Swedish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2013-Feb

Treatments for classic Kaposi sarcoma: a systematic review of the literature.

Endast registrerade användare kan översätta artiklar
Logga in Bli medlem
Länken sparas på Urklipp
Elodie Régnier-Rosencher
Bernard Guillot
Nicolas Dupin

Nyckelord

Abstrakt

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines are lacking for classic Kaposi sarcoma.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to review the evidence on efficacy of treatments for classic Kaposi sarcoma.

METHODS

Articles published in English or French in MEDLINE, Trip, Cochrane Library, and Pascal databases from 1980 to December 2010 were screened. Studies reporting at least 5 patients treated for histologically confirmed classic Kaposi sarcoma were selected. Primary outcome was a decrease in the number or size of lesions or of lymphedema. We reviewed 26 articles matching the inclusion criteria for methodologic quality, classifying them according to World Health Organization criteria.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with a 50% or greater decrease in lesions was 71% to 100% for pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, 58% to 90% for vinca-alkaloids, 74% to 76% for etoposide, 93% to 100% for taxanes, 100% for gemcitabine, 97% for the combination of vinblastine and bleomycin, 71% to 100% for interferon alfa-2, 43% for thalidomide, and 12% for indinavir. For local treatments, a decrease of 50% or greater was achieved in 62% of lesions for intralesional vincristine, 50% to 90% for intralesional interferon alfa-2, 56% for imiquimod, and 25% for nicotine patches. A complete response was attained in 60% to 93% of lesions with radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Eligible trials were of poor quality. The lack of standardized classification of disease activity and clinical outcomes precluded the comparison of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for efficacy of any particular intervention is of low quality and does not support recommending any particular therapeutic strategy. Further studies are required and it will be important to standardize the assessment of disease activity and clinical response.

Gå med på vår
facebook-sida

Den mest kompletta databasen med medicinska örter som stöds av vetenskapen

  • Fungerar på 55 språk
  • Växtbaserade botemedel som stöds av vetenskap
  • Örter igenkänning av bild
  • Interaktiv GPS-karta - märka örter på plats (kommer snart)
  • Läs vetenskapliga publikationer relaterade till din sökning
  • Sök efter medicinska örter efter deras effekter
  • Organisera dina intressen och håll dig uppdaterad med nyheterna, kliniska prövningar och patent

Skriv ett symptom eller en sjukdom och läs om örter som kan hjälpa, skriv en ört och se sjukdomar och symtom den används mot.
* All information baseras på publicerad vetenskaplig forskning

Google Play badgeApp Store badge