TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative analysis of systemic oncological treatments and best supportive care for advanced gastresophageal cancer :
T2 - A comprehensive scoping review and evidence map
AU - Santero, Marilina
AU - Meade, Adriana
AU - Selva, A
AU - Acosta-Dighero, Roberto
AU - Meza, Nicolás
AU - Quintana Ruiz, Maria Jesús
AU - Bracchiglione, Javier
AU - Requeijo, Carolina
AU - Salazar, Josefina
AU - Rodríguez Grijalva, Gerardo
AU - Solà, Ivan
AU - Urrútia, Gerard
AU - Bonfill, X. (Xavier)
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine published by Chinese Cochrane Center, West China Hospital of Sichuan University and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
PY - 2023/6
Y1 - 2023/6
N2 - Objective: To identify, describe, and organize the available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments compared to best supportive care (BSC) for advanced gastresophageal cancer. Methods: We conducted a thorough search across MEDLINE (PubMed), EMbase (Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Our inclusion criteria encompassed systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental and observational studies involving patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy or biological/targeted therapy compared to BSC. The outcomes included survival, quality of life, functional status, toxicity, and quality of end-of-life care. Results: We included and mapped 72 studies, comprising SRs, experimental and observational designs, 12 on esophageal cancer, 51 on gastric cancer, and 10 both locations. Most compared schemes including chemotherapy (47 studies), but did not report therapeutic lines. Moreover, BSC as a control arm was poorly defined, including integral support and placebo. Data favor the use of systemic oncological treatments in survival outcomes and BSC in toxicity. Data for outcomes including quality of life, functional status, and quality of end-of-life care were limited. We found sundry evidence gaps specifically in assessing new treatments such as immunotherapy and important outcomes such as functional status, symptoms control, hospital admissions, and the quality of end-life care for all the treatments. Conclusions: There are important evidence gaps regarding new for patients with advanced gastresophageal cancer and the effect of systemic oncological treatments on important patient-centered outcomes beyond survival. Future research should clearly describe the population included, specifying previous treatments and considering therapeutic, and consider all patient-centered outcomes. Otherwise, it will be complex to apply research results into practice.
AB - Objective: To identify, describe, and organize the available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments compared to best supportive care (BSC) for advanced gastresophageal cancer. Methods: We conducted a thorough search across MEDLINE (PubMed), EMbase (Ovid), The Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Our inclusion criteria encompassed systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental and observational studies involving patients with advanced esophageal or gastric cancer receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy or biological/targeted therapy compared to BSC. The outcomes included survival, quality of life, functional status, toxicity, and quality of end-of-life care. Results: We included and mapped 72 studies, comprising SRs, experimental and observational designs, 12 on esophageal cancer, 51 on gastric cancer, and 10 both locations. Most compared schemes including chemotherapy (47 studies), but did not report therapeutic lines. Moreover, BSC as a control arm was poorly defined, including integral support and placebo. Data favor the use of systemic oncological treatments in survival outcomes and BSC in toxicity. Data for outcomes including quality of life, functional status, and quality of end-of-life care were limited. We found sundry evidence gaps specifically in assessing new treatments such as immunotherapy and important outcomes such as functional status, symptoms control, hospital admissions, and the quality of end-life care for all the treatments. Conclusions: There are important evidence gaps regarding new for patients with advanced gastresophageal cancer and the effect of systemic oncological treatments on important patient-centered outcomes beyond survival. Future research should clearly describe the population included, specifying previous treatments and considering therapeutic, and consider all patient-centered outcomes. Otherwise, it will be complex to apply research results into practice.
KW - Drug therapy
KW - Esophageal neoplasms
KW - Immunotherapy
KW - Molecular targeted therapy
KW - Review
KW - Stomach neoplasms
KW - drug therapy
KW - review
KW - immunotherapy
KW - molecular targeted therapy
KW - stomach neoplasms
KW - esophageal neoplasms
KW - Humans
KW - Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use
KW - Stomach Neoplasms/drug therapy
KW - Quality of Life
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85163092273&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/cdd0115c-1902-3af5-8117-e2742143069b/
U2 - 10.1111/jebm.12539
DO - 10.1111/jebm.12539
M3 - Review article
C2 - 37303304
SN - 1756-5383
VL - 16
SP - 216
EP - 236
JO - Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
JF - Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine
IS - 2
ER -