4.6 Review

Preoperative Denosumab may increase the Risk of Local Recurrence of Giant-cell Tumor of Bone Treated with Curettage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 12, 期 2, 页码 508-517

出版社

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/jca.50575

关键词

Denosumab; Giant-cell Tumor of Bone; Local recurrence; Meta-analysis

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81972509]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed that preoperative denosumab may increase the risk of local recurrence in patients with GCTB treated with curettage. Caution should be taken when using denosumab in the management of GCTB.
Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effect of preoperative denosumab on the local recurrence of giant-cell tumor of bone (GCTB) treated with curettage. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched. The following data were analyzed using meta-analysis: local recurrence rate of patients receiving denosumab followed by curettage (denosumab group), local recurrence rate of patients receiving curettage only (control group), and a comparison of the local recurrence rates of the two groups. Results: Nine studies that contained 672 patients with GCTB were included in this review. Patients in the denosumab group (preoperative denosumab followed by curettage) had a higher risk of local recurrence compared with those in the control group (curettage only) (odds ratio = 3.04, 95% confidence interval = 1.48-6.22, P < 0.01). The association between preoperative denosumab and local recurrence remained significant in most of the subgroup analyses, except for those with sample sizes < 59 (P = 0.09), sacral GCTB (P = 0.42), and usage of postoperative denosumab (P = 0.38). Conclusions: Preoperative denosumab may increase the risk of local recurrence of GCTB treated with curettage and should be used with caution in the management of GCTB.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据