-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive cancer that spreads and metastasizes quickly. In recent years, the antiangiogenic drug bevacizumab has been trialed to treat...
Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in patients with malignant melanoma: a systematic review and PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-comparative clinical studies.
Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive cancer that spreads and metastasizes quickly. In recent years, the antiangiogenic drug bevacizumab has been trialed to treat malignant melanoma. We conducted the first meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with other drugs in malignant melanoma. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-comparative clinical studies of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy, targeted medicine, and interferon to treat malignant melanoma in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Meta-analysis of RCT was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4), and non-comparative meta-analysis was performed using R (version 4.0.3). The primary outcome was the objective response rate. Depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies, the pooled outcomes and 95% CI were calculated using either random-effects or fixed-effect models. Subgroup outcomes were calculated with possible relevant variables. Sensitivity analyses were carried out by excluding each study from the highly heterogeneous pooled results in turn. Funnel plot and Begg's test were used to test the included studies' potential publication bias. The level of significance was set at < 0.05. This meta-analysis included 20 trials: five RCTs and 15 non-comparative clinical studies with a total of 23 bevacizumab intervention arms. In 14 treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with chemotherapy drugs such as fotemustine, dacarbazine, carboplatin/paclitaxel, and temozolomide. In six treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with targeted medicines such as imatinib, everolimus, sorafenib, erlotinib, and temsirolimus. There were also six treatment arms that used bevacizumab in combination with interferon. The pooled objective response rate was 15.8% (95% CI, 11.4%-20.2%). Bevacizumab plus carboplatin/paclitaxel significantly increased the overall survival compared to carboplatin/paclitaxel (HR = 0.64, 95% CI, 0.49-0.85, < 0.01). Fatigue, nausea, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were the most common adverse events. The pooled incidence of hypertension of all bevacizumab arms in malignant melanoma was 32.4% (95% CI, 24.5%-40.3%). This study showed that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy might be effective and well-tolerated in patients with stage III or IV unresectable malignant melanoma. : [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=304625], identifier [CRD42022304625].
PubMed: 37521468
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1163805 -
Journal of Neuro-oncology Aug 2023Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search to identify clinical studies evaluating overall survival (OS) in TTFields-treated patients. Comparative and single-cohort studies were analyzed. Survival curves were pooled using a distribution-free random-effects method.
RESULTS
Among nine studies, seven (N = 1430 patients) compared the addition of TTFields therapy to standard of care (SOC) chemoradiotherapy versus SOC alone and were included in a pooled analysis for OS. Meta-analysis of comparative studies indicated a significant improvement in OS for patients receiving TTFields and SOC versus SOC alone (HR: 0.63; 95% CI 0.53-0.75; p < 0.001). Among real-world post-approval studies, the pooled median OS was 22.6 months (95% CI 17.6-41.2) for TTFields-treated patients, and 17.4 months (95% CI 14.4-21.6) for those not receiving TTFields. Rates of gross total resection were generally higher in the real-world setting, irrespective of TTFields use. Furthermore, for patients included in studies reporting data on device usage (N = 1015), an average usage rate of ≥ 75% was consistently associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Meta-analysis of comparative TTFields studies suggests survival may be improved with the addition of TTFields to SOC for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.
Topics: Humans; Glioblastoma; Temozolomide; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Brain Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy
PubMed: 37493865
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-023-04348-w -
Nitric Oxide : Biology and Chemistry Sep 2023Gliomas represent the most prevalent form of brain tumors, among which glioblastomas are the most malignant subtype. Despite advances in comprehending their biology and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Gliomas represent the most prevalent form of brain tumors, among which glioblastomas are the most malignant subtype. Despite advances in comprehending their biology and treatment strategies, median survival remains disappointingly low. Inflammatory processes involving nitric oxide (NO), critically contribute to glioma formation. The inducible isoform of NO synthase (iNOS) is highly overexpressed in gliomas and has been linked to resistance against temozolomide (TMZ) treatment, neoplastic transformation, and modulation of immune response. While both in vitro and in vivo studies showed the potential of iNOS inhibitors as effective treatments for gliomas, no clinical trials on gliomas have been published. This review aims to summarize the available evidence regarding iNOS as a target for glioma treatment, focusing on clinically relevant data.
METHODS
Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review by searching PubMed/Medline, and Embase databases in May 2023. We included studies that investigated the impact of NOS inhibitors on glioma cells using L-NMMA, CM544, PBN, 1400W or l-NAME either alone or combined with TMZ. We extracted data on the NOS inhibitor used, subtype, study setting, animal model or cell lines employed, obtained results, and safety profile. Our inclusion criteria encompassed original articles in English or Spanish, studies with an untreated control group, and a primary outcome focused on the biological effects on glioma cells.
RESULTS
Out of 871 articles screened from the aforementioned databases, 37 reports were assessed for eligibility. After excluding studies that did not utilize glioma cells or address the designated outcome, 11 original articles satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although no NOS inhibitor has been tested in a published clinical trial, three inhibitors have been evaluated using in vivo models of intracranial gliomas. l-NAME, 1400W, and CM544 were tested in vitro. Co-administration of l-NAME, or CM544 with TMZ showed superior results in vitro compared to individual agent testing.
CONCLUSION
Glioblastomas remain a challenging therapeutic target. iNOS inhibitors exhibit substantial potential as treatment options for oncologic lesions, and they have demonstrated a safe toxicity profile in humans for other pathological conditions. Research endeavors should be focused on investigating their potential effects on brain tumors.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Glioblastoma; NG-Nitroarginine Methyl Ester; Glioma; Temozolomide; Brain Neoplasms; Enzyme Inhibitors; Nitric Oxide Synthase; Nitric Oxide
PubMed: 37279819
DOI: 10.1016/j.niox.2023.06.002