-
Advances in Therapy Feb 2020This network meta-analysis aims to deliver an up-to-date, comprehensive efficacy and toxicity comparison of the approved first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
This network meta-analysis aims to deliver an up-to-date, comprehensive efficacy and toxicity comparison of the approved first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in order to provide support for evidence-based treatment decisions. Previous NMAs of first-line mRCC treatments either predate the approval of all the first-line TKIs currently available or do not include evaluation of safety data for all treatments.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of phase II/III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing approved first-line TKI therapies for mRCC. A random effects model with a frequentist approach was computed for progression-free survival (PFS) data and for the proportion of patients experiencing a maximum of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs).
RESULTS
The network meta-analysis of PFS demonstrated no significant differences between cabozantinib and either sunitinib (50 mg 4/2), pazopanib or tivozanib. The network meta-analysis indicated that in terms of grade 3 and 4 AEs, tivozanib had the most favourable safety profile and was associated with significantly less risk of toxicity than the other TKIs.
CONCLUSION
These network meta-analysis data demonstrate that cabozantinib, sunitinib, pazopanib and tivozanib do not significantly differ in their efficacy, but tivozanib is associated with a more favourable safety profile in terms of grade 3 or 4 toxicities. Consequently, the relative toxicity of these first-line TKIs may play a more significant role than efficacy comparisons in treatment decisions and in planning future RCTs.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anilides; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Female; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis; Network Meta-Analysis; Phenylurea Compounds; Progression-Free Survival; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Pyridines; Pyrimidines; Quinolines; Sulfonamides; Sunitinib
PubMed: 31838709
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-01167-2 -
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy : CII Feb 2021Management of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) has undergone a paradigm shift with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in the first-line setting. However, direct... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Management of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) has undergone a paradigm shift with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in the first-line setting. However, direct comparative data are inadequate to inform treatment decisions. Therefore, we aimed to assess first-line therapy for mRCC and indirectly compare the efficacy and safety of currently available treatments.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Multiple databases were searched for articles published before June 2020. Studies that compared overall and/or progression-free survival (OS/PFS) and/or adverse events (AEs) in mRCC patients were considered eligible.
RESULTS
Six studies matched our eligibility criteria. For OS, pembrolizumab plus axitinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.73-0.98] and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR 0.86, 95% CrI 0.75-0.99) were significantly more effective than sunitinib, and pembrolizumab plus axitinib was probably the best option based on analysis of the treatment ranking. For PFS, pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR 0.86, 95% CrI 0.76-0.97) and avelumab plus axitinib (HR 0.85, 95% CrI 0.74-0.98) were statistically superior to sunitinib, and avelumab plus axitinib was likely to be the preferred option based on analysis of the treatment ranking, closely followed by pembrolizumab plus axitinib. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had significantly lower rates of serious AEs than sunitinib.
CONCLUSION
Pembrolizumab plus axitinib seemed to be the most efficacious first-line agents, while nivolumab plus ipilimumab had the most favorable efficacy-tolerability equilibrium. These findings may facilitate individualized treatment strategies and inform future direct comparative trials in an expanding treatment options without direct comparison between approved drugs.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis
PubMed: 32757054
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-020-02684-8 -
Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology 2020Effective systemic treatment of non-clear cell renal carcinoma (nccRCC) is still an unmet clinical need, with few studies to support an evidence-based approach. To date,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Effective systemic treatment of non-clear cell renal carcinoma (nccRCC) is still an unmet clinical need, with few studies to support an evidence-based approach. To date, the only recommended standard first-line treatment is sunitinib. Pazopanib may also be used in nccRCC but its place in therapy is not clearly established. It has comparable efficacy and better tolerability than sunitinib in clear cell renal carcinoma. Our objective was to review the use of pazopanib in metastatic nccRCC.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. Any type of study reporting the use of pazopanib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma including cases with non-clear cell histology was eligible.
RESULTS
In all, 15 studies were included in our analysis, including a total of 318 nccRCC patients treated with pazopanib. Most studies were retrospective ( = 12); three were prospective trials. The specific outcomes of nccRCC patients were reported by four studies. Pazopanib alone as first-line treatment gave overall response rates ranging from 27% to 33%, disease control rates of 81-89%, median progression free survival of 8.1-16.5 months and median overall survival of 17.3-31.0 months. Grade 3-4 adverse events rates were 21-55%.
CONCLUSION
The present review provides for the first time a systematic summary of evidence about the possible use of pazopanib as first-line treatment for nccRCC, with a favorable outcome despite the low strength of evidence. Pazopanib could be considered as a possible therapeutic option in this setting.
PubMed: 32550862
DOI: 10.1177/1758835920915303 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022With the advent of immuno-oncology compounds in randomized trials, we observe more and more survival curves crossing. From a statistical standpoint this corresponds to...
BACKGROUND
With the advent of immuno-oncology compounds in randomized trials, we observe more and more survival curves crossing. From a statistical standpoint this corresponds to violation of the proportional hazard assumption. When this occurs, the hazard ratio from the Cox regression is not reliable as an estimate. Herein, we aimed to identify the most appropriate IO-based therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma applying an alternative method to overcome the issue of hazard assumption violation for meta-analyses.
METHODS
Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Scopus databases were searched. Only phase III randomized clinical trials on IO-IO (nivo-ipi) or IO-TKI combinations were included. An algorithm to obtain survival data from published Kaplan-Meier curves was used to reconstruct data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and duration of response (DoR). Differences in restricted mean survival time (RMST) were used for comparisons.
RESULTS
individual survival data from 4,206 patients from five trials were reconciled. Patients who received nivo-ipi or IO-TKI had better OS, PFS and DoR relative to sunitinib (all p<0.001). Patients who received IO-TKI had similar OS and PFS relative to nivo-ipi, with a 36-month ΔRMST of -0.55 (95% CI: -1.71-0.60; p=0.3) and -1.5 (95% CI: -2.9-0.0; p=0.051) months, respectively. Regarding DoR, patients who received nivo-ipi had longer duration of response relative to IO-TKI, with a 24-month ΔRMST of 1.5 (95% CI: 0.2-2.8; p=0.02) months.
CONCLUSION
Despite overall similar OS and PFS for patients receiving nivo-ipi and IO-TKI combinations, DoR was more favorable in patients who received nivo-ipi compared to IO-TKI. A meta-analysis based on differences in RMST is a useful alternative whenever the proportional hazard assumption is violated. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021241421.
PubMed: 36132135
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.955894 -
Cancer Treatment Reviews Jun 2021Innovative strategies to fully exploit the antitumor activity of multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are urgently needed. Higher concentrations of TKIs at...
BACKGROUND
Innovative strategies to fully exploit the antitumor activity of multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are urgently needed. Higher concentrations of TKIs at their target site, i.e. intratumorally, may lead to broader kinase inhibition, which might be essential for the optimal suppression of tumor growth and induction of apoptosis. To reach these higher intratumoral concentrations, without encountering dose limiting toxicity, alternative TKI dosing strategies employing higher daily and high intermittent doses have been studied. In this systematic review, we evaluated the current clinical evidence to support (intermittent) high TKI dosing regimens.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted in the following databases: PubMed®, EMBASE® and Cochrane Library©, to evaluate efficacy of alternatively scheduled high-dosed regimen (a higher dose in a regular daily schedule than registered or a higher dose in an alternative intermittent schedule) of TKIs in (haemato-)oncology. Data were extracted independently by two authors according to predefined criteria. Extracted data were tabulated to summarize key findings.
RESULTS
Out of twenty studies that met the inclusion criteria, thirteen investigated higher daily dose schedules of either afatinib, axitinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, imatinib, sorafenib, and sunitinib. Five of these studies included pharmacokinetic analyses, reporting marginal higher maximum drug concentrations (C) in plasma (1.3-4-fold higher) compared to the standard dose schedules. Seven clinical trials investigated intermittent high-dose schedules requiring treatment breaks, with the following TKIs: afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, lapatinib, sorafenib, and sunitinib. Six of these included pharmacokinetic results, all reporting higher (2-21-fold) C in plasma compared to the standard daily dose schedule, with manageable toxicity. No data on tumor concentrations were presented. Data on the efficacy outcomes were limited due to small sample size, study designs, phase 1 population and heterogeneous tumor types.
CONCLUSIONS
Early phase clinical studies show that high-dose intermittent TKI-treatment schedules can lead to an increased C compared to standard (low-dose) daily administration with manageable toxicity. These higher concentrations are assumed to reflect higher intratumoral concentrations. Further investigation of the potential improvement in clinical benefit of a high-dose intermittent strategy with multitargeting TKIs is warranted.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Humans; Neoplasms; Prognosis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors
PubMed: 33823432
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102171 -
Cancer Medicine Oct 2019Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly invasive and lethal neuroendocrine tumor. Antiangiogenic drugs have been reported in the treatment of SCLC. We aimed to provide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly invasive and lethal neuroendocrine tumor. Antiangiogenic drugs have been reported in the treatment of SCLC. We aimed to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of angiogenic inhibitors on SCLC survival using network meta-analysis.
METHODS
The impact of five angiogenesis inhibitors, that is, vandetanib (Van), bevacizumab (Bev), Rh-endostatin (End), sunitinib (Sun), and thalidomide (Tha), on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated by conducting a network meta-analysis. RNA sequencing data were downloaded from publicly available databases.
RESULTS
Nine phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs), that involved 1599 participants, that investigated angiogenesis inhibitors in the treatment of SCLC were included in this meta-analysis. Sun and Bev achieved better PFS than Tha (Bev VS. Tha, HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.79-0.98, Sun VS. Tha, HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-1.00). Moreover, Sun and Bev were superior to placebo in terms of PFS (Bev VS. Placebo, HR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.81-0.97, Sun VS. Placebo, HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.66-1.00). Based on this study, we found no significant difference of OS of SCLC. The angiogenesis pathway and expression of target genes were globally deactivated in SCLC tissue.
CONCLUSION
Results of this network meta-analysis indicate that the PFS outcome of SCLC with Sun or Bev drugs is superior to that of Tha. The improved therapeutic impact of angiogenesis inhibitors on SCLC needs more evidence, such as long-term observation in clinical trials, to be validated.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; RNA-Seq; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
PubMed: 31433125
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.2462 -
European Urology Jun 2021Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a mainstay treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). As not all patients benefit from ICIs, a biomarker-driven... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The Predictive Value of Programmed Death Ligand 1 in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treated with Immune-checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a mainstay treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). As not all patients benefit from ICIs, a biomarker-driven clinical decision-making strategy is desirable.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the predictive value of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) in mRCC patients treated with ICIs.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Multiple databases were searched for articles published up to April 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Studies comparing objective response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CRR), progressive disease rate (PDR), or progression-free survival (PFS) based on tumor PD-L1 status in mRCC patients were eligible.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Six studies matched our eligibility criteria. Treatment with ICIs was associated with significantly higher ORRs and CRRs, and lower PDRs in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors than in those with PD-L1-negative status (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-2.28; OR 3.11, 95% CI 2.04-4.75; and OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.31-0.60, respectively). ICI treatment was associated with significantly better PFS in PD-L1-positive patients than in sunitinib-treated patients (hazard ratio 0.65, 95% CI 0.57-0.74), whereas this was not found in patients with PD-L1-negative tumors. Compared with sunitinib, ICI combination therapy improved ORRs and PFS significantly in PD-L1-positive patients of all examined ICIs. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had the highest likelihood of providing the highest ORR and longest PFS in PD-L1-positive patients.
CONCLUSIONS
PD-L1 positivity of the tumor is associated with improved ORRs and prolonged PFS in mRCC patients receiving ICI treatment and thus helps identify mRCC patients most likely to benefit from ICI treatment.
PATIENT SUMMARY
The use of an immune-checkpoint inhibitor for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) improved oncological outcomes, and the status of programmed death ligand 1 could contribute to guiding patients and clinicians when determining personalized treatment strategies for mRCC.
Topics: B7-H1 Antigen; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Kidney Neoplasms; Sunitinib
PubMed: 33172722
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.10.006 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024FLT3 mutations are closely associated with the occurrence of hematological and solid malignancies, especially with acute myeloid leukemia. Currently, several FLT3...
FLT3 mutations are closely associated with the occurrence of hematological and solid malignancies, especially with acute myeloid leukemia. Currently, several FLT3 inhibitors are in clinical trials, and some have been applied in clinic. However, the safety, efficacy and pharmacodynamics of these FLT3 inhibitors have not been systemically analyzed before. We searched and reviewed clinical trial reports on the monotherapy of 13 FLT3 inhibitors, including sorafenib, lestaurtinib, midostaurin, gilteritinib, quizartinib, sunitinib, crenolanib, tandutinib, cabozantinib, pexidartinib, pacritinib, famitinib, and TAK-659 in patients with hematological and solid malignancies before May 31, 2023. Our results showed the most common adverse events (AEs) were gastrointestinal adverse reactions, including diarrhea, hand-foot syndrome and nausea, while the most common hematological AEs were febrile neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. Based on the published data, the mean overall survival (OS) and the mean progression-free survival (PFS) were 9.639 and 5.905 months, respectively. The incidence of overall response rate (ORR), complete remission (CR), partial response (PR), and stable disease (SD) for all these FLT3 inhibitors was 29.0%, 8.7%, 16.0%, and 42.3%, respectively. The ORRs of FLT3 inhibitors in hematologic malignancies and solid tumors were 40.8% and 18.8%, respectively, indicating FLT3 inhibitors were more effective for hematologic malignancies than for solid tumors. In addition, time to maximum plasma concentration () in these FLT3 inhibitors ranged from 0.7-12.0 hours, but the elimination half-life () range was highly variable, from 6.8 to 151.8 h. FLT3 inhibitors monotherapy has shown significant anti-tumor effect in clinic, and the effectiveness may be further improved through combination medication.
PubMed: 38828446
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1294668 -
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer May 2024The number of cancer patients undergoing chronic treatment with target therapy is increasing. Although much is known about the toxicity of conventional anticancer... (Review)
Review
The number of cancer patients undergoing chronic treatment with target therapy is increasing. Although much is known about the toxicity of conventional anticancer therapies, evidence on the effects of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) on fertility is still lacking. Therefore, this review was undertaken to evaluate the effects of TKIs on male gonadal function. A comprehensive search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted, focusing on the effects of TKIs on spermatogenesis and testicular endocrine function. We included animal studies, observational studies, and case reports published up to December 31, 2023. Identified articles were reviewed and analyzed to evaluate the impact of TKIs on the male gonad. Their long-term effects, the reversibility of the observed changes, and the underlying molecular mechanisms involved were recorded. The findings emerging on the effects of TKIs on male gonadal function are conflicting. Although specific TKIs (imatinib, gefitinib, sorafenib, sunitinib, quizartinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib) have been identified as potentially as potential interfering with spermatogenesis and hormone production, the extent and severity of these effects may vary from patient to patient and between different drugs within this drug class. Experimental studies on mouse models have suggested a potential interference with spermatogenesis. Evidence also suggests that TKIs affects the hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis, decreasing serum testosterone and gonadotropin levels. The effects of TKIs on male gonadal function highlight the need for personalized treatment choices. Potential fertility concerns can help minimize adverse effects and improve patient outcomes. Addressing the potential impact of TKIs on male fertility helps optimize cancer treatment and survival outcomes.
PubMed: 38901138
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102131 -
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt... 2024Combination therapy with multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors (multi-TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been increasingly tested in clinical studies. This... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Combination therapy with multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors (multi-TKIs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been increasingly tested in clinical studies. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the addition of ICI to multi-TKIs on the profile of treatment-related adverse events.
METHODS
An electronic database search was performed using PubMed and Web of Science to identify published clinical studies on multi-TKI monotherapy and multi-TKI plus ICI combination therapy from July 20, 2005 to July 1, 2023. The incidence rate of common adverse events caused by multi-TKI monotherapy and multi-TKI plus ICI combination therapy was obtained and compared from the viewpoints of (1) relative risk for the combination therapy vs sunitinib, (2) adverse event incidence rate by clinical trial, and (3) pooled incidence rate. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis used random effects models.
RESULTS
This systematic review identified 83 clinical studies involving 7951 patients. The combination therapy of multi-TKI and ICI was associated with an increased risk of diarrhea (relative risk [RR]: 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.33, < .001), hypothyroidism (RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.11-1.87, = .0064) and rash (RR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.18-2.47, = .0045) compared with multi-TKI monotherapy. The addition of ICI was suggested to decrease the risk of adverse events related to performance status.
CONCLUSION
Our study identified an increased risk of treatment-related adverse events associated with multi-TKI plus ICI combination therapy. This would help optimize the management of toxicities caused by multi-TKI plus ICI combination therapy.
Topics: Humans; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors; Combined Modality Therapy; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Databases, Factual
PubMed: 38581169
DOI: 10.1177/10732748241244586