IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0172307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of anti-angiogenic agents on overall survival in metastatic oesophago-gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • David L Chan
  • Katrin M Sjoquist
  • David Goldstein
  • Timothy J Price
  • Andrew J Martin
  • Yung-Jue Bang
  • Yoon-Koo Kang
  • Nick Pavlakis

Abstract

Background: Studies of anti-angiogenic agents (AAs), combined with chemotherapy (chemo) or as monotherapy in metastatic oesophago-gastric cancer (mOGC), have reported mixed outcomes. We undertook systematic review and meta-analysis to determine their overall benefits and harms. Methods: Randomized controlled trials in mOGC were sought investigating the addition of AAs to standard therapy (best supportive care or chemo). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) with secondary endpoints progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and toxicity. Estimates of treatment effect from individual trials were combined using standard techniques. Subgroup analyses were performed by line of therapy, region, age, performance status, histological type, number of metastatic sites, primary site, mechanism of action and HER2 status. Results: Fifteen trials evaluating 3502 patients were included in quantitative analysis. The addition of AAs was associated with improved OS: HR 0·81 (95% CI 0·75–0·88, p = Grade 3: with OR 1·39 (95% CI 1·17–1·65). Conclusions: The addition of AAs to standard therapy in mOGC improves OS. Improved efficacy was only observed in 2nd- or 3rd-line setting and not in 1st-line setting. Consistent OS benefit was present across all geographical regions. This benefit is at the expense of increased overall toxicity.

Suggested Citation

  • David L Chan & Katrin M Sjoquist & David Goldstein & Timothy J Price & Andrew J Martin & Yung-Jue Bang & Yoon-Koo Kang & Nick Pavlakis, 2017. "The effect of anti-angiogenic agents on overall survival in metastatic oesophago-gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0172307
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0172307
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0172307&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0172307?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:pone00:0172307. 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.