Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Response rate to the treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinemia: A meta-analysis of the results of clinical trials

dc.contributor.authorSantos-Lozano A.
dc.contributor.authorMorales-Gonzalez A.
dc.contributor.authorSanchis-Gomar F.
dc.contributor.authorCristi-Montero C.
dc.contributor.authorFiuza-Luces C.
dc.contributor.authorPareja-Galeano H.
dc.contributor.authorMartínez-López J.
dc.contributor.authorGaratachea N.
dc.contributor.authorLucia A.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-02T22:28:06Z
dc.date.available2020-09-02T22:28:06Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier10.1016/j.critrevonc.2016.06.004
dc.identifier.citation105, , 118-126
dc.identifier.issn10408428
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12728/6197
dc.descriptionWaldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a malignant lymphoproliferative disorder characterized by the presence of a high level of serum monoclonal IgM and a lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate in the bone marrow. This meta-analysis sought to assess the effectiveness of the different treatments for WM tested in published trials using the response rate (RR) as the main outcome measure. Forty-six articles (1409 patients) identified were entered in a variable effects model meta-analysis of proportions (rates and sample sizes). A greater response to treatment was produced in patients treated with a combination of 2+ drugs (RR = 73%; 95%CI: 62, 83; p < 0.01) than in those receiving monotherapy with rituximab (RR = 44%; 95%CI: 34, 55; p < 0.01) or a purine analogue [61% (95%CI: 43, 78; p < 0.01) for cladribine and 53% (95%CI: 34, 72; p < 0.01) for fludarabine]. The combination rituximab + cladribine emerged as particularly effective (RR = 87%; 95%CI: 78, 94; p < 0.01), slightly more effective than rituximab + bortezomib/dexamethasone (RR = 84%; 95%CI: 79, 88; p < 0.01) and rituximab + cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone [RR = 81% (95%CI: 72, 88; p < 0.01)]. Our results are in overall agreement with treatment recommendations from the seventh International Workshops on WM. Our findings are limited by the fact that we could not analyze progression-free survival (PFS). More phase II/III trials are needed to corroborate promising recent findings with bendamustine and carfilzomib and further research are needed to standardize recommendations based on maximum treatment efficacy combined with lowest toxicity, differentiation between first vs second line treatment, or long-term follow up after treatment. © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier Ireland Ltd
dc.subjectMeta-analysis
dc.subjectPurine analogues
dc.subjectRituximab
dc.subjectWaldeström disease
dc.subjectbendamustine
dc.subjectbortezomib
dc.subjectcarfilzomib
dc.subjectcladribine
dc.subjectcyclophosphamide
dc.subjectdexamethasone
dc.subjectfludarabine
dc.subjectrituximab
dc.subjectdrug combination
dc.subjectcancer combination chemotherapy
dc.subjectdrug efficacy
dc.subjectdrug response
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectmeta analysis
dc.subjectmonotherapy
dc.subjectprogression free survival
dc.subjectReview
dc.subjecttreatment outcome
dc.subjectWaldenstroem macroglobulinemia
dc.subjectdrug combination
dc.subjectWaldenstrom Macroglobulinemia
dc.subjectDrug Combinations
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectTreatment Outcome
dc.subjectWaldenstrom Macroglobulinemia
dc.titleResponse rate to the treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinemia: A meta-analysis of the results of clinical trials
dc.typeReview


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail
Nombre:
item_2-s2.0-84979573880.pdf
Tamaño:
3.543Kb
Formato:
PDF
Ver/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem