Abstract P3-14-06: The prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in breast cancer patients: A systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) remains a common treatment related adverse event for breast cancer (BC) patients. CIPN interferes with the ability to complete chemotherapy & therefore potentially compromises survival outcomes. CIPN can worsen health-related quality of life and also add to the ongoing morbidity experienced by BC survivors. Previously, systematic reviews & ASCO guidelines have examined CIPN across many cancer types & different chemotherapies, which may lead to the introduction of confounding factors not relevant to BC patients. A recent prospective cohort also identified other specific lifestyle factors associated with CIPN in BC patients (1). From our search, a systematic review specifically looking at CIPN in BC patients has not previously been undertaken. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL. Clinical trials and observational studies for all potential pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were included. Risk of bias for full-text papers was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment or the modified Newcastle Ottawa score. Results: Of 706 records being identified, 601 unique citations were screened with 21 full text papers retrieved for assessment, and 16 studies included in the qualitative assessment. We identified 10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), one observational cohort study, and five controlled before-and-after studies (CBA). Pharmacological interventions which were investigated included calcium/magnesium infusion, glutamine, amifostine, goshajinkigan, omega 3 fatty acids, acetyl-L-carnitine, pregabalin, alpha-lipoic acid and minocycline. Non-pharmacological interventions included body mass index & lifestyle factors, electroacupuncture, exercise, limb hypothermia, carbon dioxide limb bathing and limb compression therapy. All trials identified were investigating primary prevention of CIPN in the setting of taxane chemotherapy. Improvements in the incidence of CIPN were reported with omega 3 fatty acids, glutamine and alpha-lipoic acid, but only one of these studies is a published RCT. In two of the studies, the benefit was identified only on physical examination, but no significant benefit with nerve conduction (NCS) testing. On subgroup analysis of trials investigating exercise, there was a benefit in the use of high intensity exercise versus low intensity exercise, particularly in patients <50 years old within a healthy weight range. Mixed results were seen with goshajinkigan. An increase in CIPN was seen with antioxidant use, electroacupuncture and acetyl L carnitine. Majority of the RCTs were associated with a high overall risk of bias. Conclusions: There has been a paucity of research on CIPN in BC patients. There were no interventions identified in this systematic review which show a clear clinical benefit in the prevention of CIPN in BC patients. BC patients may have specific lifestyle and hormonal factors which influence CIPN and this should prompt ongoing specific patient focussed research within this subgroup with large, blinded, randomised controlled trials. Greenlee, et al. Natl Cancer Inst 2017; 109(2). Citation Format: Roberts KE, Feng S, Adsett I, Rickett K, Woodward N. The prevention and management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in breast cancer patients: A systematic review [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-14-06.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,030 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».