-
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and... 2024Advances in targeted therapies have expanded the treatment options for colorectal cancer (CRC), allowing for more tailored and effective approaches to managing the...
BACKGROUND
Advances in targeted therapies have expanded the treatment options for colorectal cancer (CRC), allowing for more tailored and effective approaches to managing the disease. In targeted therapy, Bevacizumab is a commonly prescribed anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody that has a direct anti-vascular impact in cancer patients. Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors (VEGFs), especially VEGF-A, are significant agents in promoting tumour angiogenesis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the impact of adding Bevacizumab to chemotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
METHODOLOGY
Comprehensive searches have been performed on electronic databases such as PubMed, and Google Scholar using the following terms: colorectal cancer, adenocarcinoma, Bevacizumab, chemotherapy, and monoclonal antibody.
RESULTS
In the meta-analysis, 16 out of the 24 included studies were analysed. In the final analysis, incorporating Bevacizumab with chеmothеrapy demonstrated favourable outcomes for OS with a hazard ratio (HR = 0.689,95%CI: 0.51-0.83, ² = 39%, p <0.01) and for PFS with a hazard ratio (HR = 0.77 95% CI: 0.60-0.96, I² = 54%, < 0.01). The subgroup analysis of PFS, categorised by study dеsign (prospеctivе vs rеtrospеctivе), reveals that the Hazard Ratio (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.62-0.97, ² = 21%, < 0.01) and for OS with a hazard ratio (HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.52-0.86, I² = 17%, < 0.01).
CONCLUSION
Our findings indicate that combining Bevacizumab with chemotherapy enhances clinical outcomes and results in a significant increase in PFS and OS in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Positive outcomes are demonstrated by a substantial 23% increase in PFS and 31% increase in OS in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who undergo Bevacizumab in conjunction with chemotherapy
PubMed: 38845624
DOI: 10.1080/20523211.2024.2354300 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2024Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 70% to 85% of individuals with primary liver cancer. Gene therapy, which uses genes to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most common type of liver cancer, accounting for 70% to 85% of individuals with primary liver cancer. Gene therapy, which uses genes to treat or prevent diseases, holds potential for treatment, especially for tumours. Trials on the effects of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma have been published or are ongoing.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the benefits and harms of gene therapy in people with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of sex, administered dose, and type of formulation.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised clinical trials through electronic searches in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science. We searched five online clinical trial registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. We checked reference lists of the retrieved studies for further trials. The date of last search was 20 January 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We aimed to include randomised clinical trials assessing any type of gene therapy in people diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma, irrespective of year, language of publication, format, or outcomes reported.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager to prepare the review. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality/overall survival (whatever data were provided), serious adverse events during treatment, and health-related quality of life. The secondary outcomes were proportion of people with disease progression, adverse events considered non-serious, and proportion of people without improvement in liver function tests. We assessed risk of bias of the included trials using RoB 2 and the certainty of evidence using GRADE. We presented the results of time-to-event outcomes as hazard ratios (HR), dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR), and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat and outcome data at the longest follow-up.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six randomised clinical trials with 364 participants. The participants had unresectable (i.e. advanced inoperable) hepatocellular carcinoma. We found no trials assessing the effects of gene therapy in people with operable hepatocellular carcinoma. Four trials were conducted in China, one in several countries (from North America, Asia, and Europe), and one in Egypt. The number of participants in the six trials ranged from 10 to 129 (median 47), median age was 55.2 years, and the mean proportion of males was 72.7%. The follow-up duration ranged from six months to five years. As the trials compared different types of gene therapy and had different controls, we could not perform meta-analyses. Five of the six trials administered co-interventions equally to the experimental and control groups. All trials assessed one or more outcomes of interest in this review. The certainty of evidence was very low in five of the six comparisons and low in the double-dose gene therapy comparison. Below, we reported the results of the primary outcomes only. Pexastimogene devacirepvec (Pexa-Vec) plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of Pexa-Vec plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone on overall survival (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.82; 1 trial (censored observation at 20-month follow-up), 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 1 trial at 20 months after treatment, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial reported quality of life narratively as "assessment of quality of life and time to symptomatic progression was confounded by the high patient dropout rate." Adenovirus-thymidine kinase with ganciclovir (ADV-TK/GCV) plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at the two-year follow-up (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.76; 1 trial, 45 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation alone There is uncertainty about whether double-dose ADV-TK/GCV plus liver transplantation versus liver transplantation may benefit all-cause mortality at five-year follow-up (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73; 1 trial, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events other than mortality or quality of life. Recombinant human adenovirus-p53 with hydroxycamptothecin (rAd-p53/HCT) versus hydroxycamptothecin alone There is uncertainty about whether there may be little to no difference between the effect of rAd-p53/HCT versus hydroxycamptothecin alone on the overall survival at 12-month follow-up (RR 3.06, 95% CI 0.16 to 60.47; 1 trial, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. rAd-p53/5-Fu (5-fluorouracil) plus transarterial chemoembolisation versus transarterial chemoembolisation alone The trial included 46 participants. We had insufficient data to assess overall survival. The trial did not report serious adverse events or quality of life. E1B-deleted (dl1520) adenovirus versus percutaneous ethanol injection The trial included 10 participants. It did not report data on overall survival, serious adverse events, or health-related quality of life. One trial did not provide any information on sponsorship; one trial received a national research grant, one trial by the Pedersen foundation, and three were industry-funded trials. We found five ongoing randomised clinical trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of gene therapy on the studied outcomes because of high risk of bias and imprecision of outcome results. The trials were underpowered and lacked trial data on clinically important outcomes. There was only one trial per comparison, and we could not perform meta-analyses. Therefore, we do not know if gene therapy may reduce, increase, or have little to no effect on all-cause mortality or overall survival, or serious adverse events in adults with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. The impact of gene therapy on adverse events needs to be investigated further. Evidence on the effect of gene therapy on health-related quality of life is lacking.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Genetic Therapy; Quality of Life; Bias; Male; Cause of Death; Female; Middle Aged
PubMed: 38837373
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013731.pub2 -
Gastroenterology May 2024More than half of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) recur within 12 months after curative-intent resection. This systematic review and meta-analysis was...
BACKGROUND & AIMS
More than half of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) recur within 12 months after curative-intent resection. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to identify all reported prognostic factors for early recurrence in resected PDACs.
METHODS
After a systematic literature search, a meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model. Separate analyses were performed for adjusted vs unadjusted effect estimates as well as reported odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs). Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool, and evidence was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation recommendations.
RESULTS
After 2,903 abstracts were screened, 65 studies were included. Of these, 28 studies (43.1%) defined early recurrence as evidence of recurrence within 6 months, whereas 34 (52.3%) defined it as evidence of recurrence within 12 months after surgery. Other definitions were uncommon. Analysis of unadjusted ORs and HRs revealed 41 and 5 prognostic factors for early recurrence within 6 months, respectively. When exclusively considering adjusted data, we identified 25 and 10 prognostic factors based on OR and HR, respectively. Using a 12-month definition, we identified 38 (OR) and 15 (HR) prognostic factors from unadjusted data and 38 (OR) and 30 (HR) prognostic factors from adjusted data, respectively. On the basis of frequency counts of adjusted data, preoperative carbohydrate antigen 9-9, N status, nondelivery of adjuvant therapy, grading, and tumor size based on imaging were identified as key prognostic factors for early recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS
Reported prognostic factors of early recurrence vary considerably. Identified key prognostic factors could aid in the development of a risk stratification framework for early recurrence. However, prospective validation is necessary.
PubMed: 38825047
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2024.05.028 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology May 2024
PubMed: 38819749
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15532-1 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2024Immunotherapy, frequently combined with conventional chemotherapy, is crucial for treating NSCLC. Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS) is a poor prognostic factor in...
BACKGROUND
Immunotherapy, frequently combined with conventional chemotherapy, is crucial for treating NSCLC. Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS) is a poor prognostic factor in patients with NSCLC, particularly lung adenocarcinoma, where binding of conventional inhibitors to mutated KRAS proteins is challenging. Field profiles, research hotspots, and prospects for immunotherapy for patients with NSCLC-carrying KRAS mutations were uncovered in this study.
METHODS
Microsoft Excel 2019, Bibliometrix, VOSviewer software, and Citespace were utilized to conduct a comprehensive scientometric analysis and understand a specific research field's knowledge base and frontiers aided by bibliometrics.
RESULTS
Between 2014 and 2023, 398 eligible documents in the English language were acquired using the WoSCC database, of which 113 and 285 were reviews and articles, respectively. The growth rate per year was 34.25 %. The most cited articles were from the United States, and China published the highest number of articles. Cancers was the journal, with increased publications in recent years. The keywords with the strongest citation bursts were analyzed using Citespace. "Immune checkpoint inhibitors," "co-occurring genomic alterations," and "KRAS" are among the research hotspots in this field.
CONCLUSION
Using bibliometric and visual analyses, we examined immunotherapy for patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC over the previous decade. The whole analysis showed a steady, quick increase in yearly publications in this area. Our findings will provide a roadmap for future research on the mechanisms of immunotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor action in treating KRAS-mutant NSCLC.
PubMed: 38817907
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1385761 -
Cureus Apr 2024Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal cancer often diagnosed at advanced stages, highlighting the urgent need for early detection strategies. This... (Review)
Review
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly lethal cancer often diagnosed at advanced stages, highlighting the urgent need for early detection strategies. This systematic review explores the potential of fecal and urinary biomarkers for early PDAC detection. A comprehensive search identified eight relevant studies investigating various biomarkers, including proteins, metabolites, microbial profiles, DNA mutations, and non-coding RNAs. Promising findings suggest that urinary biomarkers related to metabolic alterations, inflammatory processes, fecal microbiome profiles, and fecal miRNAs hold diagnostic potential even at early stages of PDAC. Combining biomarkers into panels may enhance diagnostic accuracy. Challenges such as validation in larger cohorts, standardization of protocols, and regulatory approval must be addressed for clinical translation. Despite these hurdles, non-invasive urinary and fecal biomarkers represent a promising avenue for improving PDAC outcomes through early detection.
PubMed: 38813271
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59248 -
PloS One 2024Familial Pancreatic Cancer (FPC) presents a notable risk, with 3-10% of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases having a family history. Studies link FPC to syndromes like HBOC,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Familial Pancreatic Cancer (FPC) presents a notable risk, with 3-10% of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases having a family history. Studies link FPC to syndromes like HBOC, suggesting BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations play a role. BRCA gene functions in DNA repair impact FPC management, influencing sensitivity to therapies like PARP inhibitors. Identifying mutations not only aids FPC treatment but also reveals broader cancer risks. However, challenges persist in selectively applying genetic testing due to cost constraints. This Systematic Review focuses on BRCA1/BRCA2 significance in FPC, diagnostic criteria, prognostic value, and limitations.
METHOD
Original articles published from 2013 to January 2023 were sourced from databases such as Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest, and ScienceDirect. Inclusion criteria comprised observational cohort or diagnostic studies related to the role of BRCA1/2 mutation in correlation to familial pancreatic cancer (FPC), while article reviews, narrative reviews, and non-relevant content were excluded. The assessment of bias used ROBINS-I, and the results were organized using PICOS criteria in a Google spreadsheet table. The systematic review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 checklist.
RESULT
We analyzed 9 diagnostic studies encompassing 1325 families and 4267 patients from Italy, USA, and Poland. Despite the limitation of limited homogenous PICO studies, our findings effectively present evidence. BRCA1/2 demonstrates benefits in detecting first-degree relatives FPC involvement with 2.26-10 times higher risk. These mutation findings also play an important role since with the BRCA1/2 targeted therapy, Poly-ADP Ribose Polymerase inhibitors (PARP) may give better outcomes of FPC treatment. Analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 administration's impact on odds ratio (OR) based on six and five studies respectively. BRCA1 exhibited non-significant effects (OR = 1.26, P = 0.51), while BRCA2 showed significance (OR = 1.68, P = 0.04). No heterogeneity observed, indicating consistent results. Further research on BRCA1 is warranted.
CONCLUSION
Detecting the BRCA1/2 mutation gene offers numerous advantages, particularly in its correlation with FPC. For diagnostic and prognostic purposes, testing is strongly recommended for first-degree relatives, who face a significantly higher risk (2.26-10 times) of being affected. Additionally, FPC patients with identified BRCA1/2 mutations exhibit a more favorable prognosis compared to the non-mutated population. This is attributed to the availability of targeted BRCA1/2 therapy, which maximizes treatment outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Germ-Line Mutation; BRCA2 Protein; BRCA1 Protein; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Carcinoma
PubMed: 38809921
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299276 -
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial... 2024c-KIT is an important diagnostic marker in salivary gland tumours and is expressed in most adenoid cystic carcinomas. Histologically similar salivary gland tumours with... (Review)
Review
c-KIT is an important diagnostic marker in salivary gland tumours and is expressed in most adenoid cystic carcinomas. Histologically similar salivary gland tumours with variable immunohistochemical expression for c-KIT pose a challenge and make diagnostic reliability ambivalent. An electronic search was performed in MEDLINE by PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Trip, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE up to 31 December 2023, without period restriction. The articles that investigated CD117 or c-KIT in salivary gland tumours were included for review. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of c-KIT immunohistochemical expressions were derived and subjected to meta-analysis using Open Meta analyst for Sierra software. The risk of bias in selected studies was analysed using the QUADAS-2 tool, and RevMan 5.4 was used to output the result. Forty-three articles were reviewed, and 2285 salivary gland cases were analysed. Adenoid cystic carcinoma had an overall expression of 84.9%. A similar expression was found in epimyoepithelial carcinoma (79.1%), lymphoepithelial carcinoma (75%), myoepithelial carcinoma (60.8%), monomorphic adenoma (94.1%), and pleomorphic adenoma (74.7%). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of c-KIT/CD117 for adenoid cystic carcinoma with other salivary gland tumours were 84.99%, 69.09%, 84.79%, and 69.41%, respectively. Current evidence shows that c-KIT, despite its sensitivity, is not specific and therefore cannot be a useful diagnostic marker for distinguishing adenoid cystic carcinoma from other salivary gland tumours. Further research on other salivary gland tumours that exhibit comparable expression is necessary to validate the diagnostic accuracy of c-KIT.
PubMed: 38800447
DOI: 10.4103/jomfp.jomfp_70_24 -
Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer... May 2024This systematic review aims to compare the prognosis of treatment transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib and TACE-alone in patients with... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
This systematic review aims to compare the prognosis of treatment transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with sorafenib and TACE-alone in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with Barcelona clinic liver cancer-stage C (BCLC-C).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic search was conducted on five electronic databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane, Embase, and Scopus. Studies were included if they compared overall survival (OS) of TACE-Sorafenib to TACE-alone in patients with HCC BCLC-C within the 2019-2023 timeframe. We excluded studies consisting of conference abstracts, letters, editorials, guidelines, case reports, animal studies, trial registries, and unpublished work. The selected articles were evaluated from August 2023 to September 2023. The journal's quality was assessed with NOS for a non-randomized controlled trial.
RESULTS
This systematic review included four studies following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA). All four studies compared the OS of 401 patients with TACE-sorafenib to TACE-alone. Two studies compared time-to-progression (TTP), one study compared progression-free survival (PFS), and two studies compared disease control rate (DCR). There were various population criteria, TACE techniques used, risk factors, follow-up time, and adverse events. The collected evidence generally suggested that the combination of TACE-sorafenib is superior compared to TACE-alone. Due to a lack of essential data for the included study, a meta-analysis couldn't be performed.
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review suggested that TACE-sorafenib combination therapy in patients with HCC BCLC-C improves OS superior compared to TACE-alone, without a notable increase in adverse events.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Chemoembolization, Therapeutic; Sorafenib; Prognosis; Neoplasm Staging; Antineoplastic Agents; Treatment Outcome; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 38797810
DOI: 10.1186/s43046-024-00224-4 -
International Journal of Radiation... May 2024For rectal cancer patients, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT), and surgery (Trimodality Therapy, TMT) is associated with significant... (Review)
Review
Executive Summary of the American Radium Society® (ARS) Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Non-Operative Management (NOM) for Rectal Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines.
PURPOSE
For rectal cancer patients, the standard approach of chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT), and surgery (Trimodality Therapy, TMT) is associated with significant long-term toxicity and/or colostomy for most patients. Patient options focused on quality-of-life (QOL) have dramatically improved, but there remains limited guidance regarding comparative effectiveness. This systematic review and associated guidelines evaluate how various treatment strategies compare to each other in terms of oncologic outcomes and QOL.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cochrane and PRISMA methodology were used to search for prospective and retrospective trials and meta-analyses of adequate quality within the Ovid Medline database between 1/1/2012-6/15/2023. These studies informed the expert panel, which rated the appropriateness of various treatments in 6 clinical scenarios through a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi).
RESULTS
The search process yielded 197 articles that advised voting. Increasing data show non-operative management (NOM) and primary surgery result in QOL benefits noted over TMT without detriment to oncologic outcomes. For rectal cancer patients for whom TME would result in permanent colostomy or inadequate bowel continence, NOM was strongly recommended as usually appropriate. Restaging with tumor response assessment 8-12 weeks following completion of RT/CRT was deemed a necessary component of NOM. The panel recommended active surveillance in the setting of a near complete or complete response. In the setting of NOM, 54-56 Gy in 27-33 fractions concurrent with chemotherapy and followed by consolidation chemotherapy was recommended. The panel strongly recommends primary surgery as usually appropriate for a T3N0 high rectal tumor for whom LAR and adequate bowel function is possible, with adjuvant chemotherapy considered if N+.
CONCLUSIONS
Recent data supports NOM and primary surgery as important options that should be offered to eligible patients. Considering the complexity of multi-disciplinary management, patients should be discussed in a multi-disciplinary setting and therapy should be tailored to individual patient goals/values.
PubMed: 38797496
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.05.019