IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0177950.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Weekly versus biweekly bortezomib given in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ting Yuan
  • Feng Zhang
  • Qing-min Yao
  • Yan-xia Liu
  • Xiao-juan Zhu
  • Xin Wang

Abstract

Background: Bortezomib is recently studied as a novel agent in indolent lymphoma. The optimal schedule of bortezomib used in indolent lymphoma is still uncertain. Methods: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical trials comparing the efficacy and toxicity of the weekly and biweekly schedules of bortezomib in patients with indolent lymphoma. We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Emabase from inception to July 29, 2016. The primary outcome was the overall response rate including the complete response rate and the partial response rate. The secondary outcomes were the proportions of patients in each group experiencing the adverse events including the neutropathy, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and neutropenia. Findings: After final screening, six trials were considered eligible for analysis. The results showed that the overall response rate of biweekly schedule was higher than that of weekly schedule in indolent lymphoma (OR 1.691;95%CI 1.02–2.80). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the two schedules of bortezomib for the main adverse events. Interpretation: The biweekly schedule of bortezomib was more effective than the weekly schedule in indolent lymphoma, with similar proportion of toxicities.

Suggested Citation

  • Ting Yuan & Feng Zhang & Qing-min Yao & Yan-xia Liu & Xiao-juan Zhu & Xin Wang, 2017. "Weekly versus biweekly bortezomib given in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177950
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950?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:pone00:0177950. 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.