-
The National Medical Journal of India 2017Clinical trials have shown that early and deeper cytogenetic/ molecular responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) help in achieving improved long-term outcomes... (Review)
Review
Clinical trials have shown that early and deeper cytogenetic/ molecular responses to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) help in achieving improved long-term outcomes including lower rates of disease progression in chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML). However, the level of molecular responses achieved with TKI therapy in patients with CML is variable and this could be explained by differences in adherence to CML therapy. A systematic literature review of CML studies reporting adherence to BCR-ABL inhibitors from the USA, Asia and Europe (19 articles: 9 retrospective, 4 prospective, rest cross-sectional) showed that average adherence varies from 19% to 100% of the proportion of prescribed drug taken. Some factors that contribute to non-adherence include patient attitudes, adverse events associated with therapy, treatment complexities and socioeconomic issues. This article focuses on the problem of non-adherence to therapy in CML, especially from an Indian perspective, and offers suggestions for its mitigation.
Topics: Cross-Sectional Studies; Fusion Proteins, bcr-abl; Humans; India; Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive; Prospective Studies; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 28936999
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2017Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors prevent cell growth and have shown benefit in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, whether used as single... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors prevent cell growth and have shown benefit in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, whether used as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy. Clear benefit has been shown in trials of EGFR monoclonal antibodies (EGFR MAb) but not EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKI). However, there is ongoing debate as to which patient populations gain maximum benefit from EGFR inhibition and where they should be used in the metastatic colorectal cancer treatment paradigm to maximise efficacy and minimise toxicity.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of EGFR inhibitors in the treatment of people with metastatic colorectal cancer when given alone, in combination with chemotherapy, or with other biological agents.The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival; secondary outcomes included overall survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, Issue 9, 2016; Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950); and Ovid Embase (from 1974) on 9 September 2016; and ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) on 14 March 2017. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences ESMO, ASCO, and ASCO GI from 2012 to December 2016. We further scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors for trials for further information where needed.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials on participants with metastatic colorectal cancer comparing: 1) the combination of EGFR MAb and 'standard therapy' (whether chemotherapy or best supportive care) to standard therapy alone, 2) the combination of EGFR TKI and standard therapy to standard therapy alone, 3) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI) and standard therapy to another EGFR inhibitor (or the same inhibitor with a different dosing regimen) and standard therapy, or 4) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI), anti-angiogenic therapy, and standard therapy to anti-angiogenic therapy and standard therapy alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. Subgroup analyses were performed by Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) and neuroblastoma RAS viral (V-Ras) oncogene homolog (NRAS) status - firstly by status of KRAS exon 2 testing (mutant or wild type) and also by status of extended KRAS/NRAS testing (any mutation present or wild type).
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 33 randomised controlled trials for analysis (15,025 participants), including trials of both EGFR MAb and EGFR TKI. Looking across studies, significant risk of bias was present, particularly with regard to the risk of selection bias (15/33 unclear risk, 1/33 high risk), performance bias (9/33 unclear risk, 9/33 high risk), and detection bias (7/33 unclear risk, 11/33 high risk).The addition of EGFR MAb to standard therapy in the KRAS exon 2 wild-type population improves progression-free survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; high-quality evidence), overall survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; high-quality evidence), and response rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.41; high-quality evidence). We noted evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity in all three of these analyses (progression-free survival: I = 76%; overall survival: I = 40%; and response rate: I = 77%), likely due to pooling of studies investigating EGFR MAb use in different lines of therapy. Rates of overall grade 3 to 4 toxicity, diarrhoea, and rash were increased (moderate-quality evidence for all three outcomes), but there was no evidence for increased rates of neutropenia.For the extended RAS wild-type population (no mutations in KRAS or NRAS), addition of EGFR MAb improved progression-free survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75; moderate-quality evidence) and overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88; high-quality evidence). Response rate was also improved (OR 4.28, 95% CI 2.61 to 7.03; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the progression-free survival analysis (I = 61%), likely due to the pooling of studies combining EGFR MAb with chemotherapy with monotherapy studies.We observed no evidence of a statistically significant difference when EGFR MAb was compared to bevacizumab, in progression-free survival (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; high quality evidence) or overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the overall survival analysis (I = 51%), likely due to the pooling of first-line and second-line studies.The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy in molecularly unselected participants did not show benefit in limited data sets (meta-analysis not performed). The addition of EGFR MAb to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve progression-free survival (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29; very low quality evidence), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.47; low-quality evidence), or response rate (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.12; very low-quality evidence) but increased toxicity (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.57; low-quality evidence). We noted significant between-study heterogeneity in most analyses.Scant information on quality of life was reported in the identified studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The addition of EGFR MAb to either chemotherapy or best supportive care improves progression-free survival (moderate- to high-quality evidence), overall survival (high-quality evidence), and tumour response rate (moderate- to high-quality evidence), but may increase toxicity in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type or extended RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (moderate-quality evidence). The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy does not improve clinical outcomes. EGFR MAb combined with bevacizumab is of no clinical value (very low-quality evidence). Future studies should focus on optimal sequencing and predictive biomarkers and collect quality of life data.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Agents; Bevacizumab; Colorectal Neoplasms; Diarrhea; Disease-Free Survival; ErbB Receptors; Exanthema; Humans; Neutropenia; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Protein-Tyrosine Kinases; Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras); Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28654140
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007047.pub2 -
Medicine Aug 2015The strong association between bcl-2-like 11 (BIM) triggered apoptosis and the presence of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations has been proven in nonsmall... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The strong association between bcl-2-like 11 (BIM) triggered apoptosis and the presence of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations has been proven in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the relationship between EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor's (TKI's) efficacy and BIM polymorphism in NSCLC EGFR is still unclear.Electronic databases were searched for eligible literatures. Data on objective response rates (ORRs), disease control rates (DCRs), and progression-free survival (PFS) stratified by BIM polymorphism status were extracted and synthesized based on random-effect model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted.A total of 6 studies that involved a total of 773 EGFR mutant advanced NSCLC patients after EGFR-TKI treatment were included. In overall, non-BIM polymorphism patients were associated with significant prolonged PFS (hazard ratio 0.63, 0.47-0.83, P = 0.001) compared to patients with BIM polymorphism. However, only marginal improvements without statistical significance in ORR (odds ratio [OR] 1.71, 0.91-3.24, P = 0.097) and DCR (OR 1.56, 0.85-2.89, P = 0.153) were observed. Subgroup analyses showed that the benefits of PFS in non-BIM polymorphism group were predominantly presented in pooled results of studies involving chemotherapy-naive and the others, and retrospective studies. Additionally, we failed to observe any significant benefit from patients without BIM polymorphism in every subgroup for ORR and DCR.For advanced NSCLC EGFR mutant patients, non-BIM polymorphism ones are associated with longer PFS than those with BIM polymorphism after EGFR-TKIs treatment. BIM polymorphism status should be considered an essential factor in studies regarding EGFR-targeted agents toward EGFR mutant patients.
Topics: Apoptosis; Apoptosis Regulatory Proteins; Bcl-2-Like Protein 11; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Drug Resistance, Neoplasm; ErbB Receptors; Genes, erbB-1; Humans; Membrane Proteins; Mutation; Polymorphism, Genetic; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26287412
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001263 -
Scientific Reports Feb 2015Current data on the concordance of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA mutation status or PTEN expression status between primary tumors and metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC) are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Current data on the concordance of KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA mutation status or PTEN expression status between primary tumors and metastases in colorectal cancer (CRC) are conflicting. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine concordance and discordance of the status of these four biomarkers between primary tumors and corresponding metastases in CRC patients. The biomarker status in primary tumors was used as the reference standard. Concordance data for KRAS, BRAF, PIK3CA and PTEN were provided by 43, 16, 9 and 7 studies, respectively. The pooled concordance rate was 92.0% (95% CI: 89.7%-93.9%) for KRAS, 96.8% (95% CI: 94.8%-98.0%) for BRAF, 93.9% (95% CI: 89.7%-96.5%) for PIK3CA and 71.7% (95% CI: 57.6%-82.5%) for PTEN. The pooled false positive and false negative rates for KRAS were 9.0% (95% CI: 6.5%-12.4%) and 11.3% (95% CI: 8.0%-15.8%), respectively. KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations are highly concordant between primary tumors and corresponding metastases in CRC, but PTEN loss is not. Nine percent of patients with wild-type KRAS in primary tumors who received anti-EGFR treatment had mutant KRAS in metastases, while 11.3% patients with mutant KRAS primary tumors had wild-type KRAS in the metastases. These 11.3% patients currently do not receive potentially beneficial anti-EGFR treatment.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Class I Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases; Colorectal Neoplasms; Databases, Factual; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Lymph Nodes; Lymphatic Metastasis; Mutation; PTEN Phosphohydrolase; Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; ras Proteins
PubMed: 25639985
DOI: 10.1038/srep08065 -
PloS One 2014The survival rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients carrying wild-type KRAS is significantly increased by combining anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (mAb) with standard... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PCR-based assays versus direct sequencing for evaluating the effect of KRAS status on anti-EGFR treatment response in colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The survival rate of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients carrying wild-type KRAS is significantly increased by combining anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody (mAb) with standard chemotherapy. However, conflicting data exist in both the wild-type KRAS and mutant KRAS groups, which strongly challenge CRC anti-EGFR treatment. Here we conducted a meta-analysis in an effort to provide more reliable information regarding anti-EGFR treatment in CRC patients.
METHODS
We searched full reports of randomized clinical trials using Medline, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO). Two investigators independently screened the published literature according to our inclusive and exclusive criteria and the relative data were extracted. We used Review Manager 5.2 software to analyze the data.
RESULTS
The addition of anti-EGFR mAb to standard chemotherapy significantly improved both progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (mOS) in the wild-type KRAS group; hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS and mOS were 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58-0.84] and 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.91], respectively. In sub-analyses of the wild-type KRAS group, when PCR-based assays are employed, PFS and mOS notably increase: the HRs were 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.88] and 0.87 [95% CI, 0.78-0.96], respectively. In sub-analyses of the mutant KRAS group, neither PCR-based assays nor direct sequencing enhance PFS or mOS.
CONCLUSION
Our data suggest that PCR-based assays with high sensitivity and specificity allow accurate identification of patients with wild-type KRAS and thus increase PFS and mOS. Furthermore, such assays liberate patients with mutant KRAS from unnecessary drug side effects, and provide them an opportunity to receive appropriate treatment. Thus, establishing a precise standard reference test will substantially optimize CRC-targeted therapies.
Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Colorectal Neoplasms; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Mutation; Proto-Oncogene Proteins; Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras); Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; ras Proteins
PubMed: 25260023
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107926