-
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a refractory disease for which achieving satisfactory outcomes remains challenging with current surgical interventions. Antibody-drug...
Urothelial carcinoma (UC) is a refractory disease for which achieving satisfactory outcomes remains challenging with current surgical interventions. Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are a novel class of targeted therapeutics that have demonstrated encouraging results for UC. Although there is a limited number of high-quality randomized control trials (RCTs) examining the use of ADCs in patients with UC, some prospective non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) provide valuable insights and pertinent information. We aim to assess the efficacy and safety of ADCs in patients with UC, particularly those with locally advanced and metastatic diseases. A systematic search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases to identify pertinent studies. Outcomes, such as the overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events (AEs), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), were extracted for further analyses. Twelve studies involving 1,311 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of tumor responses, the pooled ORR and DCR were 40% and 74%, respectively. Regarding survival analysis, the pooled median PFS and OS were 5.66 months and 12.63 months, respectively. The pooled 6-month PFS and OS were 47% and 80%, while the pooled 1-year PFS and OS were 22% and 55%, respectively. The most common TRAEs of the ADCs were alopecia (all grades: 45%, grades ≥ III: 0%), decreased appetite (all grades: 34%, grades ≥ III: 3%), dysgeusia (all grades: 40%, grades ≥ III: 0%), fatigue (all grades: 39%, grades ≥ III: 5%), nausea (all grades: 45%, grades ≥ III: 2%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (all grades: 37%, grades ≥ III: 2%), and pruritus (all grades: 32%, grades ≥ III: 1%). The meta-analysis in this study demonstrates that ADCs have promising efficacies and safety for patients with advanced or metastatic UC. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42023460232.
PubMed: 38933670
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1377924 -
PeerJ 2024To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Brolucizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Brolucizumab for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (n-AMD) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched for relevant studies. Stata and RevMan5.4 were applied for meta-analysis and risk of bias assessment. Data on the best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central subfield thickness (CSFT), presence of intraretinal fluid (IRF) and/or subretinal fluid (SRF), participants with ≥1 serious adverse events, and participants with ≥1 adverse events were analyzed.
RESULTS
Six studies were finally included. Meta-analysis showed statistical differences in BCVA [SMD = -0.65, 95% CI [-0.17 to -0.23], < 0.05], the presence of IRF and/or SRF [RR = 0.67, 95% CI [0.56-0.79], < 0.05], and the safety of participants with ≥1 serious adverse events [RR = 0.57, 95% CI [0.39-0.84], < 0.05] between the experimental group and the control group. However, no statistical differences were observed in CSFT [SMD = -1.16, 95% CI [-2.79 to 0.47], > 0.05] or the safety of participants with ≥1 adverse events [RR = 1.07, 95% CI [0.97-1.17], > 0.05].
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to other anti-VEGF drugs such as Aflibercept and Ranibizumab, intravitreal injection of 6 mg Brolucizumab is more effective and safer for n-AMD, especially in the presence of IRF and/or SRF, and for participants with ≥1 serious adverse events.
Topics: Humans; Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Intravitreal Injections; Macular Degeneration; Treatment Outcome; Visual Acuity; Wet Macular Degeneration
PubMed: 38915383
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.17561 -
Clinical Epigenetics Jun 2024Gastrointestinal malignancies encompass a diverse group of cancers that pose significant challenges to global health. The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) plays a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Gastrointestinal malignancies encompass a diverse group of cancers that pose significant challenges to global health. The major histocompatibility complex (MHC) plays a pivotal role in immune surveillance, orchestrating the recognition and elimination of tumor cells by the immune system. However, the intricate regulation of MHC gene expression is susceptible to dynamic epigenetic modification, which can influence functionality and pathological outcomes.
MAIN BODY
By understanding the epigenetic alterations that drive MHC downregulation, insights are gained into the molecular mechanisms underlying immune escape, tumor progression, and immunotherapy resistance. This systematic review examines the current literature on epigenetic mechanisms that contribute to MHC deregulation in esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, hepatic and colorectal malignancies. Potential clinical implications are discussed of targeting aberrant epigenetic modifications to restore MHC expression and 0 the effectiveness of immunotherapeutic interventions.
CONCLUSION
The integration of epigenetic-targeted therapies with immunotherapies holds great potential for improving clinical outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies and represents a compelling avenue for future research and therapeutic development.
Topics: Humans; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Epigenesis, Genetic; Major Histocompatibility Complex; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic; Immunotherapy; DNA Methylation; Tumor Escape
PubMed: 38915093
DOI: 10.1186/s13148-024-01698-8 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2024In 2019, 80% of the 7.4 million global child deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Global and regional estimates of cause of hospital death and...
In 2019, 80% of the 7.4 million global child deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Global and regional estimates of cause of hospital death and admission in LMIC children are needed to guide global and local priority setting and resource allocation but are currently lacking. The study objective was to estimate global and regional prevalence for common causes of pediatric hospital mortality and admission in LMICs. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify LMIC observational studies published January 1, 2005-February 26, 2021. Eligible studies included: a general pediatric admission population, a cause of admission or death, and total admissions. We excluded studies with data before 2,000 or without a full text. Two authors independently screened and extracted data. We performed methodological assessment using domains adapted from the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Data were pooled using random-effects models where possible. We reported prevalence as a proportion of cause of death or admission per 1,000 admissions with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Our search identified 29,637 texts. After duplicate removal and screening, we analyzed 253 studies representing 21.8 million pediatric hospitalizations in 59 LMICs. All-cause pediatric hospital mortality was 4.1% [95% CI 3.4%-4.7%]. The most common causes of mortality (deaths/1,000 admissions) were infectious [12 (95% CI 9-14)]; respiratory [9 (95% CI 5-13)]; and gastrointestinal [9 (95% CI 6-11)]. Common causes of admission (cases/1,000 admissions) were respiratory [255 (95% CI 231-280)]; infectious [214 (95% CI 193-234)]; and gastrointestinal [166 (95% CI 143-190)]. We observed regional variation in estimates. Pediatric hospital mortality remains high in LMICs. Global child health efforts must include measures to reduce hospital mortality including basic emergency and critical care services tailored to the local disease burden. Resources are urgently needed to promote equity in child health research, support researchers, and collect high-quality data in LMICs to further guide priority setting and resource allocation.
PubMed: 38910960
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2024.1397232 -
BMJ Open Ophthalmology Jun 2024Graves' ophthalmopathy is a complex autoimmune disorder that can significantly affect quality of life (QoL), vision and physical appearance. Recently, a deeper...
BACKGROUND
Graves' ophthalmopathy is a complex autoimmune disorder that can significantly affect quality of life (QoL), vision and physical appearance. Recently, a deeper understanding of the underlying pathogenesis has led to the development of novel treatment options.
AIMS
The purpose of this review is to explore the current literature on conventional and novel treatment modalities and to evaluate which interventions provide the most favourable psychological and clinical outcomes in patients with moderate to severe, active Grave's ophthalmopathy. For example, QoL is an important psychosocial outcome of disease management. However, available literature demonstrates that not all clinically effective treatment options improve patients' QoL.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted to assess the clinical and psychosocial outcomes of different therapies for Graves' ophthalmopathy. An extensive database search of Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. Studies generated were reviewed and the relevant selected data were retrieved and analysed.
RESULTS
Results showed intravenous steroids, rituximab (RTX), tocilizumab and teprotumumab were all significantly effective in improving Clinical Activity Scores. Orbital radiotherapy showed a slight improvement in proptosis and diplopia. All interventions were safe with few serious adverse events being reported across all studies. All treatment modalities demonstrated beneficial improvements in both components of the Graves' Ophthalmopathy-QoL (QoL) questionnaire, apart from orbital radiotherapy which only demonstrated improvements in the visual functioning subscale. Teprotumumab was identified to be the most effective intervention for improving both clinical and psychosocial outcomes. However, further research needs to be conducted to evaluate its side effect profile and cost-effectiveness. Nonetheless, with time it has the potential to be a first-line treatment option in the management of active moderate to severe Graves' ophthalmopathy.
Topics: Humans; Graves Ophthalmopathy; Quality of Life; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Rituximab; Immunologic Factors; Glucocorticoids
PubMed: 38886120
DOI: 10.1136/bmjophth-2023-001515 -
Medicine International 2024The present systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of anti-EGFR therapy in combination with radiotherapy (RT) or with chemoradiation compared with the existing...
The present systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of anti-EGFR therapy in combination with radiotherapy (RT) or with chemoradiation compared with the existing standard of care for the treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (LAHNSCC). The PubMed, SCOPUS, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched and 12 phase III randomized controlled trials were included. The effectiveness of the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab was evaluated in nine trials. Nimotuzumab (one trial), zalutumumab (one trial) and panitumumab (one trial) were the monoclonal antibodies evaluated in the remaining three trials. One study tested the effectiveness of adding cetuximab to radical RT and found that patients with LAHNSCC exhibited improvement in locoregional control (LRC), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with those of patients treated with RT alone. A total of three studies tested the effectiveness of adding an anti-EGFR agent to chemoradiation. Of these, a single institution study in which patients received cisplatin at 30 mg/m weekly, instead of the standard doses of 100 mg/m every 3 weeks or 40 mg/m every week, reported significant improvement in PFS with the addition of nimotuzumab to chemoradiotherapy without an improvement in overall survival. However, the other two studies indicated that, when added to standard chemoradiation, the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies cetuximab or zalutumumab did not improve survival outcomes. Two phase III trials evaluated RT plus an anti-EGFR agent compared with chemoradiation alone. Of these, one study reported inferior outcomes with cetuximab-RT in terms of OS and LRC, whereas the other study with panitumumab plus RT failed to prove the non-inferiority. Two trials evaluated induction chemotherapy followed by cetuximab-RT compared with chemoradiotherapy and reported no benefits in terms of OS or PFS. Furthermore, one study evaluated induction chemotherapy followed by cetuximab-RT compared with induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy and found no improvement in OS or PFS. Finally, three phase III trials tested the effectiveness of cetuximab plus RT in the treatment of human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal carcinoma, and found it to be inferior compared with cisplatin-RT in terms of OS, PFS and failure-free survival. Based on the aforementioned findings, it is difficult to conclude that anti-EGFR therapy in any form has an advantage over conventional chemoradiation in the treatment of LAHNSCC.
PubMed: 38873325
DOI: 10.3892/mi.2024.165 -
Brain and Behavior Jun 2024The US Food and Drug Administration authorized lecanemab for the therapeutic use of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in January 2023. To assess the effectiveness and safety of...
PURPOSE
The US Food and Drug Administration authorized lecanemab for the therapeutic use of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in January 2023. To assess the effectiveness and safety of lecanemab in treating AD, we thoroughly examined the studies that are currently accessible.
METHOD
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis recommendations were followed. In order to find relevant studies on lecanemab, we carried out a thorough literature search utilizing the electronic databases MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, EBSCOhost, and Scopus. Excluding any research using experimental animals, we looked at lecanemab's effectiveness and side effects in treating AD in human clinical trials. Three randomized controlled studies were included.
FINDINGS
According to studies, lecanemab lessens clinical deterioration and reduces brain amyloid-beta plaques (difference,.45; 95% confidence interval,.67 to.23; p < .001). Participants who received lecanemab saw a greater frequency of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities (ARIA)-H (17.3% vs. 9.0%) and ARIA-E (12.6% vs. 1.7%), which is a significant adverse outcome.
CONCLUSION
Lecanemab has been shown to have an impact on the two primary pathophysiologic indicators of AD (Aβ and tau). There are still a lot of unresolved issues related to lecanemab. Future research on the effectiveness and safety of lecanemab is advised in order to determine that the advantages of this medication exceed the disadvantages.
Topics: Humans; Alzheimer Disease; Amyloid beta-Peptides; Brain; Plaque, Amyloid; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
PubMed: 38867460
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.3592 -
New Microbes and New Infections 2024While mortality caused by sepsis remains an unsolved problem, studies showed conflicting results about effectiveness of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in patients... (Review)
Review
While mortality caused by sepsis remains an unsolved problem, studies showed conflicting results about effectiveness of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies in patients suffering sepsis. For this reason, this current study provides an update of review clinical randomized trial studies until March 2024. The main object of this study is to determine effects of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies on mortality rate and hospitalization of patients suffering sepsis. Search of Scopus, Web of science, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane were performed and randomized controlled trials which conducted in patients with septic shock or bacterial sepsis were included. Two reviewers assessed all searched trials for eligibility according to already defined criteria and did data collection and analyses afterwards. Present study showed monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies are a safe strategy with mild-to-moderate adverse effects. However, most studies indicate no significant change among inter-and intra-group comparison (p > 0.05) and further studies are needed, results showed an increase in survival rate, ventilator-and ICU-free days, resolve organ dysfunction, mediating inflammation related cytokines.
PubMed: 38860003
DOI: 10.1016/j.nmni.2024.101435 -
BMC Cancer Jun 2024Novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) drugs present a promising anti-cancer treatment, although survival benefits for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (BC) remain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Novel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) drugs present a promising anti-cancer treatment, although survival benefits for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (BC) remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the comparative effect of ADCs and other anti-HER2 therapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for treatment of HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC.
METHODS
Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from five databases. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCTs by RevMan5.4 software. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted to evaluate the benefit of ADCs on PFS and OS in HER2-positive advanced BC by meta-analysis.
RESULTS
Meta-analysis of six RCTs with 3870 patients revealed that ADCs significantly improved PFS (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.49-0.80, P = 0.0002) and OS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.86, P < 0.0001) of patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC. Subgroup analysis showed that PFS and OS were obviously prolonged for patients who previously received HER2-targeted therapy. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias suggested that the results were stable and reliable.
CONCLUSION
Statistically significant benefits for PFS and OS were observed with ADCs in HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC, especially for those who received prior anti-HER2 treatment.
Topics: Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Receptor, ErbB-2; Female; Immunoconjugates; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Progression-Free Survival; Treatment Outcome; Trastuzumab; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological
PubMed: 38851684
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-12478-1 -
BMJ Open Jun 2024The aim of this study was to assess the clinical benefit value of approved antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) for solid tumours using the European Society for Medical...
Application of the ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale to assess the clinical benefit of antibody drug conjugates in solid cancer: a systematic descriptive analysis of phase III and pivotal phase II trials.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the clinical benefit value of approved antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) for solid tumours using the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) V.1.1.
DESIGN
Systematic descriptive analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed was searched for publications from 1 January 2000 to 18 October 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included the phase III randomised controlled trials or phase II pivotal trials leading to approval of ADCs in solid tumours.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two independent reviewers extracted data and discrepancies were resolved by consensus in the presence of a third investigator.
RESULTS
ESMO-MCBS Scores were calculated for 16 positive clinical trials of eight ADCs, which were first approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the China National Medical Products Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency for solid cancers. Among 16 trials, 4 (25%) met the ESMO-MCBS benefit threshold grade, while 12 (75%) of the regimens did not meet the ESMO-MCBS benefit threshold grade. 5 (31%) of the 16 trials had no published scorecard on the ESMO website due to the approval by other jurisdictions but not by the FDA or EMA. Discrepancies between our results and the ESMO scorecard were observed in 4 (36%) of 11 trials, mostly owing to integration of more recent data.
CONCLUSIONS
ESMO-MCBS is an important tool for assessing the clinical benefit of cancer drugs, but not all drugs met the meaningful benefit threshold.
Topics: Humans; Neoplasms; Immunoconjugates; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Antineoplastic Agents; United States; Drug Approval
PubMed: 38851227
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077108