-
Current Computer-aided Drug Design Sep 2023This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor therapy in advanced ovarian cancer and identify the optimal treatment for the survival of patients.
AIMS
This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitor therapy in advanced ovarian cancer and identify the optimal treatment for the survival of patients.
BACKGROUND
The diversity of PARP inhibitors makes clinicians confused about the optimal strategy and the most effective BRCAm mutation-based regimen for the survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this study is to compare the effects of various PARP inhibitors alone or in combination with other agents in advanced ovarian cancer.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies on PARP inhibitors for ovarian cancer. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 and R 4.0.4. The primary outcome was the overall PFS, and the secondary outcomes included OS, AE3, DISAE, and TFST.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies involving 5,788 participants were included. The Bayesian network metaanalysis results showed that olaparibANDAI was the most beneficial in prolonging overall PFS and non-BRCAm PFS, followed by niraparibANDAI. However, for BRCAm patients, olaparibTR might be the most effective, followed by niraparibANDAI. Olaparib was the most effective for the OS of BRCAm patients. AI, olaparibANDAI, and veliparibTR were more likely to induce grade 3 or higher adverse events. AI and olaparibANDAI were more likely to cause DISAE.
CONCLUSION
PARP inhibitors are beneficial to the survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer. The olaparibTR is the most effective for BRCAm patients, whereas olaparibANDAI and niraparibANDAI are preferable for non-BRCAm patients. Other: More high-quality studies are desired to investigate the efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in patients with other genetic performances.
PubMed: 37691198
DOI: 10.2174/1573409920666230907093331 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of olaparib in the treatment of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of olaparib in the treatment of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, CNKI, VIP Database, Wanfang Science and Technology Database were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of olaparib in the treatment of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer from the establishment of each database to January 2022. Two reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the literature, extracted the data, and cross-checked the methodological quality. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS
A total of 7 RCTs were included, including 2406 patients, There were 1497 patients in treatment groups and 909 patients in the control group. Meta-analysis results showed that in terms of effectiveness, the overall survival time of patients in the olaparib group [HR=1.24, 95%CI(1.06, 1.45), P=0.006]; in terms of safety, for all grades of adverse events (including nausea, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and headache), [HR=1.54, 95%CI(1.38, 1.71), P=0.0002], for grade 3 or higher adverse events (including nausea, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, and headache), [HR=2.13, 95%CI(1.61, 2.81), P=0.003], there were significant differences compared with the control group, suggesting that the risk of adverse reactions in the experimental group was higher than that in the control group. Subgroup analysis showed that only abdominal pain, headache and vomiting were not statistically significant, and other adverse reactions were statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Based on the existing clinical evidence, olaparib in the treatment of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer has a longer overall survival than the control group. It is an ideal regimen, but the incidence of adverse reactions is high.
PubMed: 35299755
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.858826 -
Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 2024Poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) treatment for ovarian cancer (OC) are ever-changing. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) as maintenance therapy for newly-diagnosed and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer with mutational status: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) treatment for ovarian cancer (OC) are ever-changing. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and overall safety of available PARPi as maintenance therapy for BRCA mutation status in patients with newly diagnosed and platinum-sensitive recurrent (PSR) OC patients.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Relevant RCTs were systematically retrieved from PubMed and Embase until 31 May 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) based on mutation status and adverse events (AEs) regardless of mutation were efficacy and safety endpoints.
RESULTS
In newly diagnosed BRCAm-OC patients, olaparib (HR: 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.25, 0.43) and other PARPis [niraparib (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.29, 0.55), rucaparib (HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.21, 0.76) and veliparib (HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.28, 0.69)] had a statistically significant effect on PFS versus placebo. In BRCAm-PSROC patients, Olaparib exhibited significant benefit (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.54, 0.88) for OS compared to other PARPis. In BRCAwt-PSR OC patients, Olaparib showed a favorable OS benefit than other PARPis (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.57,1.22). Overall, safety profile of all PARPis was acceptable.
CONCLUSION
All PARPis showed significant benefit, with olaparib showing greater benefit in newly diagnosed and PSR OC women.
REGISTRATION
CRD42021288932.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adenosine Diphosphate; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Network Meta-Analysis; Ovarian Neoplasms; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases; Ribose
PubMed: 38174379
DOI: 10.1080/14737140.2023.2298832 -
World Journal of Oncology Dec 2023The emergence of olaparib, a poly (adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC),...
BACKGROUND
The emergence of olaparib, a poly (adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), created a measurable clinical question on whether the agent positively influences the treatment outcomes and acceptable safety factors. The objective was to elaborate on the efficacy and safety of olaparib-added regimens in treating mCRPC patients as compared to the established guideline.
METHODS
The literature search was performed on several scientific databases, e.g., PubMed, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect, by applying the Boolean Term method. Statistical and risk of bias (RoB) analyses were calculated through RevMan 5.4.1. to investigate our outcomes, i.e., progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with the reported adverse effects (AEs). These outcomes were presented in hazard ratio (HR) and risk ratio (RR).
RESULTS
Three trials consisting of 1,325 individuals with comparable baseline characteristics were investigated. The meta-analysis showed that introducing olaparib into the regimens significantly improved the PFS (HR 0.59 (0.48 - 0.73); P < 0.05), which disclosed even better outcomes among mutated homologous recombinant repair (HRR) and ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) gene (HR 0.43 (0.30 - 0.62); P < 0.05) in 95% confidence interval (CI). Furthermore, similar outcomes were observed in OS analysis (HR 0.81 (0.67 - 0.99); P < 0.05), despite olaparib group disclosed higher AEs rate with insignificant difference in mortality rate.
CONCLUSION
The efficacy and safety of olaparib-added regimens in mCRPC patients need to be explored more extensively in trials because they are beneficial, particularly among -mutated individuals.
PubMed: 38022404
DOI: 10.14740/wjon1685 -
European Urology Oncology Oct 2020The goal of precision oncology is to use the underlying genomic characteristics of the patient and the cancer to select the optimal treatment at a given time. The recent...
CONTEXT
The goal of precision oncology is to use the underlying genomic characteristics of the patient and the cancer to select the optimal treatment at a given time. The recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer heralds the onset of precision medicine for this disease.
OBJECTIVE
To discuss the emerging role that PARP inhibitors may play as a personalised future treatment option in patients with prostate cancer, with a focus on patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) whose tumour cells harbour mutations resulting from deficient homologous recombination repair (HRR).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
To identify publications relevant to this review, a systematic literature search of PubMed was conducted for articles and proceedings of relevant major congresses, published between January 2010 and March 2020, reporting the use of PARP inhibitors in the treatment of cancers.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 168 publications were identified, and 18 of these met the criteria for subsequent review. In addition, 15 phase 2 or on-going phase 3 (mCRPC) studies evaluating PARP inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination, which had not yet reported data, were identified through ClinicalTrials.gov. Emerging data suggest that the greatest efficacy with single-agent PARP inhibitors is seen in mCRPC patients with germline or somatic BRCA1/2 alterations (especially BRCA2 or biallelic mutations), with potential efficacy also observed in men with PALB2 and FANCA mutations.
CONCLUSIONS
PARP inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy in mCRPC, and similar to ovarian and breast cancers, the greatest effect is observed in patients with HRR deficiency. The PARP inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib are now FDA approved for mCRPC patients with HRR mutations and BRCA1/2 mutations, respectively. Furthermore, when PARP inhibition is combined with novel hormonal therapies, a treatment benefit may be observed regardless of the HRR deficiency status. Gaps in the knowledge and understanding around PARP inhibitor use in prostate cancer, including the most appropriate diagnostic testing method for identifying an HRR mutation, remain to be resolved.
PATIENT SUMMARY
The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors olaparib and rucaparib are now approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer. Here, we reviewed the literature and proceedings from meeting presentations and published papers relevant to the use of PARP inhibitors in the treatment of prostate cancer. Testing methods for detecting homologous recombination repair gene mutations, as diagnostic tools to help identify patients most likely to benefit from PARP inhibitor treatment, are also discussed.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Indoles; Male; Phthalazines; Piperazines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
PubMed: 32814685
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2020.07.005 -
BMC Cancer Jan 2023To analyze the incidence and risk of hypertension associated with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in cancer patients and provide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the incidence and risk of hypertension associated with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in cancer patients and provide reference for clinicians.
METHODS
We used R software to conduct a meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCT) on PARP inhibitors for cancer treatment published in PubMed, Embase, Clinical Trials, Cochrane Library and Web of Science from inception to July 29th, 2022.
RESULTS
We included 32 RCTs with 10,654 participants for this meta-analysis. For total PARP inhibitors, the incidence and risk ratio of all-grade hypertension were 12% and 1.22 (95% CI: 0.91-1.65, P = 0.19, I = 81%), and the incidence and risk ratio of grade 3-4 hypertension were 4% and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.74-2.08, P = 0.42, I = 68%). Compared with the control group, the niraparib group, olaparib 800 mg/day group, and olaparib plus cediranib group increased the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension, while the veliparib group and rucaparib group did not increase the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension, and olaparib 200 mg-600 mg/day group (exclude olaparib plus cediranib regime) reduced the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension.
CONCLUSION
Olaparib 200-600 mg/day (excluding olaparib plus cediranib regimen) may be the most suitable PARP inhibitor for cancer patients with high risk of hypertension, followed by veliparib and rucaparib. Niraparib, olaparib 800 mg/day and olaparib combined with cediranib may increase the risk of developing hypertension in cancer patients, clinicians should strengthen the monitoring of blood pressure in cancer patients and give medication in severe cases.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Agents; Hypertension; Incidence; Phthalazines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Neoplasms
PubMed: 36717798
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10571-5 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with ovarian cancer through a network...
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with ovarian cancer through a network meta-analysis to support clinical treatment choices.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Chongqing VIP (CQVIP), and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM) were searched with a cutoff date of 14 January 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov was also checked for supplementary data. Phase II or III randomized controlled trials that compared a PARP inhibitor with a placebo in patients with relapsed or newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer were included. The hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival and overall survival and odds ratios (ORs) for grade 3 or higher adverse events were analyzed. The network meta-analysis was conducted in a Bayesian framework based on the Markov Chain Monte Carlo model in the R gemtc package (version 4.0.3).
RESULTS
Eight eligible articles reporting six trials with a total of 2,801 patients were incorporated in this network meta-analysis. Three trials compared olaparib with placebo. Two trials compared niraparib with placebo. One trial compared rucaparib with placebo. The network meta-analysis failed to show significant differences in progression-free survival among the three PARP inhibitors: HR of 0.64, 95% confidence interval of 0.3 to 1.42 for olaparib versus niraparib, and olaparib versus rucaparib (0.86; 0.33 to 2.33). The comparison between niraparib and rucaparib also did not express a statistical difference (1.34; 0.47 to 3.72). Subgroup analysis bybreast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) status showed no obvious difference in progression-free survival among the three PARP inhibitors regardless of BRCA mutation status. Olaparib had fewer grade 3 or higher adverse events than niraparib (OR, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.13 to 0.55) and rucaparib (0.34; 0.14 to 0.86). However, the analysis failed to show a significant difference between niraparib and rucaparib (1.27; 0.49 to 3.27).
CONCLUSION
Current evidence indicates that there is no significant difference observed in efficacy among olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib. However, olaparib might have fewer grade 3 or higher adverse events.
PubMed: 35756600
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.815265 -
Pharmacological Research Oct 2021We aimed to evaluate comparative safety and tolerability of the approved PARP inhibitors in people with cancer. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We aimed to evaluate comparative safety and tolerability of the approved PARP inhibitors in people with cancer.
METHODS
Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials comparing an approved PARP inhibitor (fluzoparib, olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, or talazoparib) with placebo or chemotherapy in cancer patients. Outcomes of interest included: serious adverse event (SAE), discontinuation due to adverse event (AE), interruption of treatment due to AE, dose reduction due to AE, and specific grade 1-5 AEs.
RESULTS
Ten trials including 3763 participants and six treatments (olaparib, rucaparib, niraparib, talazoparib, placebo, and protocol-specified single agent chemotherapy) were identified. SAE and discontinuation of treatment did not differ significantly among the four approved PARP inhibitors. Regarding interruption of treatment and dose reduction due to AE, statistically significant differences and statistically non-significant trend were observed. Talazoparib is associated with a higher risk of interruption of treatment and dose reduction (excluding rucaparib) due to AE as compared with the other drugs. Niraparib showed a trend of lower risk of AE related dose reduction as compared with the other drugs. Furthermore, there were significant differences in specific grade 1-5 AE among the four drugs.
CONCLUSION
The safety profile of the four approved PARP inhibitors is comparable in terms of SAE and AE-related discontinuation of treatment. Statistically significant differences in the AEs spectrum and AEs related dose interruption and dose reduction demonstrated the prompt identification of AE and dose personalization seem mandatory to obtain maximal benefit from PARP inhibitors.
Topics: Humans; Indazoles; Indoles; Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Phthalazines; Piperazines; Piperidines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 34389457
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2021.105808 -
European Urology Oncology Jun 2024Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors Have Comparable Efficacy with Platinum Chemotherapy in Patients with BRCA-positive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring pathogenic BRCA mutations can benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) and platinum treatments, whereas the impact of the mutation on sensitivity to cabazitaxel and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand therapy is currently unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of PARPi, platinum, cabazitaxel, and PSMA-ligand therapies in BRCA-positive mCRPC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Databases were queried in February 2022. We performed data synthesis by using both proportional and individual patient data. For prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) evaluation, we pooled event rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival analyses with individual patient data were performed with the mixed-effect Cox proportional hazard model and single-arm random-effect analysis, providing pooled medians.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We included 23 eligible studies with 901 BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. PSA50 response rates for PARPi and platinum were 69% (CI: 53-82%), and 74% (CI: 49-90%), respectively. Analyses of OS data showed no difference between PARPi and platinum treatments (hazard ratio: 0.86; CI: 0.49-1.52; p = 0.6). The single-arm OS and PFS analyses revealed similarities among different PARPis; pooled PFS and OS medians were 9.7 mo (CI: 8.1-12.5) and 17.4 mo (CI: 12.7-20.1), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data revealed that different PARPis were similarly effective in terms of PFS and OS. Moreover, we found that PARPi and platinum therapy were comparable in terms of PSA50 response rate and OS, highlighting that platinum is a valid treatment option for BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. However, prospective interventional studies comparing these agents are essential to provide a higher level of evidence.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this report, we found that different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors had similar efficacy, and platinum was a valid treatment option in BRCA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.
Topics: Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Male; Treatment Outcome; BRCA2 Protein; Antineoplastic Agents; Neoplasm Metastasis; BRCA1 Protein
PubMed: 37722977
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.001 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Jan 2024Carboplatin is still the cornerstone of the first-line treatment in advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (aEOC) management and the clinical response to platinum-derived... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Carboplatin is still the cornerstone of the first-line treatment in advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer (aEOC) management and the clinical response to platinum-derived agents remains the major predictor of long-term outcomes.
PATIENT AND METHODS
We aimed to identify the best treatment of the aEOC in terms of efficacy and safety, considering all treatment phases. A systematic literature search has been done to compare all treatments in aEOC population. Randomized trials with available survival and safety data published in the 2011-2022 timeframe were enclosed. Only trials reporting the BRCA or HRD (Homologous Recombination Deficiency) status were considered.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
A ranking of treatment schedules on the progression-free survival (PFS) endpoint was performed. The random-effect model was used to elaborate and extract data. The Network Meta-Analysis (NMA) by Bayesian model was performed by STATA v17. Data on PFS were extracted in terms of Hazard ratio with relative confidence intervals.
RESULTS
This NMA involved 18 trials for a total of 9105 patients. Within 12 treatment groups, we performed 3 different sensitivity analyses including "all comers" Intention to Treat (ITT) population, BRCA-mutated (BRCAm), and HRD subgroups, respectively. Considering the SUCRA-reported cumulative PFS probabilities, we showed that in the ITT population, the inferred best treatment was niraparib plus bevacizumab with a SUCRA of 96.7. In the BRCAm subgroup, the best SUCRA was for olaparib plus chemotherapy (96,9). The HRD population showed an inferred best treatment for niraparib plus bevacizumab (SUCRA 98,4). Moreover, we reported a cumulative summary of PARPi toxicity, in which different 3-4 grade toxicity profiles were observed, despite the PARPi "class effect" in terms of efficacy.
CONCLUSIONS
Considering all aEOC subgroups, the best therapeutical option was identified as PARPi plus chemotherapy and/or antiangiogenetic agents, suggesting the relevance of combinatory approaches based on molecular profile. This work underlines the potential value of "chemo-free" regimens to prolong the platinum-free interval (PFI).
Topics: Humans; Female; Bevacizumab; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Ovarian Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial
PubMed: 38065404
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2023.104229