-
Cancers Oct 2023Poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) are an important class of therapeutics for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Unlike hormone-based... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Poly ADP-ribose polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) are an important class of therapeutics for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Unlike hormone-based treatments for mCRPC, PARPis are not without drug-related hematological adverse events.
OBJECTIVE
To review the evidence on hematological toxicities, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia from PARPis in prostate cancer.
STUDY METHODOLOGY
A systematic review and meta-analysis using the PRISMA guidelines was performed for phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of PARPis in prostate cancer. PubMed, Embase, and Ovid All EBM reviews-Cochrane were queried from inception to 9 June 2023. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to report risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all-grade and high-grade anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia toxicities.
RESULTS
The systematic review retrieved eight phase II and III RCTs; specifically, eight were included in the anemia, five in the all-grade thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, and four in the high-grade thrombocytopenia and neutropenia outcomes. Compared to a placebo and/or other non-PARPi treatments, PARPi use was associated with an increased risk of all-grade anemia (RR, 3.37; 95% CI, 2.37-4.79; < 0.00001), thrombocytopenia (RR, 4.54; 95% CI, 1.97-10.44; = 0.0004), and neutropenia (RR, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.60-6.03; = 0.0008). High-grade anemia (RR, 6.94; 95% CI, 4.06-11.86; < 0.00001) and thrombocytopenia (RR, 5.52; 95% CI, 2.80-10.88; < 0.00001) were also associated with an increased risk, while high-grade neutropenia (RR, 3.63; 95% CI, 0.77-17.23; = 0.10) showed no significant association. Subgroup stratification analyses showed differences in various all-grade and high-grade toxicities.
CONCLUSION
PARPis were associated with an increased risk of hematological AEs. Future studies with more pooled RCTs will enhance this understanding and continue to inform patient-physician shared decision-making. Future studies may also have a role in improving the current management strategies for these AEs.
PubMed: 37835597
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15194904 -
European Urology Oncology Jun 2024Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Poly (ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors Have Comparable Efficacy with Platinum Chemotherapy in Patients with BRCA-positive Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
CONTEXT
Testing for mutations in Breast Cancer Gene 1/2 (BRCA) has emerged as a novel decision-making tool for clinicians. Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) harboring pathogenic BRCA mutations can benefit from poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) and platinum treatments, whereas the impact of the mutation on sensitivity to cabazitaxel and prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-ligand therapy is currently unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy of PARPi, platinum, cabazitaxel, and PSMA-ligand therapies in BRCA-positive mCRPC.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Databases were queried in February 2022. We performed data synthesis by using both proportional and individual patient data. For prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rate (≥50% decrease from baseline [PSA50]) evaluation, we pooled event rates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival analyses with individual patient data were performed with the mixed-effect Cox proportional hazard model and single-arm random-effect analysis, providing pooled medians.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We included 23 eligible studies with 901 BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. PSA50 response rates for PARPi and platinum were 69% (CI: 53-82%), and 74% (CI: 49-90%), respectively. Analyses of OS data showed no difference between PARPi and platinum treatments (hazard ratio: 0.86; CI: 0.49-1.52; p = 0.6). The single-arm OS and PFS analyses revealed similarities among different PARPis; pooled PFS and OS medians were 9.7 mo (CI: 8.1-12.5) and 17.4 mo (CI: 12.7-20.1), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Our data revealed that different PARPis were similarly effective in terms of PFS and OS. Moreover, we found that PARPi and platinum therapy were comparable in terms of PSA50 response rate and OS, highlighting that platinum is a valid treatment option for BRCA-positive mCRPC patients. However, prospective interventional studies comparing these agents are essential to provide a higher level of evidence.
PATIENT SUMMARY
In this report, we found that different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors had similar efficacy, and platinum was a valid treatment option in BRCA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.
Topics: Humans; Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Male; Treatment Outcome; BRCA2 Protein; Antineoplastic Agents; Neoplasm Metastasis; BRCA1 Protein
PubMed: 37722977
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.09.001 -
BMC Cancer Jan 2023To analyze the incidence and risk of hypertension associated with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in cancer patients and provide... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To analyze the incidence and risk of hypertension associated with poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in cancer patients and provide reference for clinicians.
METHODS
We used R software to conduct a meta-analysis of phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCT) on PARP inhibitors for cancer treatment published in PubMed, Embase, Clinical Trials, Cochrane Library and Web of Science from inception to July 29th, 2022.
RESULTS
We included 32 RCTs with 10,654 participants for this meta-analysis. For total PARP inhibitors, the incidence and risk ratio of all-grade hypertension were 12% and 1.22 (95% CI: 0.91-1.65, P = 0.19, I = 81%), and the incidence and risk ratio of grade 3-4 hypertension were 4% and 1.24 (95% CI: 0.74-2.08, P = 0.42, I = 68%). Compared with the control group, the niraparib group, olaparib 800 mg/day group, and olaparib plus cediranib group increased the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension, while the veliparib group and rucaparib group did not increase the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension, and olaparib 200 mg-600 mg/day group (exclude olaparib plus cediranib regime) reduced the risk of any grade and grade 3-4 hypertension.
CONCLUSION
Olaparib 200-600 mg/day (excluding olaparib plus cediranib regimen) may be the most suitable PARP inhibitor for cancer patients with high risk of hypertension, followed by veliparib and rucaparib. Niraparib, olaparib 800 mg/day and olaparib combined with cediranib may increase the risk of developing hypertension in cancer patients, clinicians should strengthen the monitoring of blood pressure in cancer patients and give medication in severe cases.
Topics: Humans; Antineoplastic Agents; Hypertension; Incidence; Phthalazines; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Neoplasms
PubMed: 36717798
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-10571-5 -
PloS One 2022Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) have become a mainstay for the treatment of BRCA-mutant malignancies. PARPis are likely to be more effective but also...
OBJECTIVES
Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) have become a mainstay for the treatment of BRCA-mutant malignancies. PARPis are likely to be more effective but also bring an increase in costs. Thus, we aimed at evaluating the cost effectiveness of PARPis in the treatment of malignancies.
METHODS
Studies of cost effectiveness of PARPis were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Key information was extracted from the identified studies and reviewed. Quality of the included studies was evaluated using Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Modeling techniques, measurement of parameters and uncertainty analysis were analyzed across studies. Interventions and cost-effectiveness results were reported stratified by patient population.
RESULTS
Among the 25 studies identified, we included 17 on ovarian cancer, 2 on breast cancer, 3 on pancreatic cancer, and 3 on prostate cancer that involved olaparib, niraparib, rucaparib, and talazoparib. All studies had a QHES score of above 75. In the maintenance therapy of ovarian cancer, additional administration of olaparib was cost-effective for newly diagnosed patients after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy but was not cost-effective for platinum-sensitive recurrent patients in majority studies. However, the economic value of other PARPis in ovarian cancer as well as all PARPis in other tumors remained controversial. Cost-effectiveness of PARPi was primarily impacted by the costs of PARPi, survival time, health utility and discount rate. Moreover, genetic testing improved the cost-effectiveness of PARPi treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
PARPi is potentially cost-effective for patients with ovarian, pancreatic, or prostate cancer. Genetic testing can improve the cost-effectiveness of PARPi.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Ovarian Neoplasms; Antineoplastic Agents; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 36520958
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279286 -
Cell Death & Disease Oct 2022PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treatment with outstanding benefits in regard to...
PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) treatment with outstanding benefits in regard to progression-free survival, especially in patients either carrying BRCA1/2 mutations or harboring defects in the homologous recombination repair system. Yet, it remains uncertain which PARPi to apply and how to predict responders when platinum sensitivity is unknown. To shed light on the predictive power of genes previously suggested to be associated with PARPi response, we systematically reviewed the literature and identified 79 publications investigating a total of 93 genes. The top candidate genes were further tested using a comprehensive CRISPR-Cas9 mutagenesis screening in combination with olaparib treatment. Therefore, we generated six constitutive Cas9 EOC cell lines and profiled 33 genes in a CRISPR-Cas9 cell competition assay using non-essential (AAVS1) and essential (RPA3 and PCNA) genes for cell fitness as negative and positive controls, respectively. We identified only ATM, MUS81, NBN, BRCA2, and RAD51B as predictive markers for olaparib response. As the major survival benefit of PARPi treatment was reported in platinum-sensitive tumors, we next assessed nine top candidate genes in combination with three PARPi and carboplatin. Interestingly, we observed similar dropout rates in a gene and compound independent manner, supporting the strong correlation of cancer cell response to compounds that rely on DNA repair for their effectiveness. In addition, we report on CDK12 as a common vulnerability for EOC cell survival and proliferation without altering the olaparib response, highlighting its potential as a therapeutic target in EOC.
Topics: Humans; Female; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Carboplatin; CRISPR-Cas Systems; Early Detection of Cancer; Phthalazines; Ovarian Neoplasms; Genes, Overlapping
PubMed: 36307400
DOI: 10.1038/s41419-022-05347-x -
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt... 2022Evidence shows that gene mutation is a significant proportion of genetic factors associated with prostate cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a signal cascade...
OBJECTIVE
Evidence shows that gene mutation is a significant proportion of genetic factors associated with prostate cancer. The DNA damage response (DDR) is a signal cascade network that aims to maintain genomic integrity in cells. This comprehensive study was performed to determine the link between different DNA damage response gene mutations and prostate cancer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Papers published up to February 1, 2022 were retrieved. The DDR gene mutations associated with prostate cancer were identified by referring to relevant research and review articles. Data of prostate cancer patients from multiple PCa cohorts were obtained from cBioPortal. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated using both fixed-effects models (FEMs) and random-effects models (REMs).
RESULTS
Seventy-four studies were included in this research, and the frequency of 13 DDR genes was examined. Through the analysis of 33 articles that focused on the risk estimates of DDR genes between normal people and PCa patients, DDR genes were found to be more common in prostate cancer patients (OR = 3.6293 95% CI [2.4992; 5.2705]). Also, patients in the mutated group had a worse OS and DFS outcome than those in the unmutated group ( < .05). Of the 13 DDR genes, the frequency of 9 DDR genes in prostate cancer was less than 1%, and despite differences in race, was the potential gene with the highest frequency (REM Frequency = .0400, 95% CI .0324 - .0541). The findings suggest that mutations in genes such as and in PCa patients may increase the sensitivity of Olaparib, a PARP inhibitor.
CONCLUSION
These results demonstrate that mutation in any DDR pathway results in a poor prognosis for PCa patients. Furthermore, mutations in and or the expression of and other genes significantly influence Olaparib sensitivity, which may be underlying therapeutic targets in the future.
Topics: Humans; Male; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Mutation; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Prognosis; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 36283420
DOI: 10.1177/10732748221129451 -
Cancer Treatment Reviews Dec 2022Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) is a poor prognostic disease with limited treatments and uncertain therapeutic algorithms. We performed a systematic... (Review)
Review
Metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) is a poor prognostic disease with limited treatments and uncertain therapeutic algorithms. We performed a systematic review and multiple Bayesian network meta-analyses according to treatment line to establish an optimal therapeutic sequencing strategy for this lethal disease. We included 125 first-line trials (37,812 patients) and 33 s/further-lines trials (11,321 patients). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall response rates (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety, for first and further lines, separately. We also estimated separate treatment rankings for the first and subsequent lines according to each endpoint, based on (surface under the cumulative ranking curve) SUCRA values. No first-line treatment was associated with superior PFS and OS than paclitaxel ± bevacizumab. Platinum-based polychemotherapies were generally superior in terms of ORR, at the cost of higher toxicity.. PARP-inhibitors in germline-BRCA1/2-mutant patients, and immunotherapy + chemotherapy in PD-L1-positive mTNBC, performed similar to paclitaxel ± bevacizumab. In PD-L1-positive mTNBC, pembrolizumab + chemotherapy was better than atezolizumab + nab-paclitaxel in terms of OS according to SUCRA values. In second/further-lines, sacituzumab govitecan outperformed all other treatments on all endpoints, followed by PARP-inhibitors in germline-BRCA1/2-mutant tumors. Trastuzumab deruxtecan in HER2-low mTNBC performed similarly and was the best advanced-line treatment in terms of PFS and OS after sacituzumab govitecan, according to SUCRA values. Moreover, comparisons with sacituzumab govitecan, talazoparib and olaparib were not statistically significant. The most effective alternatives or candidates for subsequent lines were represented by nab-paclitaxel (in ORR), capecitabine (in PFS) and eribulin (in PFS and OS).
Topics: Humans; Triple Negative Breast Neoplasms; Bevacizumab; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Network Meta-Analysis; B7-H1 Antigen; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bayes Theorem; Paclitaxel; Algorithms
PubMed: 36202026
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2022.102468 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2022Meta-analysis of safety of Olaparib in the treatment of different indications. The databases of PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were...
Meta-analysis of safety of Olaparib in the treatment of different indications. The databases of PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched by computer to collect the research on the indications and the incidence of adverse reactions caused by Olaparib for different cancer types. The search time was from the establishment of the database to May 2022. After two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted the data and evaluated the bias risk included in the study, we used RevMan 5.4 software for meta-analysis. A total of 14 studies were included, with a total sample size of 5119 cases. By meta-analysis, the adverse reactions of Olaparib in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, breast cancer and ovarian cancer were compared. In adverse reactions of any grade, the results showed that fatigue (RR = 1.58, 95% CI [1.20-2.07], = 0.001) was the most serious in the treatment of pancreatic cancer with Olaparib. Anemia (RR = 2.94, 95% CI [1.97-4.39], < 0.00001), neutropenia (RR = 1.37, 95% CI [0.80-2.33], = 0.25), nausea (RR = 1.93, 95% CI [1.61-2.32], < 0.00001) and vomiting (RR = 1.96, 95% CI [1.59-2.41], < 0.00001) were the most severe in ovarian cancer. In adverse reactions of grade 3 or above, fatigue (RR = 3.44, 95% CI [1.48-7.98], = 0.004) and vomiting (RR = 1.09, 95% CI [0.42-2.81], = 0.86) were the most serious adverse reactions in the treatment of breast cancer with Olaparib. Anemia (RR = 9.74, 95% CI [2.75-34.47], = 0.0004), neutropenia (RR = 1.33, 95% CI [0.87-2.02], = 0.19) and nausea (RR = 2.94, 95% CI [1.18-7.32], = 0.02) were the most severe in ovarian cancer. In addition, the incidence of decreased white blood cell count and hepatotoxicity in the treatment of breast cancer, and the incidence of decreased platelet count, constipation and abdominal pain in the treatment of ovarian cancer were higher than those in pancreatic cancer. Current evidence showed that the risk of adverse reactions of Olaparib in the treatment of different indications is different, and specific analysis and treatment should be carried out for different cancer types. Due to the limitation of the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions need to be verified by more high-quality studies.
PubMed: 35910367
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2022.968163 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jul 2022Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Some patients affected by ovarian cancers often present genome instability with one or... (Review)
Review
Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy in the United States. Some patients affected by ovarian cancers often present genome instability with one or more of the defects in DNA repair pathways, particularly in homologous recombination (HR), which is strictly linked to mutations in breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 (BRCA 1) or breast cancer susceptibility gene 2 (BRCA 2). The treatment of ovarian cancer remains a challenge, and the majority of patients with advanced-stage ovarian cancers experience relapse and require additional treatment despite initial therapy, including optimal cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and platinum-based chemotherapy. Targeted therapy at DNA repair genes has become a unique strategy to combat homologous recombination-deficient (HRD) cancers in recent years. Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), a family of proteins, plays an important role in DNA damage repair, genome stability, and apoptosis of cancer cells, especially in HRD cancers. PARP inhibitors (PARPi) have been reported to be highly effective and low-toxicity drugs that will tremendously benefit patients with HRD (i.e., BRCA 1/2 mutated) epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) by blocking the DNA repair pathways and inducing apoptosis of cancer cells. PARP inhibitors compete with NAD at the catalytic domain (CAT) of PARP to block PARP catalytic activity and the formation of PAR polymers. These effects compromise the cellular ability to overcome DNA SSB damage. The process of HR, an essential error-free pathway to repair DNA DSBs during cell replication, will be blocked in the condition of BRCA 1/2 mutations. The PARP-associated HR pathway can also be partially interrupted by using PARP inhibitors. Grossly, PARP inhibitors have demonstrated some therapeutic benefits in many randomized phase II and III trials when combined with the standard CRS for advanced EOCs. However, similar to other chemotherapy agents, PARP inhibitors have different clinical indications and toxicity profiles and also face drug resistance, which has become a major challenge. In high-grade epithelial ovarian cancers, the cancer cells under hypoxia- or drug-induced stress have the capacity to become polyploidy giant cancer cells (PGCCs), which can survive the attack of chemotherapeutic agents and start endoreplication. These stem-like, self-renewing PGCCs generate mutations to alter the expression/function of kinases, p53, and stem cell markers, and diploid daughter cells can exhibit drug resistance and facilitate tumor growth and metastasis. In this review, we discuss the underlying molecular mechanisms of PARP inhibitors and the results from the clinical studies that investigated the effects of the FDA-approved PARP inhibitors olaparib, rucaparib, and niraparib. We also review the current research progress on PARP inhibitors, their safety, and their combined usage with antiangiogenic agents. Nevertheless, many unknown aspects of PARP inhibitors, including detailed mechanisms of actions, along with the effectiveness and safety of the treatment of EOCs, warrant further investigation.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Female; Genes, BRCA2; Humans; Ovarian Neoplasms; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35897700
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158125 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with ovarian cancer through a network...
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of different poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in patients with ovarian cancer through a network meta-analysis to support clinical treatment choices.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, Chongqing VIP (CQVIP), and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM) were searched with a cutoff date of 14 January 2021. ClinicalTrials.gov was also checked for supplementary data. Phase II or III randomized controlled trials that compared a PARP inhibitor with a placebo in patients with relapsed or newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer were included. The hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival and overall survival and odds ratios (ORs) for grade 3 or higher adverse events were analyzed. The network meta-analysis was conducted in a Bayesian framework based on the Markov Chain Monte Carlo model in the R gemtc package (version 4.0.3).
RESULTS
Eight eligible articles reporting six trials with a total of 2,801 patients were incorporated in this network meta-analysis. Three trials compared olaparib with placebo. Two trials compared niraparib with placebo. One trial compared rucaparib with placebo. The network meta-analysis failed to show significant differences in progression-free survival among the three PARP inhibitors: HR of 0.64, 95% confidence interval of 0.3 to 1.42 for olaparib versus niraparib, and olaparib versus rucaparib (0.86; 0.33 to 2.33). The comparison between niraparib and rucaparib also did not express a statistical difference (1.34; 0.47 to 3.72). Subgroup analysis bybreast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) status showed no obvious difference in progression-free survival among the three PARP inhibitors regardless of BRCA mutation status. Olaparib had fewer grade 3 or higher adverse events than niraparib (OR, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.13 to 0.55) and rucaparib (0.34; 0.14 to 0.86). However, the analysis failed to show a significant difference between niraparib and rucaparib (1.27; 0.49 to 3.27).
CONCLUSION
Current evidence indicates that there is no significant difference observed in efficacy among olaparib, niraparib, and rucaparib. However, olaparib might have fewer grade 3 or higher adverse events.
PubMed: 35756600
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.815265