-analyses.…”

“…Of the included reviews, two were Cochrane SRs (15,29), and four were network meta-analyses. (28,31,32,34) Included SRs were published between 2014 and 2020, nine were performed in high-income countries, and seven of them in China. All SRs included meta-analyses except for Harvey 2017.…”

“…Eight primary studies were included in two SRs (24,36), and ve in another ve SRs. (15,23,27,28,32) Outcomes reported…”