IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0193814.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Meta-analysis of gemcitabine in brief versus prolonged low-dose infusion for advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Author

Listed:
  • Zhao Dehua
  • Chu Mingming
  • Wang Jisheng

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (GEM) at 30 min standard-dose infusion (30 min-SDI) compared with prolonged low-dose infusion (P-LDI) in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Electronic databases including Pubmed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, and VIP were searched using keywords “GEM”, “P-LDI”, and “NSCLC”. Review Manager 5.3 was used to perform the meta-analysis. Primary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and 1-year survival rate (1-year SR). Secondary endpoints were grade 3/4 hematotoxicity and nausea/vomiting. In association. GRADE quality of evidence system was used to assess the results of meta-analysis. Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 637 patients were included and no statistical heterogeneity was found among the studies. The results showed that P-LDI was superior in ORR (RD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.16, P = 0.02), but had a similar 1-year SR (RD = 0.05, 95% CI: -0.02 to 0.12, P = 0.18) as compared with 30 min-SDI. For grade 3/4 adverse events, there was no significant difference in anemia (RD = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.04, P = 0.27) and nausea/vomiting (RD = 0.01, 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.06, P = 0.64) between the two treatments. However, patients with P-LDI experienced less leukopenia (RD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.15 to -0.01, P = 0.03) and thrombocytopenia ((RD = -0.05, 95% CI: -0.09 to –0.01, P = 0.006). The GRADE profile showed that the included RCTs had low quality of evidences. Conclusion: P-LDI was superior in terms of ORR, experienced less grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia and leukopenia compared with 30 min-SDI, and could be a viable treatment option for advanced NSCLC. However, the results need to be further verified by high quality trials and large samples owing to the low quality of evidences.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhao Dehua & Chu Mingming & Wang Jisheng, 2018. "Meta-analysis of gemcitabine in brief versus prolonged low-dose infusion for advanced non-small cell lung cancer," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-12, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193814
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193814
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193814&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0193814?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193814. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.