From: The role of etoposide in the treatment of adult patients with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis
Author | Year | Reference | Trigger | Total number of adults | Inclusion in meta–analysis | Survival of etoposide–treated patients, % (n) | Survival of non–etoposide–treated patients, % (n) | Additional information | Supporting the effect of etoposide | Risk of bias according to ROBINS–I |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Song et al. | 2019 | [15] | Pregnancy | 13 | Yes | 100% (6) | 71% (5) | NS | Critical | |
Knaak et al. | 2020 | [16] | Various | 40 | Yes | 14% (1) | 45% (15) | NS | Critical | |
Naymagon et al. | 2021 | [12] | Various | 90 | Yes | 21% (9) | 33% (16) | Log–rank test for difference in the survival distribution (p = 0.41) | No | Critical |
Diack et al. | 2020 | [8] | Various | 26 | Yes | 29% (2) | 26% (5) | p = 0.9 | No | Critical |
Ahn et al. | 2010 | [17] | Various | 26 | Yes | 31% (4) | 69% (9) | NS | Critical | |
Barba et al. | 2015 | [9] | Various | 71 | Yes | 54% (15) | 67% (29) | p = 0.3 | No | Critical |
Arca et al. | 2015 | [3] | Various | 162 | Yes | 85% (69) | 74% (60) | p = 0.079, aOR: 0.21, p = 0.04 | Yes | Serious |
Bigenwald et al. | 2018 | [4] | Malignancy | 71 | No | uHR: 0.55 (p = 0.04), aHR: 0.50 (p = 0.04) | Yes | Critical | ||
Bubik et al. | 2020 | [5] | Various | 31 | No | HR: 0.22 for ≥ 5 doses of etoposide (p = 0.003) | Yes | Critical | ||
Li et al. | 2020 | [7] | B–cell lymphoma | 31 | No | Log–rank test for difference in survival distribution (p = 0.0183) | Yes | Critical | ||
Song et al. | 2019 | [6] | EBV | 58 | No | Etoposide as 1st line therapy vs. no etoposide or 2nd line therapy (p = < 0.001) | Yes | Critical | ||
Buyse et al. | 2010 | [10] | Various | 56 | No | EIT for non–survivors 6 h vs. survivors 4 h (p = 0.19) | No | Serious | ||
Schram et al. | 2015 | [11] | Various | 68 | No | OS etoposide: 9.5 months, OS no etoposide: 1.9 months (p = 0.78) | No | Critical |