Dataset Information

Anti-Angiogenesis Maintenance Therapy in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Phase III Randomized Controlled Trials.

ABSTRACT: Aim: Anti-angiogenesis agents have been added as maintenance therapy in ovarian cancer over the past decade. The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the efficacy of anti-angiogenesis therapy in newly diagnosed and relapsed ovarian cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for all phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the efficacy and toxicity of anti-angiogenesis agents in ovarian cancer. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were used to evaluate the effectiveness of anti-angiogenesis therapy in ovarian cancer. Results: A total of 6097 patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer from 5 phase III RCTs and 2943 patients with relapsed ovarian cancer from 6 phase III RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that anti-angiogenesis maintenance therapy significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.93; p = 0.001), but not OS (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05; p = 0.49) compared with placebo in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. In patients with relapsed ovarian cancer, the pooled results showed a significant improvement on OS (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98; p = 0.02) and PFS (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52-0.72; p < 0.001). The pooled results also showed that the anti-angiogenesis agents were associated with an increase in the occurrence of severe hypertension, neutropenia, diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, headache, and bleeding in ovarian cancer. However, infrequent fatal adverse events occurred in the anti-angiogenesis groups. Conclusions: Study results suggest that anti-angiogenesis agents were an effective therapy for newly diagnosed and relapsed ovarian cancer, especially for relapsed ovarian cancer. Anti-angiogenesis agents may be associated with some severe but not fatal adverse events. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021283647.

SUBMITTER: Wang Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8636101 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeMaintenance therapy prolongs progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) not undergoing autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) but has generally been limited to immunomodulatory agents. Other options that complement the induction regimen with favorable toxicity are needed.Patients and methodsThe phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled TOURMALINE-MM4 study randomly assigned (3:2) patients with NDMM not undergoing ASCT who achieved better than or equal to partial response after 6-12 months of standard induction therapy to receive the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib or placebo on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles as maintenance for 24 months. The primary endpoint was PFS since time of randomization.ResultsPatients were randomly assigned to receive ixazomib (n = 425) or placebo (n = 281). TOURMALINE-MM4 met its primary endpoint with a 34.1% reduction in risk of progression or death with ixazomib versus placebo (median PFS since randomization, 17.4 v 9.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.659; 95% CI, 0.542 to 0.801; P < .001; median follow-up, 21.1 months). Ixazomib significantly benefitted patients who achieved complete or very good partial response postinduction (median PFS, 25.6 v 12.9 months; HR, 0.586; P < .001). With ixazomib versus placebo, 36.6% versus 23.2% of patients had grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); 12.9% versus 8.0% discontinued treatment because of TEAEs. Common any-grade TEAEs included nausea (26.8% v 8.0%), vomiting (24.2% v 4.3%), and diarrhea (23.2% v 12.3%). There was no increase in new primary malignancies (5.2% v 6.2%); rates of on-study deaths were 2.6% versus 2.2%.ConclusionIxazomib maintenance prolongs PFS with no unexpected toxicity in patients with NDMM not undergoing ASCT. To our knowledge, this is the first PI demonstrated in a randomized clinical trial to have single-agent efficacy for maintenance and is the first oral PI option in this patient population.

Project description:BackgroundThe impact of prolonging temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance beyond six cycles in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) remains a topic of discussion. We investigated the effects of prolonged TMZ maintenance on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).Patients and methodsIn this retrospective single-center cohort study, we included patients with GBM who were treated with radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant TMZ. For analysis, patients were considered who either completed six TMZ maintenance cycles (group B), continued with TMZ therapy beyond six cycles (group C), or stopped TMZ maintenance therapy within the first six cycles (group A). Patients with progression during the first six TMZ maintenance cycles were excluded.ResultsClinical data from 107 patients were included for Kaplan-Meier analyses and 102 for Cox regressions. Median PFS times were 8.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.1-12.4) in group A, 13.7 months (95% CI 10.6-17.5) in group B, and 20.9 months (95% CI 15.2-43.5) in group C. At first progression, response rates of TMZ/lomustine rechallenge were 47% in group B and 13% in group C. Median OS times were 12.7 months (95% CI 10.3-16.8) in group A, 25.2 months (95% CI 17.7-55.5) in group B, and 28.6 months (95% CI 24.4-open) in group C. Nevertheless, multivariate Cox regression for patients in group C compared with group B that accounted for imbalances of other risk factors showed no different relative risk (RR) for OS (RR 0.77, p = .46).ConclusionOur data do not support a general extension of TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The Oncologist 2017;22:570-575 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Radiation therapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) maintenance therapy is still the standard of care in patients below the age of 65 years in newly diagnosed glioblastoma. However, in clinical practice, many centers continue TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles. The impact of this continuation is controversial and has not yet been addressed in prospective randomized clinical trials. We compared the effect of more than six cycles of TMZ in comparison with exactly six cycles on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by multivariate analysis and found a benefit in PFS but not OS. Thus, our data do not suggest prolonging TMZ maintenance therapy beyond six cycles, which should be considered in neurooncological practice.

Project description:The incidence and mortality rates of ovarian cancer are increasing globally. Ovarian cancer is diagnosed at an advanced stage in 80% of women. After standard, platinum-based, front-line chemotherapy, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and antiangiogenic agents are successfully employed as maintenance strategies for newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer patients. Landmark clinical studies, including SOLO-1, PAOLA-1, PRIMA, and VELIA, have provided crucial insights on optimizing first-line maintenance treatment using PARP inhibitors. A group of ovarian cancer experts, primarily from low- and middle-income countries, met in September 2019 to discuss new developments for the first-line treatment of ovarian cancer and its implications. Key implications of the evolving clinical data included: (1) olaparib or niraparib maintenance therapy appears to be the preferred choice for patients with BRCA1/2 mutations; hence, BRCA testing is beneficial in identifying these patients; (2) niraparib monotherapy and olaparib in combination with bevacizumab have demonstrated significant benefit in progression-free survival (PFS) in homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive patients; (3) bevacizumab, niraparib alone, or observation can be an alternative for HRD-negative patients; (4) further data is warranted to explore the role of PARP inhibitors in treating HRD-negative, ovarian cancer patients to confirm findings of the exploratory analysis of PRIMA; (5) PARP inhibitors may be beneficial for stage IV ovarian cancer patients with inoperable disease and patients with prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy; and (6) there is an urgent need to increase awareness in both clinicians and patients on BRCA and HRD testing for optimizing treatment decision-making and improving clinical outcomes in newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer patients. In clinical medicine, the limited availability of family history (FH) information and the complexity of FH criteria has hampered the implementation of BRCA testing. Moreover, many cancer patients with BRCA mutations are not tested because they do not meet the criteria for FH. Consequently, BRCA testing in many high income countries, including the US and Australia, is underused and used inappropriately, which has resulted in the loss of valuable opportunities for better cancer management and cancer prevention.

Dataset Information

Anti-Angiogenesis Maintenance Therapy in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Phase III Randomized Controlled Trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets