Author:
Gui Yu,Liu Xunzhou,Chen Xianchun,Yang Xi,Li Shichao,Pan Qingwen,Luo Xiangdong,Chen Li
Abstract
Abstract
Background
In early breast cancer treatment, the preferred surgical regimen remains a topic of controversy, and conventional pairwise meta-analysis cannot provide a hierarchy based on clinical trial evidence. Therefore, a network meta-analysis was performed both for direct and indirect comparisons and to assess the survival outcomes of surgical regimens.
Methods
Randomized clinical trials comparing different surgical regimens for the treatment of early breast cancer were identified. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free-survival (DFS) were analyzed using random-effects network meta-analysis on the hazard ratio (HR) scale and calculated as combined HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided.
Results
The network meta-analysis compared 11 different surgical regimens that consisted of 13 and 17 direct comparisons between strategies for OS (34 trials; n = 23 587 patients) and DFS (32 trials; n = 22 552 patients), respectively. The values of surface under the cumulative ranking for OS and DFS after mastectomy (M)+radiotherapy (RT) were observed to be the largest. Breast-conserving surgery (BCS)+axillary node sampling+RT almost achieved the threshold for inferiority compared with the other surgical treatment arms and was statistically significantly associated with worse OS (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.94; HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.92; HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.96). No statistically significant difference between BCS+sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)+RT vs BCS+SLNB+intraoperative RT was observed in carrying out network meta-analysis (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.64 to 1.36).
Conclusions
M+RT is safer than other surgical regimens for the treatment of early breast cancer patients because of the favorable balance between the survival outcomes. Early breast cancer patients who receive BCS should be given SLNB and not axillary node sampling. Intraoperative RT is no better than postoperative RT in patients who receive SLNB.
Funder
National Natural Science Foundation of China
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference95 articles.
1. Global, regional, and national cancer incidence, mortality, years of life lost, years lived with disability, and disability-adjusted life-years for 32 cancer groups, 1990 to 2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study;Fitzmaurice;JAMA Oncol,2016
2. Cancer statistics, 2017;Siege;CA Cancer J Clin,2017
3. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference statement: Diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ September 22–24, 2009;Allegra;J Natl Cancer Inst,2010
4. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography;Ernster;J Natl Cancer Inst,2002
Cited by
17 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献