Evidence Hub

The role of celecoxib for colorectal cancer treatment: a systematic review

Xiaohan Zhou, Xiuyun Wang, Yaqin Zhao, C. Yi

Translational Cancer Research, 2018

621 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Background: Some evidence has suggested that the Cox-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, might improve the survival outcomes in cancer patients. However, the association between celecoxib use and treatment response in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients remains controversial. Thus, a summary on current evidence was performed.

Methods: We conducted an electronic search using (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CNKI) to identify relevant peer-reviewed articles, up to March 2018. Eligible study designs included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and uncontrolled trials (UCTs) with the single experimental arm. The included trials evaluated the effect of adding celecoxib to conventional treatments for patients with CRC on overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), pathological response, survival indices, and toxicities. Results: The final analysis included 12 trials with a total of 621 patients. In this study, a qualitative summary and meta-analysis was performed due to insufficient RCTs. The addition of celecoxib showed improvement of pathological response but had no effects on ORR (RR =1.09; 95% CI, 0.62–1.92; P=0.76) and DCR (RR =1.09; 95% CI, 0.94–1.27; P=0.25). The impact of celecoxib on survival indices remains unclear. Meta-analysis on toxicities suggests that celecoxib is well tolerated with a decreased risk of oral mucositis (RR =0.35; 95% CI, 0.18–0.67; P=0.002).

Conclusions: Results showed the potential benefits of celecoxib in the treatment of resectable CRC compared…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, 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: 621 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

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.

Open this study Sign up free