-
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Nov 2016Sunitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, axitinib and bevacizumab are the five recommended antiangiogenic agents in first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Sunitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, axitinib and bevacizumab are the five recommended antiangiogenic agents in first-line therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Because these drugs underwent simultaneous clinical development, no direct efficacy and safety comparison was ever conducted, thus preventing optimal therapy choices.
METHODS
We performed a traditional and network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mRCC-recommended first-line antiangiogenic agents. After a systematic review of Medline and Embase up to July 2014, we identified randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the outcomes of mRCC patients treated with sunitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, axitinib and bevacizumab as first-line treatment. Endpoints of interest were response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS
We screened 769 abstracts and included nine RCTs with a total of 4282 patients. In the weighted pooled analysis, first-line antiangiogenic agents showed significant improvement in PFS (HR=0.6; 95% IC, 0.51-0.72) and OS (HR=0.85; 95% IC, 0.78-0.93) compared to control (placebo or interferon-alpha2a (INF)). Network meta-analysis showed no significant differences among antiangiogenic drugs in 6-month PFS, 1-year OS, disease control rate and drug-related safety for all-grade hypertension, diarrhea, weight-loss, nausea or anorexia. However, pazopanib showed a lower incidence of fatigue, anemia and hand foot skin reaction.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis confirms the benefits of first-line antiangiogenic therapy in mRCC, with an improvement in OS. Sunitinib, pazopanib, axitinib and bevacizumab + INF offer similar efficacy but different safety profiles which can help clinicians to better personalize treatment decisions in patients with mRCC.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Disease Progression; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27823651
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2016.08.012 -
BMC Urology Jul 2016The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include pazopanib as a second-line treatment option. It would therefore be of interest to determine the efficiency of pazopanib in this setting in terms of the partial response rate (PRR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS).
METHODS
Peer-reviewed clinical reports without language restriction, both full papers and conference abstracts, which assessed the second-line use of pazopanib following failure of first-line non-cytokine-targeted therapy, were included. After the literature retrieval, we conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the size of the effect of each outcome measure (PRR, DCR, and PFS). The effect size and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models based on the heterogeneity represented by I(2) of selected studies. Meta-analysis forest plots with a fixed-effect model showing the PRR and DCR were created.
RESULTS
Our results show that there are no available comparative studies on pazopanib second-line treatment. Only phase II trials or retrospective analysis reports were retrievable. Six studies (comprising 217 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Pazopanib as a second-line treatment resulted in a PRR of 23 % (95 % CI, 17-31 %; I(2) = 52.6 %) and a DCR of 73 % (95 % CI, 65-80 %; I(2) = 0.00 %). The meta-analysis with fixed-effect model revealed that PFS was 6.5 months (95 % CI, 5.6-7.5 months; I(2) = 86.2 %).
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the effectiveness and indication of pazopanib for use in the second-line setting has not yet been examined in-depth; however, this meta-analysis has shown that the treatment effects in terms of PRR, DCR, and PFS may be similar to other well-studied second-line targeted therapies. Rigorous comparative phase III trials testing this hypothesis are required.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27377922
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-016-0156-4 -
International Urology and Nephrology Apr 2023Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second largest male tumor in the world and one of the most common malignant tumors in the urinary system. In recent years, the incidence... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second largest male tumor in the world and one of the most common malignant tumors in the urinary system. In recent years, the incidence rate of PCa in China has been increasing year by year. Meanwhile, refractory hormone resistance and adverse drug reactions of advanced PCa cause serious harm to patients.
OBJECTIVE
The present study aims to systematically review the recent advances in molecularly targeted drugs for prostate cancer and to use the retrieval and analysis of the literature library to summarize the adverse effects of different drugs so as to maximize the treatment benefits of targeted therapies.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We performed a systematic literature search of the Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases up to March 2022 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords such as (prostate cancer) AND (molecular target drugs) AND (side effect) were used. No language restrictions were set on the search process, and all these results were processed independently by two authors. Consensus was reached through discussion once met with any disagreements. The primary endpoint was differential features between different molecular targeted drugs. Secondary endpoints were side effects of different drugs on the body and corresponding prognostic values.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool was used to assess the study quality in terms of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, the completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other biases. We retrieved 332 articles, of which 49 met the criteria for inclusion. Included studies show that prostatic tumor cells, tumor neovascularization and immune checkpoints are the main means for targeted therapy. Common drugs include 177 Lu-PSMA, Olaparib, Rucaparib, Bevacizumab, Pazopanib, Sorafenib, Cabozantinib, Aflibercept, Ipilimumab, Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Durvalumab. A series of publicly available data suitable for further analysis of side effects. An over-representation analysis of these datasets revealed reasonable dosage and usage is the key to controlling the side effects of targeted drugs. Important information such as the publication year, the first author, location and outcome observation of adverse effects was extracted from the original article. If the study data has some insufficient data, contacting the corresponding authors is necessary. All the studies included prospective nonrandomized and randomized research. Retrospective reviews were also screened according to the relevant to the purpose of this study. Meeting abstracts as well as letters to the editor and editorials were excluded.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Data analysis was based on Cochrane's risk of bias tools to obtain the quality assessment. The included randomized studies used RoB2 and non-randomized ones corresponded to ROBINS-I. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were used to determine relative risk (RR) and side effects between groups. The eggers' test was used to check the publication bias from variable information in the included studies. All p < 0.05 were considered to be significant, and 95% was set as the confidence interval.
CONCLUSIONS
With the approval of a variety of targeted drugs, targeted therapy will be widely used in the treatment of advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Despite the existence of adverse reactions related to targeted drug treatment, it is still meaningful to adjust the drug dosage or treatment cycle to reduce the occurrence of adverse reactions, improving the treatment benefits of patients.
Topics: Humans; Male; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostate
PubMed: 36719528
DOI: 10.1007/s11255-023-03487-3 -
Musculoskeletal Surgery Mar 2023Approximately 80% of desmoid tumors (DTs) show spontaneous regression or disease stabilization during first-line active surveillance. Medical treatment can be considered... (Review)
Review
Approximately 80% of desmoid tumors (DTs) show spontaneous regression or disease stabilization during first-line active surveillance. Medical treatment can be considered in cases of disease progression. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity of each medical treatment by reviewing only the studies that included progressive disease as the inclusion criterion. We searched the EMBASE, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases to identify published studies for progressive DTs. The disease control rates of the medical treatments, such as low-dose chemotherapy with methotrexate plus vinblastine or vinorelbine, imatinib, sorafenib, pazopanib, nilotinib, anlotinib, doxorubicin-based agents, liposomal doxorubicin, hydroxyurea, and oral vinorelbine for progressive DTs were 71-100%, 78-92%, 67-96%, 84%, 88%, 86%, 89-100%, 90-100%, 75%, and 64%, respectively. Low-dose chemotherapy, sorafenib, pazopanib, nilotinib, anlotinib, and liposomal doxorubicin had similar toxicities. Sorafenib and pazopanib were less toxic than imatinib. Doxorubicin-based chemotherapy was associated with the highest toxicity. Hydroxyurea and oral vinorelbine exhibited the lowest toxicity. Stepwise therapy escalation from an initial, less toxic treatment to more toxic agents is recommended for progressive DTs. Sorafenib and pazopanib had limited on-treatment side effects but had the possibility to induce long-term treatment-related side effects. In contrast, low-dose chemotherapy has some on-treatment side effects and is known to have very low long-term toxicity. Thus, for progressive DTs following active surveillance, low-dose chemotherapy is recommended in young patients as long-term side effects are minor, whereas therapies such as sorafenib and pazopanib is recommended for older patients as early side effects are minor.
Topics: Humans; Vinorelbine; Sorafenib; Imatinib Mesylate; Hydroxyurea; Fibromatosis, Aggressive; Watchful Waiting; Methotrexate; Doxorubicin
PubMed: 35150408
DOI: 10.1007/s12306-022-00738-x -
Sarcoma 2016This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies.... (Review)
Review
This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies of adults with advanced or metastatic STS who received systemic anticancer therapy before enrollment in a randomized-controlled trial of pazopanib, another targeted cancer agent, or cytotoxic chemotherapy. Of 204 publications identified, seven articles representing six unique studies met inclusion criteria. Additional safety results for pazopanib were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov. Hematologic toxicities were common with all therapies evaluated (pazopanib, trabectedin, dacarbazine ± gemcitabine, gemcitabine ± docetaxel, cyclophosphamide, and ifosfamide). Studies differed in AE type, timing of assessment, and outcomes reported, although patient populations and AE assessment timing were relatively similar for pazopanib and trabectedin. AEs that were more common with trabectedin than pazopanib were anemia, neutropenia, nausea/vomiting, and elevations in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase. An AE that was more common with pazopanib than trabectedin was anorexia. Only the pazopanib study reported AE frequencies versus placebo. A planned meta-analysis was not feasible, as there was no common comparator. More well-designed studies that include common comparators are needed for comparison of safety effects among treatments for STS.
PubMed: 27516726
DOI: 10.1155/2016/3597609 -
Anti-cancer Agents in Medicinal... Nov 2012The treatment of advanced urothelial cancer of the bladder has evolved substantially during recent years. Chemotherapy has been the mainstay of treatment and confers... (Review)
Review
The treatment of advanced urothelial cancer of the bladder has evolved substantially during recent years. Chemotherapy has been the mainstay of treatment and confers survival advantage. Despite such advances, the chemotherapy of bladder cancer is far from satisfactory due to severe side effects. Targeted therapy with novel drugs directed at specific molecular pathways opens promising new avenues to improve patient outcome. A systematic review examined the clinical data for novel targeted agents in 10 phase II trials, with a focus on bevacizumab, aflibercept, sunitinib, sorafenib, gefitinib, lapatinib and trastuzumab. Besides, we present studies on other novel, promising targeted agents, including pazopanib, cetuximab and everolimus. Although bevacizumab and trastuzumab have shown promising results for patients with advanced bladder cancer, other targeted agents have not achieved the same clinical benefit in this disease as seen in other common epithelial cancers. Ultimately, combination targeted therapy, sequential therapy, adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy may yield the best outcomes.
Topics: Animals; Antineoplastic Agents; Humans; Models, Molecular; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Signal Transduction; Urinary Bladder; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Urothelium
PubMed: 22583418
DOI: 10.2174/187152012803529673 -
Cancer Treatment Reviews Oct 2012Angiogenesis is critical for tumor growth and a promising therapeutic target. This review will summarize and analyze data from clinical trials of anti-angiogenic agents... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Angiogenesis is critical for tumor growth and a promising therapeutic target. This review will summarize and analyze data from clinical trials of anti-angiogenic agents in the treatment of breast cancer (BC).
DESIGN
A systematic search of PubMed and conference databases was performed to identify reports of randomized clinical trials investigating specific anti-angiogenic agents in the treatment of BC.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Phase III trials in advanced BC have demonstrated a reduction in the risk of disease progression (22-52%), improved response rates and net improvements in progression-free survival of 1.2 to 5.5 months, but no significant improvements in overall survival with the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy. Results of phase III trials in early breast cancer have been inconsistent. Bevacizumab-containing regimens have also been associated with higher overall adverse event rates compared to chemotherapy alone. Phase III trials of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib were negative, while randomized phase II trials of sorafenib and pazopanib have improved some outcomes when combined with chemotherapy or targeted therapy compared to controls. In addition to expected vascular class safety signals, tyrosine kinase inhibitors show "off-target" side effects. Ongoing clinical trials evaluating combinatorial strategies based on biological synergies and translational studies identifying biological predictors of response will be crucial to establish meaningful clinical benefits in selected BC populations.
CONCLUSION
Most trials of anti-angiogenic agents in BC have reported improved response rate and progression-free survival but no increase in overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone. Optimizing the therapeutic indices of these agents is a focus of ongoing research and will be critical to their future development.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neoplasm Staging; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 22365657
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2011.12.002 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology May 2015A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative risk (RR) of congestive heart failure (CHF) associated with approved multi-targeted... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine the relative risk (RR) of congestive heart failure (CHF) associated with approved multi-targeted vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). Eligible studies included randomized trials comparing arms with and without an FDA-approved VEGFR TKI. Statistical analyses calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 10,647 patients from 16 phase III trials and 5 phase II trials were selected. All grade CHF occurred in 138 of 5752 (2.39%) patients receiving VEGFR TKIs and 37 of 4895 (0.75%) patients in the non-TKI group. High-grade CHF occurred in 17 of 1426 (1.19%) patients receiving VEGFR TKIs and 8 of 1232 (0.65%) patients in the non-TKI group. The RR of all grade and high-grade CHF for the TKI vs. no TKI arms was 2.69 (p<0.001; 95% CI: 1.86 to 3.87) and 1.65 (p=0.227, 95% CI: 0.73 to 3.70), respectively. The RR of relatively specific TKIs (axitinib) was similar to relatively non-specific TKIs (sunitinib, sorafenib, vandetanib, pazopanib).
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Heart Failure; Humans; Neoplasms; Odds Ratio; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Publication Bias; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor; Risk
PubMed: 25577572
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2014.12.008 -
Internal and Emergency Medicine Aug 2021Low muscle mass has been associated with worse clinical outcomes in various cancers. This work investigated whether, during tyrosine kinases inhibitors (TKIs) therapy,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Low muscle mass has been associated with worse clinical outcomes in various cancers. This work investigated whether, during tyrosine kinases inhibitors (TKIs) therapy, low muscle mass was associated with treatment toxicity and survival outcomes. A systematic literature search was performed in Pubmed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases from inception to June 2020, based on fixed inclusion and exclusion criteria. Effect sizes were estimated with hazard ratios (HR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and heterogeneity was assessed by measuring inconsistency (I) based on the Chi squared test. A total of 24 retrospective studies were identified, enrolling patients treated with sorafenib (n = 12), sunitinib (n = 6), lenvatinib (n = 3), regorafenib (n = 2), gefitinib (n = 1), imatinib (n = 1), and pazopanib (n = 1). Thirteen studies were deemed eligible for pooled analyses. Meta-analyses found a significant effect of low muscle mass on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.26-4.58, p = 0.008, I = 51%) in patients treated with TKI therapy. A subgroup analysis by treatment showed an association between DLT and low muscle during sorafenib or sunitinib, although not significant. A significant association between low skeletal muscle index and poorer overall survival was observed in HCC patients treated with sorafenib (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.07-1.96, p = 0.02). For other TKIs, although some results showed an association between low muscle mass and worse outcomes, the number of studies for each TKI therapy was too small to reach conclusions. Skeletal muscle mass could influence the prognosis of some TKI-treated patients. This effect is demonstrated in sorafenib-treated HCC patients but remains almost unexplored in other cancer patients undergoing TKI therapy. Further prospective studies with large sample size and sufficient follow-up are needed to clarify the role of muscle mass in the metabolism of TKI-based cancer treatment, and its association with toxicity and survival.
Topics: Gefitinib; Humans; Imatinib Mesylate; Indazoles; Muscle, Skeletal; Neoplasms; Phenylurea Compounds; Prognosis; Pyrazoles; Pyridines; Pyrimidines; Quinolines; Sorafenib; Sulfonamides; Sunitinib; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 33337518
DOI: 10.1007/s11739-020-02589-5 -
Targeted Oncology May 2024Targeting of angiogenesis has become a major therapeutic approach for the treatment of various advanced cancers. There are many unresolved questions on the toxicity of...
BACKGROUND
Targeting of angiogenesis has become a major therapeutic approach for the treatment of various advanced cancers. There are many unresolved questions on the toxicity of anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).
OBJECTIVE
We performed a meta-analysis to assess the toxicity prevalence of the different anti-angiogenic TKIs among cancer patients and in subpopulations of interest including patients with renal cell carcinoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases to November 2023. Clinical trials were eligible if they set out to report the grade ≥3 toxicities related to one of the seven currently approved anti-angiogenic TKIs as monotherapies. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method was applied with PROSPERO (CRD42023411946).
RESULTS
The 421 eligible studies included a total of 56,895 cancer patients treated with anti-angiogenic TKI monotherapy. Twenty-four different cancer types were identified, mainly renal cell carcinoma (41.9% of the patients). The anti-angiogenic TKI was sorafenib (34.5% of the patients), sunitinib (30.5%), regorafenib (10.7%), pazopanib (9.4%), cabozantinib (7.7%), axitinib (4.3%), and lenvatinib (2.9%). The pooled prevalence of grade 3 and 4 toxicities was 56.1% (95% confidence interval 53.5-58.6), with marked between-study heterogeneity (I = 96.8%). Toxicity profiles varied considerably depending on the type of TKI, the cancer type, and the specific patient characteristics. In particular, Asian patients and elderly people had higher prevalences of severe toxicities, with pazopanib being the best-tolerated drug. For patients treated with sunitinib, particularly those with metastatic RCC, there was no significant difference in terms of toxicity according to the regimen schedule.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis highlights the toxicity profiles of anti-angiogenic TKI monotherapies, and thus enables high-level recommendations for the choice of anti-angiogenic TKIs on the basis of the patient's age, ethnicity, comorbidities, and comedications, for personalized treatment.
PubMed: 38761350
DOI: 10.1007/s11523-024-01067-8