Results on efficacy and safety of cancer treatment with or without tumor necrosis factor‑related apoptosis‑inducing ligand‑related agents: a meta-analysis
- Authors:
- Shaoxing Sun
- Zonghuan Li
- Li Sun
- Chunxu Yang
- Zijie Mei
- Wen Ouyang
- Bo Yang
- Conghua Xie
View Affiliations
Affiliations: Department of Radiation and Medical Oncology, Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, Hubei 430071, P.R. China
- Published online on: February 18, 2014 https://doi.org/10.3892/mco.2014.261
-
Pages:
440-448
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Abstract
This meta‑analysis aimed to evaluate the currently available evidence on the efficacy and safety of cancer treatment with or without tumor necrosis factor‑related apoptosis‑inducing ligand (TRAIL)‑related agents. We conducted a systematic search through Medline, Cochrane Library and EMBASE electronic databases and manually searched the Journal of Clinical Oncology to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted between 1995 and 2013 comparing the efficacy and safety results of cancer treatment with and without TRAIL‑related agents. The methodological quality of the included RCTs was assessed by the Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool. The outcome measurements included objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR)̸disease control rate (DCR) and adverse events (AEs). The relevant data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.2 software. Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation was used to assess the quality of evidence and grade of recommendation. Four RCTs, including a total of 596 patients, were ultimately selected and analyzed. There were no statistically significant differences among the 4 RCTs regarding ORR [relative risk (RR)=0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.73‑1.15, P=0.45], CBR̸DCR (RR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.81‑1.05, P=0.21), progression‑free survival [hazard ratio (HR)=0.89, 95% CI: 0.75‑1.05, P=0.16], overall survival (HR=0.90, 95% CI: 0.74‑1.09, P=0.27), number of patients with any AEs (RR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.96‑1.03, P=0.77), number of patients with any severe AEs (RR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.78‑1.55, P=0.58), number of patients with ≥grade 3 AEs (RR=1.13, 95% CI: 0.93‑1.38, P=0.22) and number of fatal AEs (RR=1.14, 95% CI: 0.71‑1.81, P=0.59). The quality of evidence was considered to be moderate and the recommendation grades were weak. In conclusion, the benefits of TRAIL‑related agents in the treatment of cancer patients remain uncertain and further clinical trials are required.
View Figures |
Figure 1
|
 |
Figure 2
|
 |
Figure 3
|
 |
Figure 4
|
 |
Figure 5
|
 |
Figure 6
|
 |
Figure 7
|
 |
Figure 8
|
 |
Figure 9
|
View References
|
1.
|
Siegel R, Naishadham D and Jemal A: Cancer
statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 62:10–29. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
2.
|
Wiley SR, Schooley K, Smolak PJ, et al:
Identification and characterization of a new member of the TNF
family that induces apoptosis. Immunity. 3:673–682. 1995.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
3.
|
Pitti RM, Marsters SA, Ruppert S, et al:
Induction of apoptosis by Apo-2 ligand, a new member of the tumor
necrosis factor cytokine family. J Biol Chem. 271:12687–12690.
1996. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
4.
|
Pan G, O’Rourke K, Chinnaiyan AM, et al:
The receptor for the cytotoxic ligand TRAIL. Science. 276:111–113.
1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
5.
|
Pan G, Ni J, Wei YF, et al: An antagonist
decoy receptor and a death domain-containing receptor for TRAIL.
Science. 277:815–818. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
6.
|
Rowinsky EK: Targeted induction of
apoptosis in cancer management: the emerging role of tumor necrosis
factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor activating
agents. J Clin Oncol. 23:9394–9407. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
7.
|
Marsters SA, Sheridan JP, Pitti RM, et al:
A novel receptor for Apo2L/TRAIL contains a truncated death domain.
Curr Biol. 7:1003–1006. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
8.
|
Ashkenazi A, Holland P and Eckhardt SG:
Ligand-based targeting of apoptosis in cancer: the potential of
recombinant human apoptosis ligand 2/tumor necrosis factor-related
apoptosis-inducing ligand (rhApo2L/TRAIL). J Clin Oncol.
26:3621–3630. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar
|
|
9.
|
Bellail AC, Qi L, Mulligan P, et al: TRAIL
agonists on clinical trials for cancer therapy: the promises and
the challenges. Rev Recent Clin Trials. 4:34–41. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
10.
|
Higgins JPT and Green S: Cochrane Handbook
for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane
Collaboration. 2011, https://www.cochrane-handbook.org
Accessed, September 20, 2013.
|
|
11.
|
Schunemann H, Brozek J and Oxman A: GRADE
handbook for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of
recommendations Version 3.2 (updated March 2009). GRADE Working
Group. 2009, Available from http:/www.cc-ims.net/gradepro.
Accessed September 20, 2013.
|
|
12.
|
Tierney JF, Stewart LA, Ghersi D, et al:
Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into
meta-analysis. Trials. 8:162007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
13.
|
Soria JC, Mark Z, Zatloukal P, et al:
Randomized phase II study of dulanermin in combination with
paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bevacizumab in advanced non-small-cell
lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 29:4442–4451. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
14.
|
Demetri GD, Le Cesne A, Chawla SP, et al:
First-line treatment of metastatic or locally advanced unresectable
soft tissue sarcomas with conatumumab in combination with
doxorubicin or doxorubicin alone: a phase I/II open-label and
double-blind study. Eur J Cancer. 48:547–563. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
15.
|
Kindler HL, Richards DA, Garbo LE, et al:
A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 study of ganitumab (AMG
479) or conatumumab (AMG 655) in combination with gemcitabine in
patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol.
23:2834–2842. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
16.
|
Paz-Ares L, Balint B, de Boer RH, et al: A
randomized phase 2 study of paclitaxel and carboplatin with or
without conatumumab for first-line treatment of advanced
non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 8:329–337.
2013.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
17.
|
Plummer R, Attard G, Pacey S, et al: Phase
1 and pharmaco-kinetic study of lexatumumab in patients with
advanced cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 13:6187–6194. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
18.
|
Tolcher AW, Mita M, Meropol NJ, et al:
Phase I pharmaco-kinetic and biologic correlative study of
mapatumumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody with agonist
activity to tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand
receptor-1. J Clin Oncol. 25:1390–1396. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar
|
