TY - JOUR
T1 - Cyclophosphamide versus ifosfamide for paediatric and young adult bone and soft tissue sarcoma patients
AU - Mulder, Renée L.
AU - Paulides, Marios
AU - Langer, Thorsten
AU - Kremer, Leontien C.M.
AU - van Dalen, Elvira C.
N1 - Funding Information:
Leontien Kremer and Elvira van Dalen, the Co-ordinating Editors of the Childhood Cancer Group, are co-authors of this review and therefore they could not act as the Co-ordinating Editors for this review. Wim J Tissing (Department of Pediatric Oncology/Hematology, Beatrix Children’s Hospital, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands) was willing to take on this task, for which we thank him. Also, we thank Edith Leclercq, the Trials Search Co-ordinator of the Childhood Cancer Group, for running the search strategy in the different databases and providing us with the titles and abstracts of the searches, and Wolfgang Stöhr for his help in preparing the protocol for this review. The editorial base of the Cochrane Childhood Cancer Group is funded by Kinderen Kankervrij (KIKA).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 The Cochrane Collaboration.
Copyright:
Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2015/9/30
Y1 - 2015/9/30
N2 - Background: Alkylating agents, such as cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide, play a major role in the improved survival of children and young adults with bone and soft tissue sarcoma. However, there is still controversy as to their comparative anti-tumour efficacy and possible adverse effects. This is the second update of the first systematic review evaluating the state of evidence on the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide as compared to ifosfamide for paediatric and young adult patients with sarcoma. Objectives: The primary obective was to compare the effectiveness, that is response rate, event-free survival and overall survival, of cyclophosphamide with that of ifosfamide for paediatric and young adult patients with sarcoma. Secondary objectives were to determine effects of these agents on toxicities (including late effects) and quality of life. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, issue 2), MEDLINE/PubMed (from 1966 to March 2015) and EMBASE/Ovid (from 1980 to March 2015) with prespecified terms. In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases (www.controlled-trials.com; searched June 2015). Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide for the treatment of different types of sarcoma in paediatric and young adult patients (aged less than 30 years at diagnosis). Chemotherapy other than either cyclophosphamide or ifosfamide should have been the same in both treatment groups. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently performed the study selection. Main results: No studies meeting the inclusion criteria of the review were identified. Authors' conclusions: No RCTs or CCTs comparing the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in the treatment of bone and soft tissue sarcoma in children and young adults were identified. Therefore no definitive conclusions can be made about the effects of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in these patients. Based on the currently available evidence, we are not able to give recommendations for clinical practice. More high-quality research is needed.
AB - Background: Alkylating agents, such as cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide, play a major role in the improved survival of children and young adults with bone and soft tissue sarcoma. However, there is still controversy as to their comparative anti-tumour efficacy and possible adverse effects. This is the second update of the first systematic review evaluating the state of evidence on the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide as compared to ifosfamide for paediatric and young adult patients with sarcoma. Objectives: The primary obective was to compare the effectiveness, that is response rate, event-free survival and overall survival, of cyclophosphamide with that of ifosfamide for paediatric and young adult patients with sarcoma. Secondary objectives were to determine effects of these agents on toxicities (including late effects) and quality of life. Search methods: We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2015, issue 2), MEDLINE/PubMed (from 1966 to March 2015) and EMBASE/Ovid (from 1980 to March 2015) with prespecified terms. In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases (www.controlled-trials.com; searched June 2015). Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide for the treatment of different types of sarcoma in paediatric and young adult patients (aged less than 30 years at diagnosis). Chemotherapy other than either cyclophosphamide or ifosfamide should have been the same in both treatment groups. Data collection and analysis: Two authors independently performed the study selection. Main results: No studies meeting the inclusion criteria of the review were identified. Authors' conclusions: No RCTs or CCTs comparing the effectiveness of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in the treatment of bone and soft tissue sarcoma in children and young adults were identified. Therefore no definitive conclusions can be made about the effects of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in these patients. Based on the currently available evidence, we are not able to give recommendations for clinical practice. More high-quality research is needed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964694435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/14651858.CD006300.pub4
DO - 10.1002/14651858.CD006300.pub4
M3 - Scientific review articles
C2 - 26421585
AN - SCOPUS:84964694435
SN - 1469-493X
VL - 2015
JO - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
JF - Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
IS - 9
M1 - CD006300
ER -
