Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis
Abstract Background Cancer cachexia affects more than half of all cancer patients, reducing survival rates. Evidence‐based approaches are urgently needed to optimize treatment. Methods A systematic review and network meta‐analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of different ph...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2024-09-01
|
| Series: | Cancer Medicine |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.70166 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1825206521857835008 |
|---|---|
| author | Hao Chen Masashi Ishihara Hiroki Kazahari Ryusuke Ochiai Shigeru Tanzawa Takeshi Honda Yasuko Ichikawa Nobuyuki Horita Hisashi Nagai Kiyotaka Watanabe Nobuhiko Seki |
| author_facet | Hao Chen Masashi Ishihara Hiroki Kazahari Ryusuke Ochiai Shigeru Tanzawa Takeshi Honda Yasuko Ichikawa Nobuyuki Horita Hisashi Nagai Kiyotaka Watanabe Nobuhiko Seki |
| author_sort | Hao Chen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background Cancer cachexia affects more than half of all cancer patients, reducing survival rates. Evidence‐based approaches are urgently needed to optimize treatment. Methods A systematic review and network meta‐analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacotherapies for cancer cachexia. Three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched for the period from January 1, 2000, to March 20, 2024. The netmeta package in R software was used to calculate the pooled effect, employing a random effects model. Results Seven placebo‐controlled randomized trials involving 1421 patients were analyzed. Pairwise analysis showed that body weight increases were 4.6 kg (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–8.37 kg) for olanzapine, 3.82 kg (95% CI 0.73–6.91 kg) for espindolol (20 mg), 2.36 kg (95% CI 1.84–2.89 kg) for anamorelin (100 mg), and 1.31 kg (95% CI 0.42–2.19 kg) for anamorelin (50 mg). In terms of safety profiles, olanzapine demonstrated the lowest odds ratio when compared to placebo, at 0.26 (95% CI 0.07–0.94), followed by anamorelin (50 mg) at 0.86 (95% CI 0.30–2.48), and anamorelin (100 mg) at 0.89 (95% CI 0.42–1.88). However, network meta‐analysis could not confirm the superiority of olanzapine over anamorelin in terms of efficacy and safety. Conclusion Both olanzapine and anamorelin are useful in improving body weight in patients with cancer cachexia. Personalization may be helpful for different patients. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-e025148833cd4a03b3a174997f38f2ba |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2045-7634 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-09-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cancer Medicine |
| spelling | doaj-art-e025148833cd4a03b3a174997f38f2ba2025-02-07T09:08:08ZengWileyCancer Medicine2045-76342024-09-011317n/an/a10.1002/cam4.70166Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysisHao Chen0Masashi Ishihara1Hiroki Kazahari2Ryusuke Ochiai3Shigeru Tanzawa4Takeshi Honda5Yasuko Ichikawa6Nobuyuki Horita7Hisashi Nagai8Kiyotaka Watanabe9Nobuhiko Seki10Department of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Chemotherapy Yokohama City University Hospital Yokohama JapanGraduate School of Human and Environmental Studies Tokai University Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanDepartment of Oncology Teikyo University School of Medicine Tokyo JapanAbstract Background Cancer cachexia affects more than half of all cancer patients, reducing survival rates. Evidence‐based approaches are urgently needed to optimize treatment. Methods A systematic review and network meta‐analysis were conducted to assess the effectiveness and safety of different pharmacotherapies for cancer cachexia. Three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were searched for the period from January 1, 2000, to March 20, 2024. The netmeta package in R software was used to calculate the pooled effect, employing a random effects model. Results Seven placebo‐controlled randomized trials involving 1421 patients were analyzed. Pairwise analysis showed that body weight increases were 4.6 kg (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.83–8.37 kg) for olanzapine, 3.82 kg (95% CI 0.73–6.91 kg) for espindolol (20 mg), 2.36 kg (95% CI 1.84–2.89 kg) for anamorelin (100 mg), and 1.31 kg (95% CI 0.42–2.19 kg) for anamorelin (50 mg). In terms of safety profiles, olanzapine demonstrated the lowest odds ratio when compared to placebo, at 0.26 (95% CI 0.07–0.94), followed by anamorelin (50 mg) at 0.86 (95% CI 0.30–2.48), and anamorelin (100 mg) at 0.89 (95% CI 0.42–1.88). However, network meta‐analysis could not confirm the superiority of olanzapine over anamorelin in terms of efficacy and safety. Conclusion Both olanzapine and anamorelin are useful in improving body weight in patients with cancer cachexia. Personalization may be helpful for different patients.https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.70166anamorelinbody weightcancer cachexianetwork meta‐analysisolanzapine |
| spellingShingle | Hao Chen Masashi Ishihara Hiroki Kazahari Ryusuke Ochiai Shigeru Tanzawa Takeshi Honda Yasuko Ichikawa Nobuyuki Horita Hisashi Nagai Kiyotaka Watanabe Nobuhiko Seki Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis Cancer Medicine anamorelin body weight cancer cachexia network meta‐analysis olanzapine |
| title | Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
| title_full | Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
| title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
| title_short | Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis |
| title_sort | efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for cancer cachexia a systematic review and network meta analysis |
| topic | anamorelin body weight cancer cachexia network meta‐analysis olanzapine |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.70166 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT haochen efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT masashiishihara efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hirokikazahari efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT ryusukeochiai efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT shigerutanzawa efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT takeshihonda efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT yasukoichikawa efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT nobuyukihorita efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hisashinagai efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT kiyotakawatanabe efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT nobuhikoseki efficacyandsafetyofpharmacotherapyforcancercachexiaasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |