Open AccessA meta-analysis of highly active anti-retroviral therapy for treatment of plasmablastic lymphoma
Author(s) -
Bing Guo,
Xinhau Zhang,
Hu Ma,
Hang-bo Zhou,
Xiaojun Zhou
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
annals of saudi medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.373
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 0975-4466
pISSN - 0256-4947
DOI - 10.4103/0256-4947.60517
Subject(s) - plasmablastic lymphoma , medicine , cochrane library , lymphoma , medline , china , family medicine , meta analysis , political science , law
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Plasmablastic lymphoma is a recently described B-cell derived lymphoma. The prognosis of plasmablastic lymphoma patients is usually poor. We performed a systematic review of the literature on the use of highly active anti-retroviral therapy (HAART) and the prognosis of plasmablastic lymphoma. METHODS: A comprehensive search of relevant databases, including Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Library, and the Science Citation Index yielded ten randomized controlled trials. Trials were divided into two groups according to therapy. The rates of plasmablastic lymphoma were analyzed using a fixed-effects model. Sensitivity analyses (on publication type, statistical model) were performed to further detect and evaluate clinically significant heterogeneity. Tests of survival for plasmablastic lymphoma were also performed by using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Meta-analysis result showed that the prognosis of plasmablastic lymphoma patients was statistically different in the patients receiving HAART in addition to chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy than in the patients receiving the chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy alone (pooled relative risk=3.04; P =.03). Survival analyses also displayed a statistically significant difference (χ 2 =6.22, P =.013). CONCLUSION: HAART in addition to chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy is effective in improving the prognosis of plasmablastic lymphoma. However, the small sample sizes increase the likelihood of bias in the studies in this meta-analysis, and therefore, the results should be taken cautiously.