RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The presence of malignant pleural effusion in lung cancer patients often suggests a poor prognosis. We plan to investigate which regimen of vascular targeting drug is preferable to control the malignant pleural effusion in such patients. METHODS: Two investigators dependently searched and screened for randomized controlled trials in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from the database inception to August 2022. R software was applied to build a network model in Bayesian method. Objective response rate of malignant pleural effusion is the primary outcome measure. Besides, the incidence of 3 adverse events were compared, including gastrointestinal reaction, leukopenia and hypertension. Due to the disconnection of network, we analysis and discuss the short-term treatment (3-4 weeks) and long-term treatment (6-12 weeks) respectively. RESULTS: 31 studies with 2093 patients were identified. Four targeting drugs contain bevacizumab (Bev), anlotinib, apatinib and Endostar. Two administration routes include intracavity perfusion (icp) and intravenous injection. Based on the current evidence, for short-term treatments, compared with single-agent chemotherapy (CT), Bev_icp + CT, anlotinib + CT, Bev_icp and anlotinib + endorstar_icp present better objective response, and no statistical significance was found in objective response between Bev_icp + CT, anlotinib + CT and Bev_icp. For long-term treatments, compared with doublet or triplet chemotherapy (2CT or 3CT), Bev_icp + 2CT, apatinib + 2CT, Bev_icp + 3CT, and Bev_intravenous injection + 2CT are more effective option, but no statistical significance was found in objective response between the 4 combination regimens with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that no statistical significance between above vascular targeting regimens. Pathological type of lung cancer may affect the effect of bevacizumab intracavity infusion plus chemotherapy. The influence of different administration routes of vascular targeting drugs on efficacy remains to be investigated. There are some concerns with the quality of the studies, and some limitations should be considered when interpreting these results, which includes limited geographical region and sample size of studies. Despite these limitations, this study may inform vascular targeting therapy choice in such a patient population.
