-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to specific regimens, which directly target the cancer, the tumour microenvironment, or both.Current guidelines recommend targeted therapies with agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib or temsirolimus (for people with poor prognosis) as the standard of care for first-line treatment of people with mRCC and mention non-specific cytokines as an alternative option for selected patients.In November 2015, nivolumab, a checkpoint inhibitor directed against programmed death-1 (PD-1), was approved as the first specific immunotherapeutic agent as second-line therapy in previously treated mRCC patients.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of immunotherapies either alone or in combination with standard targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and their efficacy to maximize patient benefit.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science and registers of ongoing clinical trials in November 2016 without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with or without blinding involving people with mRCC.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected and analyzed studies according to the published protocol. Summary statistics for the primary endpoints were risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology and summarized the quality and magnitude of relative and absolute effects for each primary outcome in our 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified eight studies with 4732 eligible participants and an additional 13 ongoing studies. We categorized studies into comparisons, all against standard therapy accordingly as first-line (five comparisons) or second-line therapy (one comparison) for mRCC.Interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy probably increases one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapies with temsirolimus or sunitinib (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.51; 2 studies; 1166 participants; moderate-quality evidence), may lead to similar quality of life (QoL) (e.g. MD -5.58 points, 95% CI -7.25 to -3.91 for Functional Assessment of Cancer - General (FACT-G); 1 study; 730 participants; low-quality evidence) and may slightly increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) grade 3 or greater (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; 1 study; 408 participants; low-quality evidence).There is probably no difference between IFN-α plus temsirolimus and temsirolimus alone for one-year overall mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.34; 1 study; 419 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of AEs of 3 or greater may be increased (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.45; 1 study; 416 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no information on QoL.IFN-α alone may slightly increase one-year overall mortality compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.36; 2 studies; 1381 participants; low-quality evidence). This effect is probably accompanied by a lower incidence of AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84; 2 studies; 1350 participants; moderate-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with IFN-α plus bevacizumab or standard targeted therapy (sunitinib) may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.08; 1 study; 83 participants; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.62; 1 study; 82 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with vaccines (e.g. MVA-5T4 or IMA901) or standard therapy may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.32; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.39; 2 studies; 1065 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.In previously treated patients, targeted immunotherapy (nivolumab) probably reduces one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapy with everolimus (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; 1 study; 821 participants; moderate-quality evidence), probably improves QoL (e.g. RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.78 for clinically relevant improvement of the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS); 1 study, 704 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and probably reduces the incidence of AEs grade 3 or greater (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.65; 1 study; 803 participants; moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence of moderate quality demonstrates that IFN-α monotherapy increases mortality compared to standard targeted therapies alone, whereas there is no difference if IFN is combined with standard targeted therapies. Evidence of low quality demonstrates that QoL is worse with IFN alone and that severe AEs are increased with IFN alone or in combination. There is low-quality evidence that IFN-α alone increases mortality but moderate-quality evidence on decreased AEs compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab. Low-quality evidence shows no difference for IFN-α plus bevacizumab compared to sunitinib with respect to mortality and severe AEs. Low-quality evidence demonstrates no difference of vaccine treatment compared to standard targeted therapies in mortality and AEs, whereas there is moderate-quality evidence that targeted immunotherapies reduce mortality and AEs and improve QoL.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Bevacizumab; Cancer Vaccines; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunotherapy; Indoles; Interferon-alpha; Kidney Neoplasms; Longevity; Pyrroles; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sirolimus; Sunitinib
PubMed: 28504837
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011673.pub2 -
Pazopanib: Evidence review and clinical practice in the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma.BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Nov 2018Pazopanib is indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). The aim of this study was to review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics...
BACKGROUND
Pazopanib is indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). The aim of this study was to review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib and see how these aspects are linked to clinical practice.
METHODS
A non-exhaustive systematic review was conducted according to the three topics. No publication restrictions were imposed and the selected languages were Spanish and English. After that, a summary of the main results and findings of the review was presented and discussed during three meetings (one for each topic) with 13 medical oncologists that usually treat mRCC. At these meetings, a questionnaire on the first-line use of pazopanib in clinical practice was also drawn up. After the meetings, the questionnaire was completed by 60 specialist medical oncologists in renal cancer.
RESULTS
The efficacy and safety of pazopanib have been demonstrated in several clinical trials, and subsequently confirmed in studies in real-world clinical practice. In addition to its clinical benefit and good safety profile, quality of life results for pazopanib, which compare favorably to sunitinib, make it a good option in the first-line treatment of patients. Special populations have been included in studies conducted with pazopanib, and it is safe for use in elderly patients, poor functional status, kidney failure, and mild or moderate hepatic impairment, and in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disease. The results of the questionnaire have shown that pazopanib is perceived as an effective drug, in which quality of life (QoL) outcomes are valued above all.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper offers a comprehensive and critical summary of efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib in the treatment of mRCC. Pazopanib is an effective treatment with an acceptable safety profile. Its QoL and tolerability results offer certain advantages when compared with other therapeutic alternatives, and its use appears to be safe in different patient profiles.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Quality of Life; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30477570
DOI: 10.1186/s40360-018-0264-8 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Nov 2017The discovery of signaling networks that drive oncogenic processes has led to the development of targeted anticancer agents. The burden of pigmentary adverse events from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The discovery of signaling networks that drive oncogenic processes has led to the development of targeted anticancer agents. The burden of pigmentary adverse events from these drugs is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published clinical trials and determine the incidence and risk of development of targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted to identify studies reporting targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes. The incidence and relative risk were calculated. Case reports and series were reviewed to understand clinical characteristics.
RESULTS
A total of 8052 patients from 36 clinical trials were included. The calculated overall incidences of targeted cancer therapy-induced all-grade pigmentary changes in the skin and hair were 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-25.4) and 21.5% (95% CI, 14.9-30.1), respectively. The relative risk of all-grade pigmentary changes of skin and hair were 93.7 (95% CI, 5.86-1497.164) and 20.1 (95% CI, 8.35-48.248). Across 53 case reports/series (N = 75 patients), epidermal growth factor receptor and breakpoint cluster region-abelson inhibitors were the most common offending agents.
LIMITATIONS
Potential under-reporting and variability in oncologists reporting these events.
CONCLUSION
There is a significant risk of development of pigmentary changes during treatment with targeted anticancer therapies. Appropriate counseling and management are critical to minimize psychosocial impairment and deterioration in quality of life.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Humans; Male; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasms; Pigmentation Disorders; Prevalence; Prognosis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 28918974
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2017.06.044 -
Cancer Research and Treatment Oct 2017Despite advancements in therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers, their prognosis remains dismal. Tumor angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer... (Review)
Review
Despite advancements in therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers, their prognosis remains dismal. Tumor angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer growth and metastasis, and recent studies indicate that pharmacologic blockade of angiogenesis is a promising approach to therapy. In this systematic review, we summarize current literature on the clinical benefit of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric cancer. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and conference proceedings including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the European Cancer Congress. Included studies aimed to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Each trial investigated at least one of the following endpoints: overall survival, progression-free survival/time to progression, and/or objective response rate. Our search yielded 139 publications. Forty-two met the predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies reported outcomes with apatinib, axitinib, bevacizumab, orantinib, pazopanib, ramucirumab, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, telatinib, and vandetanib. Second-line therapy with ramucirumab and third-line therapy with apatinib are the only anti-angiogenic agents so far shown to significantly improve survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Overall, agents that specifically target the vascular endothelial growth factor ligand or receptor have better safety profile compared to multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Biomarkers; Clinical Trials as Topic; Esophageal Neoplasms; Esophagogastric Junction; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Quality of Life; Receptor, ErbB-2; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 28052652
DOI: 10.4143/crt.2016.176 -
Cancer Investigation Aug 2016The present systematic review summarizes current evidence regarding the mechanisms of action, the efficacy, and the adverse effects of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The present systematic review summarizes current evidence regarding the mechanisms of action, the efficacy, and the adverse effects of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in ovarian cancer patients. Phase II and III clinical trials were sought in the PubMed database and in the Clinical Trials.gov registry through September 30, 2015. Seventy-five clinical trials regarding TKIs targeting mainly vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and sarcoma tyrosine kinase (Src) were yielded. The most promising results were noted with cediranib, nintedanib, and pazopanib. However, drawing universal conclusions about the potential integration of TKIs in ovarian cancer therapy remains elusive. Furthermore, emerging challenges and directions for the future research are critically discussed.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Clinical Trials as Topic; ErbB Receptors; Female; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Ovarian Neoplasms; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Receptors, Platelet-Derived Growth Factor; Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor; Treatment Outcome; src-Family Kinases
PubMed: 27486869
DOI: 10.1080/07357907.2016.1206117 -
The Oncologist Dec 2017Prognosis for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is dismal, with median overall survival (OS) of 8-12 months. The role of second-line therapy has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prognosis for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is dismal, with median overall survival (OS) of 8-12 months. The role of second-line therapy has been inconsistently investigated over the last 20 years. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of salvage treatment in pretreated adult type STS, gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) excluded.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library were searched for randomized phase II/phase III trials exploring second- or beyond therapy lines in pretreated metastatic STS. Two independent investigators extracted data; the quality of eligible studies was resolved by consensus. Hazard ratio (HR) of death and progression (OS and progression-free survival [PFS]) and odds ratio (OR) for response rate (RR) were pooled in a fixed- or random-effects model according to heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and publication bias with funnel plots.
RESULTS
Overall, 10 randomized trials were selected. The pooled HR for death was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.9). Second-line therapy reduced the risk of progression by 49% (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.76). This translated into an absolute benefit in OS and PFS by 3.3 and 1.6 months, respectively. Finally, RR with new agents or chemotherapy doublets translated from 4.3% to 7.6% (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.22-2.50).
CONCLUSION
Better survival is achieved in patients treated with salvage therapies (chemotherapy, as single or multiple agents or targeted biological agents). A 3-months gain in OS and an almost double RR is observed. Second lines also attained a reduction by 50% the risk of progression.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
There is some evidence that salvage therapies after first-line failure are able to improve outcome in metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Trabectedin, gemcitabine-based therapy, and pazopanib are currently approved drugs used after conventional upfront treatment. This meta-analysis reviews the benefit of new agents used in randomized trials in comparison with no active treatments or older agents for recurrent/progressed STS. The results show that modern drugs confer a statistically significant 3-month benefit in terms of overall survival, and an increase in response rate. Despite a limited improvement in outcome, currently approved second-line therapy should be offered to patients with good performance status.
Topics: Disease-Free Survival; Doxorubicin; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salvage Therapy; Sarcoma
PubMed: 28835514
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0474 -
Current Drug Targets 2016Sporadic data are available about pazopanib use in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) undergoing dialysis and no systematic review has been previously... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sporadic data are available about pazopanib use in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) undergoing dialysis and no systematic review has been previously performed about this issue.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the present mini-review is to provide an overview of clinical outcomes of pazopanib in this population, in order to support the clinical oncologist for the treatment choice and management.
RESULTS
All the literature ever published about mRCC dialysis patients receiving pazopanib, until August 2015, was evaluated: only two case series emerged from our search and one more patient from our department was also included, with a total of 11 mRCC dialysis patients overall. Moreover, we described our case of intrapatient dose titration of pazopanib during dialysis.
CONCLUSION
The continued treatment schedule, the short half-life, the predominantly hepatic metabolism, the wide possibility of dose modulation, the favorable tolerability profile and the similar efficacy respect to sunitinib represent factors in favor of pazopanib as first line mRCC treatment in dialysis patients. The knowledge and the good management of toxicity during pazopanib treatment can lead, also in dialysis patients, to the best and longest application of the drug, taking into account the concept of a dose escalation guided by toxicity as a marker of efficacy. The review, together with our single case report, confirmed the efficacy, the good tolerability and the maneuverability of pazopanib treatment in mRCC patients undergoing dialysis.
Topics: Adult; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Half-Life; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Kidney Neoplasms; Male; Pyrimidines; Renal Dialysis; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26758665
DOI: 10.2174/1389450117666160112114756 -
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Jun 2024Pazopanib, an anti-angiogenic multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and soft tissue sarcoma....
BACKGROUND
Pazopanib, an anti-angiogenic multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and soft tissue sarcoma. However, its recommended dose does not always produce consistent outcomes, with some patients experiencing adverse effects or toxicity. This variability is due to differences in the systemic exposure to pazopanib. This review aimed to establish whether sufficient evidence exists for the routine or selective therapeutic drug monitoring of pazopanib in adult patients with approved indications.
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed and Web of Science databases using search terms related to pazopanib and therapeutic drug monitoring yielded 186 and 275 articles, respectively. Ten articles associated with treatment outcomes or toxicity due to drug exposure were selected for review.
RESULTS
The included studies were evaluated to determine the significance of the relationship between drug exposure/Ctrough and treatment outcomes and between drug exposure and toxicity. A relationship between exposure and treatment outcomes was observed in 5 studies, whereas the trend was nonsignificant in 4 studies. A relationship between exposure and toxicity was observed in 6 studies, whereas 2 studies did not find a significant relationship; significance was not reported in 3 studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Sufficient evidence supports the therapeutic drug monitoring of pazopanib in adult patients to improve its efficacy and/or safety in the approved indications.
Topics: Indazoles; Humans; Sulfonamides; Pyrimidines; Drug Monitoring; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Sarcoma; Kidney Neoplasms; Angiogenesis Inhibitors
PubMed: 38723115
DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000001206 -
Computational and Mathematical Methods... 2022The aim of this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis was to analyze the efficacy and adverse effects of adjuvant targeted therapy regimens in advanced or metastatic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The aim of this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis was to analyze the efficacy and adverse effects of adjuvant targeted therapy regimens in advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
METHODS
Studies eligible for the efficacy of adjuvant targeted therapy regimens in advanced or metastatic RCC published before December 2021 in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Clinical Trials Database (CENTRAL), and Web of Science were searched for (1) patients with locally advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) who received adjuvant postoperative targeted therapy versus those not receiving active treatment; (2) primary endpoint outcomes of disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs); and (3) design: randomized controlled trial (RCT) as inclusion criteria. Data on DFS and OS were extracted or recalculated by meta-analysis as hazard ratios (HRs), and AEs were compared using a dominance ratio (OR).
RESULT
This systematic evaluation will provide evidence on the effectiveness and adverse effects of adjuvant targeted therapy in patients with advanced RCC. The results of meta-analysis showed that all of the three adjuvant targeted therapeutic drugs (sorafenib, sunitinib, and pazopanib) did not benefit from the adjuvant targeted therapy for DFS and OS and even increase the incidence of AEs compared to the placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this study was to summarize data on DFS, OS, and AEs in patients with advanced RCC treated with targeted therapies. The evidence provided by this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis will help guide clinical decision-making and provide insight into the future management of patients with advanced RCC.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Combined Modality Therapy; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms
PubMed: 35392587
DOI: 10.1155/2022/7341294 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Jul 2022To assess comparative effectiveness of adjuvant therapies for renal cell carcinoma and quantify the absolute benefit of adjuvant treatments by clinicopathological risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess comparative effectiveness of adjuvant therapies for renal cell carcinoma and quantify the absolute benefit of adjuvant treatments by clinicopathological risk groups.
METHODS
This 'living' review was conducted using Living Interactive Evidence (LIvE) synthesis framework.
RESULTS
The 'living' results are available on an interactive website. This network meta-analysis, including six RCTs with 7525 participants, showed that pembrolizumab (rank 1) significantly improved disease-free survival and overall survival compared with sunitinib but not when compared to pazopanib, and axitinib. The risk of treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events was increased with pembrolizumab as compared to placebo and axitinib but not when compared to sunitinib. The absolute benefit of adjuvant pembrolizumab increases substantially with larger tumor size, nodal positivity and higher Leibovich scores.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence suggests that pembrolizumab delays disease progression compared to sunitinib. A risk-adapted strategy should be used in patients undergoing consideration for treatment with adjuvant pembrolizumab.
Topics: Axitinib; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Sunitinib
PubMed: 35537621
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103706