[HTML][HTML] The prognostic effect of dexamethasone on patients with glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

L Zhou, Y Shen, T Huang, Y Sun, RN Alolga… - Frontiers in …, 2021 - frontiersin.org
L Zhou, Y Shen, T Huang, Y Sun, RN Alolga, G Zhang, Y Ge
Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2021frontiersin.org
Background: Dexamethasone (DEX) is widely adopted to reduce tumor-associated edema
in glioblastoma (GBM) patients despite its side effects. However, the benefits of using DEX in
GBM patients remains elusive. Methods: In this study, we performed a comprehensive meta-
analysis to address this concern. We searched the relevant studies from PubMed, Web of
Science, and EMBASE databases, and then applied random or fixed-effects models to
generate estimated summary hazard radios (HRs) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) …
Background: Dexamethasone (DEX) is widely adopted to reduce tumor-associated edema in glioblastoma (GBM) patients despite its side effects. However, the benefits of using DEX in GBM patients remains elusive.
Methods: In this study, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to address this concern. We searched the relevant studies from PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases, and then applied random or fixed-effects models to generate estimated summary hazard radios (HRs) and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Moreover, subgroup and sensitivity analysis were conducted and publication bias were further evaluated.
Results: Ten articles with a total of 2,230 GBM patients were eligible according to the inclusion criteria. In the assessment of overall survival (OS), meta-analysis data revealed that DEX was significantly associated with the poor prognosis of GBM patients (HR=1.44, 95% CI=1.32−1.57). In the progression-free survival (PFS), the pooled results indicated that the use of DEX can increase 48% death risk for GBM patients (HR=1.48, 95% CI=1.11−1.98). Subgroup analyses revealed that DEX was associated with poorer outcome of GBM in subgroup of newly diagnosed patients and GBM patients treated with ≥ 2mg/day. Sensitivity analyses showed that no study changed the pooled results materially for both OS and PFS analyses. The funnel plot had no obvious asymmetry.
Conclusion: Our findings partly confirmed that use of DEX was associated with poor treatment outcome in GBM patients. To reach a definitive conclusion, large samples from multi-centers are urgent to address this concern.
Frontiers