-
BMC Urology Jun 2019Conflicting evidence exists regarding the effect of hypertension on the prognosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with tyrosine kinase... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Conflicting evidence exists regarding the effect of hypertension on the prognosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This study aimed to assess the predictive value of TKIs-induced hypertension in patients with mRCC.
METHODS
This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019129593). PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database were searched with terms: "renal cell carcinoma", "hypertension", "blood pressure", "tyrosine kinase inhibitor", "sunitinib", "axitinib", "sorafenib" and "pazopanib" until March 21, 2019. Hazard Ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) were extracted and analyzed with Stata 15.0 software. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I value. Meta-regression, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were also performed to explore heterogeneity. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and precisely assessed by Egger's and Begg's tests. The quality of evidence of outcomes was generated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE).
RESULTS
A total of 4661 patients from 22 studies were included in the study. The results showed that the increase of blood pressure was an effective predictor for longer PFS (HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.48-0.71, p < 0.001; I = 77.3%) and OS (HR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.45-0.70, p < 0.001; I = 77.4%) of patients with mRCC. Subgroup analysis revealed that patients receiving sunitinib and pazopanib could have longer PFS and OS.
CONCLUSIONS
This study indicated that TKIs-induced hypertension may be a good predictor for better prognosis of patients with mRCC receiving TKIs treatment, especially using sunitinib or pazopanib.
Topics: Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney Neoplasms; Prognosis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Survival Rate
PubMed: 31174518
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-019-0481-5 -
Pazopanib: Evidence review and clinical practice in the management of advanced renal cell carcinoma.BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Nov 2018Pazopanib is indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). The aim of this study was to review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics...
BACKGROUND
Pazopanib is indicated in the first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). The aim of this study was to review the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib and see how these aspects are linked to clinical practice.
METHODS
A non-exhaustive systematic review was conducted according to the three topics. No publication restrictions were imposed and the selected languages were Spanish and English. After that, a summary of the main results and findings of the review was presented and discussed during three meetings (one for each topic) with 13 medical oncologists that usually treat mRCC. At these meetings, a questionnaire on the first-line use of pazopanib in clinical practice was also drawn up. After the meetings, the questionnaire was completed by 60 specialist medical oncologists in renal cancer.
RESULTS
The efficacy and safety of pazopanib have been demonstrated in several clinical trials, and subsequently confirmed in studies in real-world clinical practice. In addition to its clinical benefit and good safety profile, quality of life results for pazopanib, which compare favorably to sunitinib, make it a good option in the first-line treatment of patients. Special populations have been included in studies conducted with pazopanib, and it is safe for use in elderly patients, poor functional status, kidney failure, and mild or moderate hepatic impairment, and in patients with concomitant cardiovascular disease. The results of the questionnaire have shown that pazopanib is perceived as an effective drug, in which quality of life (QoL) outcomes are valued above all.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper offers a comprehensive and critical summary of efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of pazopanib in the treatment of mRCC. Pazopanib is an effective treatment with an acceptable safety profile. Its QoL and tolerability results offer certain advantages when compared with other therapeutic alternatives, and its use appears to be safe in different patient profiles.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Quality of Life; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30477570
DOI: 10.1186/s40360-018-0264-8 -
European Urology Oncology Jun 2018The role of antiangiogenic agents in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is well established. However, it is still not clear whether this benefit can be extrapolated to...
CONTEXT
The role of antiangiogenic agents in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is well established. However, it is still not clear whether this benefit can be extrapolated to the adjuvant setting.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the efficacy and safety of antiangiogenic agents in patients with RCC and a high risk of relapse after nephrectomy.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of any oral antiangiogenic agent compared to placebo in post-nephrectomy RCC patients. Prespecified data elements were extracted from each trial. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Three RCTs comparing antiangiogenics to placebo among 3693 patients met our inclusion criteria and were used in meta-analyses. Overall, antiangiogenics did not improve DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.07) or OS (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79-1.25). These results persisted when restricting the analysis to patients with clear cell carcinoma and patients with highest risk of relapse. Similarly, sunitinib did not show any improvement in the entire cohort for either DFS (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67-1.19) or OS (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.90-1.37).
CONCLUSIONS
In this meta-analysis, antiangiogenics did not improve OS and DFS over placebo in high-risk RCC after nephrectomy. Further studies are needed to identify the patient population that might derive a benefit from antiangiogenics in the adjuvant setting.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this article, we found that there is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of oral antiangiogenics in nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma after nephrectomy. In addition, the use of oral antiangiogenics was associated with a 2.7-fold higher rate of significant side effects compared to placebo.
PubMed: 30345423
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2018.03.012 -
European Urology Nov 2018Contradictory data exist with regard to adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy in surgically managed patients for localized renal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Contradictory data exist with regard to adjuvant vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-targeted therapy in surgically managed patients for localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC).
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the therapeutic benefit (disease-free survival [DFS] and overall survival [OS]) and grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) for adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy for resected localized RCC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A critical review of PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library in January 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement was performed. We identified reports and reviewed them according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials and Standards for the Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies criteria. Of eight full-text articles that were eligible for inclusion, five studies (two of five were updated analyses) were retained in the final synthesis. Study characteristics were abstracted and the number needed to treat (NNT) per trial was estimated.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
The three randomized controlled phase III trials included the following comparisons: sunitinib versus placebo or sorafenib versus placebo (Adjuvant Sorafenib or Sunitinib for Unfavorable Renal Carcinoma [ASSURE] study, n=1943), sunitinib versus placebo (S-TRAC, n=615), and pazopanib versus placebo (Pazopanib As Adjuvant Therapy in Localized/Locally Advanced RCC After Nephrectomy study, n=1135). The NNT ranged from 10 (S-TRAC) to 137 (ASSURE study). The pooled analysis showed that VEGFR-targeted therapy was not statistically significantly associated with improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-1.03, p=0.16) or OS (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.84-1.15, p=0.84) compared with the control group. The adjuvant therapy group experienced significantly higher odds of grade 3-4 AEs (OR: 5.89, 95% CI: 4.85-7.15, p<0.001). In exploratory analyses focusing on patients who started on the full-dose regimen, DFS was improved in patients who received adjuvant therapy (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.73-0.95, p=0.005).
CONCLUSIONS
This pooled analysis of reported randomized trials did not reveal a statistically significant effect between adjuvant VEGFR-targeted therapy and improved DFS or OS in patients with intermediate/high-risk local or regional fully resected RCC. Improvement in DFS may be more likely with the use of full-dose regimens, pending further results. However, adjuvant treatment was associated with high-grade AEs.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-targeted therapy after nephrectomy for localized kidney cancer is not associated with consistent improvements in delaying cancer recurrence or prolonging life and comes at the expense of potentially significant side effects.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Disease Progression; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Kidney Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neovascularization, Pathologic; Nephrectomy; Progression-Free Survival; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor; Risk Factors; Signal Transduction; Time Factors; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 29784193
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.05.002 -
Endocrine-related Cancer Sep 2018In the last few years, the therapeutic approach for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) has changed dramatically following the approval of several novel targeted treatments....
In the last few years, the therapeutic approach for neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) has changed dramatically following the approval of several novel targeted treatments. The multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor (MTKI), sunitinib malate, has been approved by Regulatory Agencies in pancreatic NENs. The MTKI class, however, includes several other molecules (approved for other conditions), which are currently being studied in NENs. An in-depth review on the studies published on the MTKIs in neuroendocrine tumors such as axitinib, cabozantinib, famitinib, lenvatinib, nintedanib, pazopanib, sorafenib and sulfatinib was performed. Furthermore, we extensively searched on the Clinical Trial Registries databases worldwide, in order to collect information on the ongoing clinical trials related to this topic. Our systematic analysis on emerging MTKIs in the treatment of gastroenteropancreatic and lung NENs identifies and studies, which demonstrate anti-tumor activity of diverse MTKIs on neuroendocrine cells and tumors. Moreover, for the first time in the literature, we report an updated view concerning the upcoming clinical trials in this field: presently, phase I, II and III clinical trials are ongoing and will include, overall, a staggering 1667 patients. This fervid activity underlines the increasing interest of the scientific community in the use of emerging MTKIs in NEN treatment.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases
PubMed: 29769293
DOI: 10.1530/ERC-17-0531 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Jan 2018A systematic review was conducted to identify real world studies reporting outcomes after first-line pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Studies... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review was conducted to identify real world studies reporting outcomes after first-line pazopanib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Studies had to be observational and report survival data in terms of progression-free survival and overall survival in order to conduct meta-analysis techniques. These real-world data were compared to those obtained in the phase II and III randomized controlled trials of pazopanib. Real world evidence showed that the clinical and safety outcomes were consistent with those observed in the clinical trials despite the inclusion of unselected patients with a wide spectrum of prognostic features and comorbidities. Similarly to the results of the pivotal studies, good prognosis patients had the most benefit from pazopanib. Further investigation is needed to complement evidence from clinical trials, in particular focused on patient-centered outcomes.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonamides; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 29279098
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.11.009 -
Critical Reviews in Oncology/hematology Dec 2017A systematic review was conducted to illustrate the bleeding risks associated with targeted therapies used in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).... (Review)
Review
A systematic review was conducted to illustrate the bleeding risks associated with targeted therapies used in the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Eligible studies included phase II, III, or IV clinical trials using pazopanib, sunitinib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, everolimus, temsirolimus, bevacizumab, axitinib, and/or sorafenib in the setting of mRCC. Types of bleeding event(s), bleeding event frequency, and incidence of thrombocytopenia were collected from the relevant articles. ClinicalTrials.gov was also searched for incidence of "Serious bleeding adverse effects" reported in these trials. The incidences of bleeding events ranged from 1 to 36%, and incidences of thrombocytopenia ranged from 2 to 78%. Available serious bleeding adverse events ranged from 1 to 7%. The highest percentage of bleeding incidences were seen with bevacizumab, while the lowest percentage of bleeding incidences were seen with axitinib. All of the included trials were of high quality per Jadad scoring.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase IV as Topic; Hemorrhage; Humans; Incidence; Kidney Neoplasms; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasm Metastasis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Thrombocytopenia
PubMed: 29198329
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.10.014 -
Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy =... Dec 2017Pazopanib is a relatively new compound to be introduced into the chemotherapy field. It is thought to have decent anti-angiogenic properties, which gives an additional... (Review)
Review
Pazopanib is a relatively new compound to be introduced into the chemotherapy field. It is thought to have decent anti-angiogenic properties, which gives an additional hope for the treatment of certain types of cancers. A systematic review solely discussing about pazopanib and its anti-angiogenic effect is yet to be published to date, despite several relevant clinical trials being conducted over the recent years. In this review, we aim to investigate the mechanism of pazopanib's anti-angiogenic effect and its effectiveness in treating several cancers. We have included, in this study, findings from electronically searchable data from randomized clinical trials, clinical studies, cohort studies and other relevant articles. A total of 352 studies were included in this review. From the studies, the effect of pazopanib in various cancers or models was observed and recorded. Study quality is indefinite, with a few decent quality articles. The most elaborately studied cancers include renal cell carcinoma, solid tumors, advanced solid tumors, soft tissue sarcoma, breast cancer and gynecological cancers. In addition, several less commonly studied cancers are included in the studies as well. Pazopanib had demonstrated its anti-angiogenic effect based on favorable results observed in cancers, which are caused by angiogenesis-related mechanisms, such as renal cell carcinoma, solid tumors, advanced solid tumors and soft tissue sarcoma. This review was conducted to study, analyze and review the anti-angiogenic properties of pazopanib in various cancers. The results obtained can provide a decent reference when considering treatment options for angiogenesis-related malignancies. Furthermore, the definite observations of the anti-angiogenic effects of pazopanib could provide newer insights leading to the future development of drugs of the same mechanism with increased efficiency and reduced adverse effects.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Humans; Indazoles; Neoplasms; Neovascularization, Pathologic; Pyrimidines; Sulfonamides
PubMed: 29054093
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2017.10.058 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Nov 2017The discovery of signaling networks that drive oncogenic processes has led to the development of targeted anticancer agents. The burden of pigmentary adverse events from... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The discovery of signaling networks that drive oncogenic processes has led to the development of targeted anticancer agents. The burden of pigmentary adverse events from these drugs is unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published clinical trials and determine the incidence and risk of development of targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted to identify studies reporting targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes. The incidence and relative risk were calculated. Case reports and series were reviewed to understand clinical characteristics.
RESULTS
A total of 8052 patients from 36 clinical trials were included. The calculated overall incidences of targeted cancer therapy-induced all-grade pigmentary changes in the skin and hair were 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-25.4) and 21.5% (95% CI, 14.9-30.1), respectively. The relative risk of all-grade pigmentary changes of skin and hair were 93.7 (95% CI, 5.86-1497.164) and 20.1 (95% CI, 8.35-48.248). Across 53 case reports/series (N = 75 patients), epidermal growth factor receptor and breakpoint cluster region-abelson inhibitors were the most common offending agents.
LIMITATIONS
Potential under-reporting and variability in oncologists reporting these events.
CONCLUSION
There is a significant risk of development of pigmentary changes during treatment with targeted anticancer therapies. Appropriate counseling and management are critical to minimize psychosocial impairment and deterioration in quality of life.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Female; Humans; Male; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasms; Pigmentation Disorders; Prevalence; Prognosis; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 28918974
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2017.06.044 -
The Oncologist Dec 2017Prognosis for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is dismal, with median overall survival (OS) of 8-12 months. The role of second-line therapy has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prognosis for patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (STS) is dismal, with median overall survival (OS) of 8-12 months. The role of second-line therapy has been inconsistently investigated over the last 20 years. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of salvage treatment in pretreated adult type STS, gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) excluded.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library were searched for randomized phase II/phase III trials exploring second- or beyond therapy lines in pretreated metastatic STS. Two independent investigators extracted data; the quality of eligible studies was resolved by consensus. Hazard ratio (HR) of death and progression (OS and progression-free survival [PFS]) and odds ratio (OR) for response rate (RR) were pooled in a fixed- or random-effects model according to heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane's risk of bias tool, and publication bias with funnel plots.
RESULTS
Overall, 10 randomized trials were selected. The pooled HR for death was 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.9). Second-line therapy reduced the risk of progression by 49% (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.76). This translated into an absolute benefit in OS and PFS by 3.3 and 1.6 months, respectively. Finally, RR with new agents or chemotherapy doublets translated from 4.3% to 7.6% (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.22-2.50).
CONCLUSION
Better survival is achieved in patients treated with salvage therapies (chemotherapy, as single or multiple agents or targeted biological agents). A 3-months gain in OS and an almost double RR is observed. Second lines also attained a reduction by 50% the risk of progression.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
There is some evidence that salvage therapies after first-line failure are able to improve outcome in metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Trabectedin, gemcitabine-based therapy, and pazopanib are currently approved drugs used after conventional upfront treatment. This meta-analysis reviews the benefit of new agents used in randomized trials in comparison with no active treatments or older agents for recurrent/progressed STS. The results show that modern drugs confer a statistically significant 3-month benefit in terms of overall survival, and an increase in response rate. Despite a limited improvement in outcome, currently approved second-line therapy should be offered to patients with good performance status.
Topics: Disease-Free Survival; Doxorubicin; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salvage Therapy; Sarcoma
PubMed: 28835514
DOI: 10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0474