4.3 Review

Efficacy and safety of post-docetaxel therapies in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature

期刊

CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 1995-2008

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1341869

关键词

Metastatic prostate cancer; prostatic neoplasms; hormone refractory; castration resistant; systematic review

资金

  1. Sanofi

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Prostate cancer is a highly prevalent form of cancer in older men and is one of the leading causes of death from cancer in men across the globe. Many therapeutic agents have been approved for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), particularly as a post-docetaxel treatment strategy. The objective of this systematic literature review was to assess published efficacy and safety data for select mCRPC therapies - such as abiraterone, cabazitaxel, and enzalutamide - in the post-docetaxel setting.Methods: Database searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL, in conjunction with hand searches of multiple congress abstracts, yielded 13 randomized studies and 107 non-randomized studies that met the inclusion criteria.Results: Randomized studies demonstrated significant improvements in median overall survival (OS) outcomes over placebo for abiraterone (15.8 vs. 11.2 months) and enzalutamide (18.4 vs. 13.6 months), and similar significant improvements were noted for cabazitaxel over mitoxantrone (15.1 vs. 12.7 months). Differences in progression-free survival (PFS) were similarly significant, although variance in the criteria for measuring PFS may limit the extent to which these outcomes can be compared between studies. Non-randomized evidence included multiple publications from several early access and compassionate use programs with a primary objective to report safety outcomes. Results from these studies largely reflected the findings in randomized trials.Conclusions: Overall, there is a growing body of evidence for post-docetaxel treatment options available in patients with mCRPC. Further head-to-head trials or indirect treatment comparisons may be a valuable method to assess the comparative efficacy of these therapies.

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

4.3
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