Peritoneal chemotherapy delivery systems for ovarian cancer treatment
Carregando...
Data
Data de publicação
Autores IPEN
Orientador
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
É parte de
É parte de
É parte de
Frontiers in Oncology
Exportar
Resumo
Introduction: Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for ovarian cancer treatment has
controversial benefits as most methodologies are associated with significant
morbidity. We carried out a systematic review to compare tumor response,
measured by tumor weight and volume, between intraperitoneal chemotherapy
delivered via drug delivery systems (DDSs) and free intraperitoneal chemotherapy
in animal models of ovarian cancer. The secondary aim was to assess the toxicity
of DDS-delivered chemotherapy, based on changes in animal body weight. Methods: Based on PRISMA and SYRCLE guidelines, we identified 38 studies for
review, of which 20, were used in the meta-analysis. We evaluated outcome,
through tumor volume and tumor weight and, toxicity, through animal weight.
Analysis was based on drugs employed and treatment duration. Results: Most studies were performed on mice. Ovarian cancer cell lines most
commonly used to induce xenografts were SKOV3 (19 studies) and A2780 (6
studies). Intraperitoneal device, also known as drug delivery systems (DDS),
consisted in nanoparticles, hydrogels, lipid polymer and others. The most
commonly used drugs were paclitaxel and cisplatin. Most studies used as the
control treatment the same chemotherapy applied free intraperitoneally and tumor
response/animal weight were evaluated weekly. There was a small benefit in overall
tumor reduction in animals treated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy applied through
the slow release device compared with animals treated with intraperitoneal free
chemotherapy, as evaluated through tumor weight - results in standardized mean
difference. (-1.06; 95% CI: -1.34, -0.78) and tumor volume (-3.72; 95% CI: -4.47, -2.97), a benefit that was seen in most weekly evaluations and formost chemotherapy drugs,
such as carboplatin (tumor weight: -5.60; 95% CI: -7.83, -3.37), paclitaxel (tumor
weight: -1.18; 95%CI: -1.52, -0.83), and cisplatin (tumor volume: -2.85; 95%CI: -3.66,
-2.04) carboplatin (tumor volume: -12.71; 95% CI: -17.35, -8.07); cisplatin (tumor
volume: -7.76; 95% CI: -9.88, -5.65); paclitaxel (tumor volume: -2.85; 95%
CI: -3.66, -2.04). Regarding animal weight, there was no weight reduction in
animals treated with intraperitoneal chemotherapy applied through the slow-release
device compared with animals treated with intraperitoneal free chemotherapy.
However, significant heterogeneity was observed in some comparisons. Conclusion: slow-release devices are overall safe and effective in animal models
of ovarian cancer. It was not possible to evaluate which one is the most promising
device to treat ovarian cancer, because many different types were used to apply
chemotherapy intraperitoneally.
Como referenciar
SIMONSEN, MARCELO; LOPEZ, ROSSANA V.M.; MAISTRO, SIMONE; IKEOKA, LUCAS T.; PEREIRA, GLAUCIA F. de L.; LUGAO, ADEMAR B.; SADALLA, JOSE C.; KATAYAMA, MARIA L.H.; FOLGUEIRA, MARIA A.A.K. Peritoneal chemotherapy delivery systems for ovarian cancer treatment: systematic review of animal models. Frontiers in Oncology, v. 14, p. 1-15, 2024. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1487376. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ipen.br/handle/123456789/49011. Acesso em: 20 Mar 2026.
Esta referência é gerada automaticamente de acordo com as normas do estilo IPEN/SP (ABNT NBR 6023) e recomenda-se uma verificação final e ajustes caso necessário.