Comparison of Corticosteroid and Vincristine in Treating Kaposiform Hemangioendothelioma and Tufted Angioma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
dx.doi.org shows its articles on its own site.
Read the article on dx.doi.org ↗Article · Oct 2018 · 1 min read
In brief
In brief
This systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 studies demonstrates that vincristine is more effective and safer than corticosteroids for treating kaposiform hemangioendothelioma and tufted angioma, with higher response rates and fewer adverse reactions. The findings support vincristine as first-line therapy for these rare vascular tumors.
Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.
Objective To evaluate the outcome and safety of corticosteroids and vincristine (VCR) in the treatment of kaposiform hemangioendothelioma (KHE) and tufted angioma (TA).
Materials and Methods Clinical studies involving corticosteroids and VCR therapies in treating KHE/TA were identified by using PubMed, Cochrane Library, OVID, EBSCO, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases from their establishment date to December 2017. Randomized controlled trials, case–control, or case series with more than five cases were included. The following data were extracted: study sample, demographics, responses rate, recurrence rate, and adverse reactions. Two reviewers completed screening and extraction. Methodological quality was evaluated with quality appraisal tool.
Results A total of 266 studies were found, and 27 studies were finally included in this research; quality of all studies was low. Seven studies with a total of 123 participants, which compared the effect of systemic corticosteroids with that of VCR, were performed for the meta-analysis. The results indicated that the effect of VCR was significantly higher than that of corticosteroids (relative risk [RR] = 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38–3.16). The recurrence rate of VCR (11.1%) was lower than that of corticosteroids (50%), but there was no statistical difference between the two therapies (p = 0.1312). The result of pooled adverse reactions response rate for VCR was 18.2%, significantly lower than that for corticosteroids, which was 52.0%.
Conclusion The present profile shows that VCR is relatively more effective and safer in treating KHE/TA than corticosteroids are. So, we believe VCR could be used as a first-line medication agent in the treatment of KHE/TA.