-
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 -
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 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2017Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Since the mid-2000s, the field of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has experienced a paradigm shift from non-specific therapy with broad-acting cytokines to specific regimens, which directly target the cancer, the tumour microenvironment, or both.Current guidelines recommend targeted therapies with agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib or temsirolimus (for people with poor prognosis) as the standard of care for first-line treatment of people with mRCC and mention non-specific cytokines as an alternative option for selected patients.In November 2015, nivolumab, a checkpoint inhibitor directed against programmed death-1 (PD-1), was approved as the first specific immunotherapeutic agent as second-line therapy in previously treated mRCC patients.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of immunotherapies either alone or in combination with standard targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and their efficacy to maximize patient benefit.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), ISI Web of Science and registers of ongoing clinical trials in November 2016 without language restrictions. We scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs with or without blinding involving people with mRCC.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We collected and analyzed studies according to the published protocol. Summary statistics for the primary endpoints were risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We rated the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology and summarized the quality and magnitude of relative and absolute effects for each primary outcome in our 'Summary of findings' tables.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified eight studies with 4732 eligible participants and an additional 13 ongoing studies. We categorized studies into comparisons, all against standard therapy accordingly as first-line (five comparisons) or second-line therapy (one comparison) for mRCC.Interferon (IFN)-α monotherapy probably increases one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapies with temsirolimus or sunitinib (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.51; 2 studies; 1166 participants; moderate-quality evidence), may lead to similar quality of life (QoL) (e.g. MD -5.58 points, 95% CI -7.25 to -3.91 for Functional Assessment of Cancer - General (FACT-G); 1 study; 730 participants; low-quality evidence) and may slightly increase the incidence of adverse events (AEs) grade 3 or greater (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.32; 1 study; 408 participants; low-quality evidence).There is probably no difference between IFN-α plus temsirolimus and temsirolimus alone for one-year overall mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.34; 1 study; 419 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but the incidence of AEs of 3 or greater may be increased (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.45; 1 study; 416 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no information on QoL.IFN-α alone may slightly increase one-year overall mortality compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.36; 2 studies; 1381 participants; low-quality evidence). This effect is probably accompanied by a lower incidence of AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.84; 2 studies; 1350 participants; moderate-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with IFN-α plus bevacizumab or standard targeted therapy (sunitinib) may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.08; 1 study; 83 participants; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.62; 1 study; 82 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.Treatment with vaccines (e.g. MVA-5T4 or IMA901) or standard therapy may lead to similar one-year overall mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.32; low-quality evidence) and AEs of grade 3 or greater (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.39; 2 studies; 1065 participants; low-quality evidence). QoL could not be evaluated due to insufficient data.In previously treated patients, targeted immunotherapy (nivolumab) probably reduces one-year overall mortality compared to standard targeted therapy with everolimus (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.87; 1 study; 821 participants; moderate-quality evidence), probably improves QoL (e.g. RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.78 for clinically relevant improvement of the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index Disease Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS); 1 study, 704 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and probably reduces the incidence of AEs grade 3 or greater (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.65; 1 study; 803 participants; moderate-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence of moderate quality demonstrates that IFN-α monotherapy increases mortality compared to standard targeted therapies alone, whereas there is no difference if IFN is combined with standard targeted therapies. Evidence of low quality demonstrates that QoL is worse with IFN alone and that severe AEs are increased with IFN alone or in combination. There is low-quality evidence that IFN-α alone increases mortality but moderate-quality evidence on decreased AEs compared to IFN-α plus bevacizumab. Low-quality evidence shows no difference for IFN-α plus bevacizumab compared to sunitinib with respect to mortality and severe AEs. Low-quality evidence demonstrates no difference of vaccine treatment compared to standard targeted therapies in mortality and AEs, whereas there is moderate-quality evidence that targeted immunotherapies reduce mortality and AEs and improve QoL.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Bevacizumab; Cancer Vaccines; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunotherapy; Indoles; Interferon-alpha; Kidney Neoplasms; Longevity; Pyrroles; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sirolimus; Sunitinib
PubMed: 28504837
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011673.pub2 -
Cancer Research and Treatment Oct 2017Despite advancements in therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers, their prognosis remains dismal. Tumor angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer... (Review)
Review
Despite advancements in therapy for advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers, their prognosis remains dismal. Tumor angiogenesis plays a key role in cancer growth and metastasis, and recent studies indicate that pharmacologic blockade of angiogenesis is a promising approach to therapy. In this systematic review, we summarize current literature on the clinical benefit of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric cancer. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and conference proceedings including the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the European Society for Medical Oncology, and the European Cancer Congress. Included studies aimed to prospectively evaluate the efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Each trial investigated at least one of the following endpoints: overall survival, progression-free survival/time to progression, and/or objective response rate. Our search yielded 139 publications. Forty-two met the predefined inclusion criteria. Included studies reported outcomes with apatinib, axitinib, bevacizumab, orantinib, pazopanib, ramucirumab, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, telatinib, and vandetanib. Second-line therapy with ramucirumab and third-line therapy with apatinib are the only anti-angiogenic agents so far shown to significantly improve survival of patients with advanced gastric cancer. Overall, agents that specifically target the vascular endothelial growth factor ligand or receptor have better safety profile compared to multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Biomarkers; Clinical Trials as Topic; Esophageal Neoplasms; Esophagogastric Junction; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Quality of Life; Receptor, ErbB-2; Stomach Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A
PubMed: 28052652
DOI: 10.4143/crt.2016.176 -
Sarcoma 2016This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies.... (Review)
Review
This systematic literature review describes adverse events (AEs) among patients with soft tissue sarcoma (STS) who received second-line or later anticancer therapies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies of adults with advanced or metastatic STS who received systemic anticancer therapy before enrollment in a randomized-controlled trial of pazopanib, another targeted cancer agent, or cytotoxic chemotherapy. Of 204 publications identified, seven articles representing six unique studies met inclusion criteria. Additional safety results for pazopanib were identified on ClinicalTrials.gov. Hematologic toxicities were common with all therapies evaluated (pazopanib, trabectedin, dacarbazine ± gemcitabine, gemcitabine ± docetaxel, cyclophosphamide, and ifosfamide). Studies differed in AE type, timing of assessment, and outcomes reported, although patient populations and AE assessment timing were relatively similar for pazopanib and trabectedin. AEs that were more common with trabectedin than pazopanib were anemia, neutropenia, nausea/vomiting, and elevations in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase. An AE that was more common with pazopanib than trabectedin was anorexia. Only the pazopanib study reported AE frequencies versus placebo. A planned meta-analysis was not feasible, as there was no common comparator. More well-designed studies that include common comparators are needed for comparison of safety effects among treatments for STS.
PubMed: 27516726
DOI: 10.1155/2016/3597609 -
BMC Urology Jul 2016The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The currently recommended treatment algorithm for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who fail the first-line targeted therapy does not normally include pazopanib as a second-line treatment option. It would therefore be of interest to determine the efficiency of pazopanib in this setting in terms of the partial response rate (PRR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS).
METHODS
Peer-reviewed clinical reports without language restriction, both full papers and conference abstracts, which assessed the second-line use of pazopanib following failure of first-line non-cytokine-targeted therapy, were included. After the literature retrieval, we conducted a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of the size of the effect of each outcome measure (PRR, DCR, and PFS). The effect size and 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed-effect or random-effects models based on the heterogeneity represented by I(2) of selected studies. Meta-analysis forest plots with a fixed-effect model showing the PRR and DCR were created.
RESULTS
Our results show that there are no available comparative studies on pazopanib second-line treatment. Only phase II trials or retrospective analysis reports were retrievable. Six studies (comprising 217 patients) were included in the qualitative and quantitative analysis. Pazopanib as a second-line treatment resulted in a PRR of 23 % (95 % CI, 17-31 %; I(2) = 52.6 %) and a DCR of 73 % (95 % CI, 65-80 %; I(2) = 0.00 %). The meta-analysis with fixed-effect model revealed that PFS was 6.5 months (95 % CI, 5.6-7.5 months; I(2) = 86.2 %).
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, the effectiveness and indication of pazopanib for use in the second-line setting has not yet been examined in-depth; however, this meta-analysis has shown that the treatment effects in terms of PRR, DCR, and PFS may be similar to other well-studied second-line targeted therapies. Rigorous comparative phase III trials testing this hypothesis are required.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antineoplastic Agents; Carcinoma, Renal Cell; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Indazoles; Kidney Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27377922
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-016-0156-4 -
PloS One 2016Hyponatraemia has been reported with targeted therapies in cancer patients. Aim of the study was to perform an up-to-date meta-analysis in order to determine the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Hyponatraemia has been reported with targeted therapies in cancer patients. Aim of the study was to perform an up-to-date meta-analysis in order to determine the incidence and relative risk (RR) in cancer patients treated with these agents.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The scientific literature regarding hyponatraemia was extensively reviewed using MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Eligible studies were selected according to PRISMA statement. Summary incidence, RR, and 95% Confidence Intervals were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of selected studies.
RESULTS
4803 potentially relevant trials were identified: of them, 13 randomized phase III studies were included in this meta-analysis. 6670 patients treated with 8 targeted agents were included: 2574 patients had hepatocellular carcinoma, whilst 4096 had other malignancies. The highest incidences of all-grade hyponatraemia were observed with the combination of brivanib and cetuximab (63.4) and pazopanib (31.7), while the lowest incidence was reported by afatinib (1.7). The highest incidence of high-grade hyponatraemia was reported by cetuximab (34.8), while the lowest incidences were reported by gefitinib (1.0). Summary RR of developing all-grade and high-grade hyponatraemia with targeted agents was 1.36 and 1.52, respectively. The highest RRs of all-grade and high-grade hyponatraemia were associated with brivanib (6.5 and 5.2, respectively). Grouping by drug category, the RR of high-grade hyponatraemia with angiogenesis inhibitors was 2.69 compared to anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptors agents (1.12).
CONCLUSION
Treatment with biological therapy in cancer patients is associated with a significant increased risk of hyponatraemia, therefore frequent clinical monitoring should be emphasized when managing targeted agents.
Topics: Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Hyponatremia; Incidence; Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27167519
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152079 -
European Journal of Cancer (Oxford,... Jul 2015Drug-induced liver chemistry abnormalities, primarily transaminase elevations, are commonly observed in pazopanib-treated patients. This meta-analysis characterises... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Characterisation of liver chemistry abnormalities associated with pazopanib monotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials in advanced cancer patients.
Drug-induced liver chemistry abnormalities, primarily transaminase elevations, are commonly observed in pazopanib-treated patients. This meta-analysis characterises liver chemistry abnormalities associated with pazopanib. Data of pazopanib-treated patients from nine prospective trials were integrated (N=2080). Laboratory datasets were used to characterise the incidence, timing, recovery and patterns of liver events, and subsequent rechallenge with pazopanib. Severe cases of liver chemistry abnormalities were clinically reviewed. Multivariate analyses identified predisposing factors. Twenty percent of patients developed elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) >3×ULN. Incidence of peak ALT >3-5×ULN, >5-8×ULN, >8-20×ULN and >20×ULN was 8%, 5%, 5% and 1%, respectively. Median time to onset for all events was 42days; 91% of events were observed within 18weeks. Recovery rates based on peak ALT >3-5×ULN, >5-8×ULN, >8-20×ULN and >20×ULN were 91%, 90%, 90% and 64%, respectively. Median time from onset to recovery was 30days, but longer in patients without dose interruption. Based on clinical review, no deaths were associated with drug-induced liver injury. Overall, 38% of rechallenged patients had ALT elevation recurrence, with 9-day median time to recurrence. Multivariate analysis showed that older age was associated with development of ALT >8×ULN. There was no correlation between hypertension and transaminitis. Our data support the current guidelines on regular liver chemistry tests after initiation of pazopanib, especially during the first 9 or 10weeks, and also demonstrate the safety of rechallenge with pazopanib.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alanine Transaminase; Chemical and Drug Induced Liver Injury; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Female; Humans; Indazoles; Liver; Male; Middle Aged; Neoplasms; Pyrimidines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonamides; Young Adult
PubMed: 25899987
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.03.019 -
Journal of Ovarian Research 2014As increased angiogenesis has been linked with the progression of ovarian cancer, a number of anti-angiogenic agents have been investigated, or are currently in... (Review)
Review
As increased angiogenesis has been linked with the progression of ovarian cancer, a number of anti-angiogenic agents have been investigated, or are currently in development, as potential treatment options for patients with advanced disease. Bevacizumab, a recombinant monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor, has gained European Medicines Agency approval for the front-line treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, fallopian tube cancer or primary peritoneal cancer in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel, and for the treatment of first recurrence of platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer in combination with carboplatin and gemcitabine. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify available efficacy and safety data for bevacizumab in ovarian cancer as well as for newer anti-angiogenic agents in development. We analyzed published data from randomized, controlled phase II/III clinical trials enrolling women with ovarian cancer to receive treatment with bevacizumab. We also reviewed available data for emerging anti-angiogenic agents currently in phase II/III development, including trebananib, aflibercept, nintedanib, cediranib, imatinib, pazopanib, sorafenib and sunitinib. Significant efficacy gains were achieved with the addition of bevacizumab to standard chemotherapy in four randomized, double-blind, phase III trials, both as front-line treatment (GOG-0218 and ICON7) and in patients with recurrent disease (OCEANS and AURELIA). The type and frequency of bevacizumab-related adverse events was as expected in these studies based on published data. Promising efficacy data have been published for a number of emerging anti-angiogenic agents in phase III development for advanced ovarian cancer. Further research is needed to identify predictive or prognostic markers of response to bevacizumab in order to optimize patient selection and treatment benefit. Data from phase III trials of newer anti-angiogenic agents in ovarian cancer are awaited.
Topics: Angiogenesis Inhibitors; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Female; Humans; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neovascularization, Pathologic; Ovarian Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 24864163
DOI: 10.1186/1757-2215-7-57