본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Efficacy and safety of PRRT for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

메타분석 1/5 보강
Bulletin du cancer 📖 저널 OA 3.6% 2022: 0/1 OA 2023: 0/1 OA 2024: 0/8 OA 2025: 0/16 OA 2026: 3/51 OA 2022~2026 2026 Vol.113(3) p. 343-351
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 2/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
환자: advanced pNETs, offering a balance of efficacy and safety compared to other available treatments
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
추출되지 않음
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
추출되지 않음
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
Full dosage PRRT may provide better outcomes than reduced dosages, and salvage PRRT remains effective for progressive disease. However, further high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings and optimize PRRT usage in pNETs.

Zhao J, Pei X, Li Y

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] PRRT showed promising potential in the management of patients with pNETs.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 연구 설계 case-control

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Zhao J, Pei X, Li Y (2026). Efficacy and safety of PRRT for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis.. Bulletin du cancer, 113(3), 343-351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulcan.2025.10.001
MLA Zhao J, et al.. "Efficacy and safety of PRRT for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: Systematic review and meta-analysis.." Bulletin du cancer, vol. 113, no. 3, 2026, pp. 343-351.
PMID 41387032 ↗

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] PRRT showed promising potential in the management of patients with pNETs. However, there is still a lack of evidence on its relative efficacy and safety compared with other treatment options. This review aims to synthesize the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of PRRT (without SSA in key comparisons) for pNETs compared to different treatments.

[METHOD] An electronic search was conducted from inception to December 2024. Comparative studies including RCTs, cohorts and case-control studies focused on using PRRT in the treatment of pNETs were included. Efficacy outcomes included DCR, CR, PR, SD, PFS, and OS. Safety outcomes were grade 3-4 hematological and renal toxicity and overall AEs.

[RESULTS] Nine studies met the inclusive criteria. Among them, only one (11.1%) study is an RCT. Meta-analysis between full and reduced dosages of 177Lu-DOTATATE for G1-G2 pNETs revealed no significant differences in DCR, CR, PR, SD, and PFS between the groups. However, the full dosage group suggested potential for improved OS in some studies, though not statistically significant. When PRRT was compared to other treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and targeted agents, it was associated with longer PFS and potentially OS. Additionally, PRRT combined with capecitabine and salvage PRRT also showed efficacy in advanced cases. Safety analysis indicated that PRRT is well-tolerated, with minimal severe toxicity reported.

[CONCLUSION] PRRT is a promising therapeutic option for patients with advanced pNETs, offering a balance of efficacy and safety compared to other available treatments. Full dosage PRRT may provide better outcomes than reduced dosages, and salvage PRRT remains effective for progressive disease. However, further high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings and optimize PRRT usage in pNETs.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반