The efficacy and safety of intravesical gemcitabine vs Bacille Calmette-Guérin for adjuvant treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: a meta-analysis

膀胱内灌注吉西他滨与卡介苗辅助治疗非肌层浸润性膀胱癌的疗效和安全性:一项荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Several studies have compared the safety and efficacy of intravesical gemcitabine (Gem) with Bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. However, the results are not consistent. We carried out a meta-analysis to provide a more comprehensive analysis of the efficacy and safety of these 2 drugs. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists. Randomized controlled trials and retrospective controlled trials comparing intravesical Gem and BCG in adjuvant therapy for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer published in Eng-lish were included in this study. The strength of association was weighed by pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine whether the findings of the meta-analysis were robust. RESULTS: We analyzed 386 subjects from 5 pooled trials. Compared with BCG, intravesical Gem had lower incidence of dysuria (overall RR =0.31, 95% CI: 0.16, 0.61, I(2)=0%, p=0.001) and hematuria (overall RR =0.27, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.71, I(2)=0%, p=0.008). There were no statistical differences in risk of recurrence, progression, incidence of fever, and any adverse events between intravesical Gem and BCG therapy (p>0.05). No publication bias was found. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that intravesical Gem may have similar efficacy and lower incidence of dysuria and hematuria compared with BCG. Nevertheless, we recommend additional high-quality randomized controlled trials to confirm these results.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。