Back to Journals » Drug Design, Development and Therapy » Volume 12

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefit of celecoxib in treating advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

Authors Yi L, Zhang W, Zhang H, Shen J, Zou J, Luo P, Zhang J

Received 29 March 2018

Accepted for publication 22 May 2018

Published 7 August 2018 Volume 2018:12 Pages 2455—2466

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S169627

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Qiongyu Guo


Lilan Yi,* Wei Zhang,* Hongman Zhang, Jie Shen, Jingwen Zou, Peng Luo, Jian Zhang

Department of Oncology, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, People’s Republic of China

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Background: The clinical benefit of a selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, combined with anticancer therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains unclear. A meta-analysis was performed to address the efficacy and safety of celecoxib in patients with advanced NSCLC.
Materials and methods: Three databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, were systematically searched for available literature until March 1, 2018. Data on tumor response rates, one-year survival, overall survival, progression-free survival, and toxicities were extracted from the included randomized clinical trials. Subgroup analysis was carried out according to the line of treatment. Review Manager 5.3 software was applied to conduct the meta-analysis.
Results: A total of 7 randomized controlled trials involving 1,559 patients with advanced NSCLC were enrolled for analysis. The pooled overall response rate (ORR) of celecoxib added to systemic therapy was not significantly improved (risk ratio [RR] =1.14, 95% CI =0.96–1.35, P=0.13). Additionally, no differences were observed between the celecoxib and placebo groups regarding 1-year survival (RR =0.99, 95% CI =0.88–1.12, P=0.91). Subgroup analysis showed that adding celecoxib to the first-line treatment significantly improved the ORR (RR =1.21, 95% CI =1.01–1.44, P=0.04) and partial response rate (RR =1.26, 95% CI =1.01–1.58, P=0.04). The aggregated Kaplan–Meier analysis found no significant difference between celecoxib and placebo regarding the 5-year overall survival (median, 12.9 vs 12.5 months, P=0.553) and 5-year progression-free survival (median, 7.4 vs 7.2 months, P=0.641). The increased RR of leukopenia (RR =1.25, 95% CI =1.03–1.50) and thrombocytopenia (RR =1.39, 95% CI =1.11–1.75) indicated that celecoxib increased hematologic toxicities (grade ≥III). However, celecoxib did not increase the related risks of thrombosis or embolism (RR =1.26, 95% CI =0.66–2.39) and cardiac ischemia (RR =1.16, 95% CI =0.39–3.44).
Conclusion: Celecoxib had no benefit on survival indices for advanced NSCLC but improved the ORR of first-line treatment. Additionally, celecoxib increased the rate of hematologic toxicities without increasing the risk of cardiovascular events.

Keywords: celecoxib, non-small-cell lung cancer, NSCLC, systematic review, meta-analysis

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]