Comparative efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel versus other taxanes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
This systematic review addresses uncertainty around cabazitaxel's effectiveness, safety, and optimal dosing compared to other taxanes, aiming to guide personalized treatment and improve patient outcomes. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the efficacy and safety of cabazitaxel, including tumor response, survival rates, and toxicity profiles. Trials were identified from several databases, and the bias was evaluated by using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Review Manager (RevMan 5.4) was used for heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analyses, pooling hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and publication bias assessment. This meta-analysis included 10 trials with 3,377 patients. Cabazitaxel demonstrated no significant overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.92–1.14) or progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.92–1.24) benefit over other taxanes but had higher grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse events (TEAEs) (RR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.16–2.42). Tumor responses showed slightly higher partial responses (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.97–1.45) and increased progressive disease response (PDR) (RR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.15–2.23), with nonsignificant complete responses and stable disease. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in OS or PFS for prostate and breast cancer. However, in head and neck cancer, cabazitaxel was associated with worse outcomes. 20 mg/m2 dose had a better safety profile, while 25 mg/m2 increased…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,377 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.