Fatal Adverse Events Associated with Pembrolizumab in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Pembrolizumab as an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) has emerged as an effective treatment for many cancers. It has unique immune-related adverse events (irAE) and little is known about its risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs). We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials to determine the incidence and risk of FAEs with pembrolizumab.Methods: A systematic search for phase I-III clinical trials of pembrolizumab was conducted using databases including PUBMED and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conferences until October 2018. Eligible studies included prospective clinical trials of pembrolizumab with available data on FAE. Data on FAE was extracted from each study and pooled for calculations. Incidence, relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated by employing fixed or random-effects models.Results: A total of 11 clinical trials with 3713 patients were included for analysis. The overall incidence of FAE with pembrolizumab was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.5-2.8%). The incidence of FAE significantly varied among different tumor types (p = .02), ranging from 0.2% in melanoma to 3.1% in breast cancer, and with its combination with chemotherapy (0.7%, 95% CI: 0.4-1.2% versus 7.0%, 95% CI: 4.9-10%; p<.01). Chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab 7.0% (95%CI: 4.9-10) as compared to pembrolizumab alone 0.7%, (95% CI: 0.4-1.2; p < .001). There was no significant difference in the risk of FAEs when pembrolizumab was compared with chemotherapy with RR = 1.24 (95% CI: 0.8-1.89; p = .31). The most common FAEs were due to infectious complication (26.5%), cardiac toxicity (14.7%) and pneumonitis (13.2%).Conclusions: The risk of FAEs with pembrolizumab may be similar to chemotherapy in cancer patients and may vary with tumor types and its combination with chemotherapy.

Increased Risk of Hypertension with Enzalutamide in Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Hypertension is associated with enzalutamide in the treatment of prostate cancer. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to determine the risk of hypertension. Databases including Pubmed and Google scholar were searched to identify randomized clinical trials with enzalutamide. A total of seven studies including 7347 patients were selected. The overall incidences of all-grade and high-grade hypertension were 11.9% (95%% CI: 8.8-16.0%) and 4.9% (95%% CI: 3.5-6.8%) respectively, with a relative risk of 2.82 (95%% CI: 2.34-3.38, p < 0.001) for all-grade and 2.27 (95%% CI: 1.73-2.96, p < 0.001) for high-grade. There was a significant risk of developing hypertension with enzalutamide.

Risk of Liver Toxicity with Nivolumab Immunotherapy in Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is approved for the treatment of many cancers. This meta-analysis was conducted to determine the risk of hepatotoxicity with nivolumab therapy. METHODS: An analysis from all phase I-III clinical trials up to December 2016 examining nivolumab was conducted. Data on elevations in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were extracted from the safety profiles of each trial. Incidence and relative risk (RR) were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The incidences of all-grade and high-grade elevations in AST were 5.4% (95% CI 3.2-9.1) and 1.6% (95% CI 0.9-3.0), respectively. The incidences of all-grade and high-grade elevations in ALT were 4.9% (95% CI 2.9-8.2) and 1.7% (95% CI 0.9-3.1), respectively. Elevations of both laboratory markers were significantly increased when compared to control (p < 0.001). Nivolumab significantly increased the RR of AST/ALT elevations; RRs were 1.58 (95% CI 1.1-2.2) for all-grade AST elevation, and 1.62 (95% CI 1.2-2.3) for all-grade ALT elevation. Subgroup analysis of all-grade AST or ALT elevation revealed a signi-ficant variation among tumor types (p < 0.001) and with combination with ipilimumab (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab is associated with significantly increased risk of liver toxicity.

Current and Emerging Therapeutic Targets for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma has evolved dramatically over recent years. In this review, we will summarize current and emerging therapies based on molecular targets and provide insight into treatment strategy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. RECENT FINDINGS: We have witnessed a paradigm shift in the therapeutic landscape as treatment was formerly reliant on cytokine-based agents which have now been replaced with therapies targeting angiogenesis, mammalian target of rapamycin pathways, and immune responses. These dramatic changes are primarily due to our improved understanding of the underlying mutations and molecular mechanisms leading to tumorigenesis and progression. We now have targeted agents in the form of small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, and mTOR inhibitors. Moreover, immunotherapy-targeting checkpoints of T-lymphocyte activity has provided increased overall survival and a new class of agents with potential to radically change the treatment options. With these agents and their combination, durable responses are increasingly seen even though treatment resistance remains a huge challenge. New treatment strategies are rapidly developing and the therapeutic landscape is expected for further evolution.

Discontinuation of Everolimus Due to Related and Unrelated Adverse Events in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to examine the risk of everolimus discontinuation due to related and unrelated adverse events (AE) in cancer patients. Fifteen RCTs were analyzed that compared everolimus to placebo and reported discontinuation due to AE with everolimus (related and unrelated to everolimus) and placebo (unrelated to everolimus). Incidence of discontinuation with everolimus due to AE and placebo was 12.3% and 4.7% respectively. Relative risk of everolimus discontinuation due to related AE was 2.60. Risk of discontinuation varied by tumor type, however everolimus dose or concomitant chemotherapy was not significant.

Pigmentary changes in patients treated with targeted anticancer agents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

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.

Attributable Risk of Infection to mTOR Inhibitors Everolimus and Temsirolimus in the Treatment of Cancer.

The risk of infection attributable to mTOR inhibitors has not been determined. Databases from PubMed and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings were searched. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials, in which everolimus or temsirolimus was compared with placebo. A total of 12 trials were included. The attributable incidences of all-grade and high-grade infections to mTOR inhibitors were 9.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.8-14.6%) and 2.3% (95% CI: 1.2-4.4%) respectively. The risk varied widely with tumor types (p <.001). There was substantial risk of infection attributable to mTOR inhibitors everolimus and temsirolimus.

Risk of hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus in cancer patients: A meta-analysis.

Everolimus has been used widely in cancer patients and is associated with the development of hyperglycemia. Due to confounding factors, its specific impact on hyperglycemia has not been well understood. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to determine the risk of hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus in cancer patients of varying tumor types. MATERIAL AND METHODS: PubMed and American Society of Clinical Oncology conference abstracts up to June 2015 were systematically searched. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which everolimus was compared to placebo in cancer patients with or without other agents. Heterogeneity tests were performed to examine between-study differences in hyperglycemia, and the incidence and relative risk of all- and high-grade hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus were determined using both random- or fixed-effects models. RESULTS: A total of seven phase III and two phase II RCTs with various tumors, encompassing a total of 3879 cancer patients, were included in our analysis. Everolimus significantly increased the risk of all-grade (RR =2.60, 95% CI 2.03-3.31, p < 0.001) and high-grade (RR =3.0, 95% CI 1.72-5.23; p < 0.001) hyperglycemia. The incidences of all- and high-grade hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus were 6.8% (95% CI 3.4-13.2%) and 2.5% (95% CI 1.2-4.9%), respectively. The everolimus-specific risk of all-grade hyperglycemia varied significantly with tumor types (p < 0.001), with the highest incidence seen in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (27.2%, 95% CI 22.2-32.8%) and the lowest in breast cancer (3.3%, 95% CI 1.3-8.2%). No significant variation was found between everolimus alone or everolimus in combination with other agents. Similar results were also found for the risk of high-grade hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus. CONCLUSION: The specific risk of hyperglycemia attributable to everolimus may vary significantly with tumor types. Close monitoring should be given to patients at high risk, such as RCC.

Incidence and risk of high-grade stomatitis with mTOR inhibitors in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway including everolimus and temsirolimus have been used extensively in cancer patients. Their use is associated with stomatitis, an adverse event resulting in morbidity and treatment interruptions or discontinuation. This study was conducted to determine the overall incidence and risk of stomatitis in cancer patients treated with the mTOR inhibitors by a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Databases from PubMed and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meetings up to October 2013 were searched for relevant studies. Eligible studies included RCTs using everolimus and temsirolimus at approved doses in cancer patients. Summary incidences, relative risks (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random- or fixed-effects model depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCTs with 4,752 patients (mTORs: 2,725, controls: 2,027) with a variety of solid tumors were included in the analysis. The incidences of all-grade (grade 1-4) and high-grade stomatitis (grade 3-4) were 33.5% (95% CI: 21.9-47.6%) and 4.1% (95% CI: 2.6-6.3%), respectively. The incidence of high-grade stomatitis significantly varied with tumor types (p=.004), and mTOR inhibitors (temsirolimus vs. everolimus, p<.001). In comparison with controls, mTOR inhibitors significantly increased the risk for developing all-grade stomatitis (RR: 4.04, 95% CI: 3.13-5.22, p<.001) and high-grade stomatitis (RR: 8.84, 95% CI: 4.07-19.22, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mTOR inhibitors everolimus and temsirolimus significantly increased the risk of high-grade stomatitis in cancer patients. Efforts towards the prevention, treatment, and identification of individuals at risk may allow for improved quality of life and consistent dosing.

Incidence and risk of rash to mTOR inhibitors in cancer patients--a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) are currently approved for the treatment of several cancers, and their use is associated with serious rash, which affects patient's quality of life and leads to undesirable dose reductions or interruptions. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to determine the overall risk of developing high-grade rash with mTOR inhibitors in cancer patients. METHODS: We searched the PubMed database and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) meetings up to December 2013 for relevant studies. Eligible studies included RCTs in which everolimus or temsirolimus was compared to controls in cancer patients. The summary incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random- or fixed-effects model depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCTs with 4752 patients (mTORs: 2725, controls: 2027) with a variety of solid tumors were included in the analysis. The incidences of all-grade (grade 1-4) and high-grade rash (grade 3-4) were 27.3% (95% CI 21.0-34.7%) and 1.0% (95% CI 0.6-1.4%), respectively. In comparison with controls, mTOR inhibitors significantly increased the risk for developing all-grade rash (RR = 3.55, 95% CI 3.0-4.20, p < 0.001) and high-grade rash (RR = 4.25, 95% CI 1.63-11.10, p = 0.003). The increased risk of high-grade rash did not vary significantly among different tumors (p = 0.91). There was no significant difference between everolimus and temsirolimus (p = 0.60). There was also no significant difference between mTOR inhibitors alone and in combination with other agents (p = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus and temsirolimus significantly increased the risk of high-grade rash in cancer patients. Early recognition and appropriate treatment is recommended.

Incidence and risk of xerosis with targeted anticancer therapies.

BACKGROUND: Many targeted therapies used in the treatment of cancer can lead to the development of xerosis, but the incidence and relative risk of xerosis have not been ascertained. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and metaanalysis of clinical trials, to ascertain the incidence and risk of developing xerosis after taking anticancer drugs. METHODS: The PubMed (1966-October 2013), Web of Science (January 1998-October 2013), and American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts (2004-2013) databases were searched for clinical trials of 58 targeted agents. Results were calculated using random or fixed effects models. RESULTS: The incidences of all- and high-grade xerosis were 17.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 15.6-20.4%) and 1.0% (95% CI: 0.9-1.5%), respectively. The risk of developing all-grade xerosis was 2.99 (95% CI: 2.0-4.3), and it varied across different drugs (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: The reporting of xerosis may vary among clinicians and institutions, and the incidence may be affected by age, concomitant medications, comorbidities, and underlying malignancies or skin conditions. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving targeted therapies have a significant risk of developing xerosis. Patients should be counseled and treated early for this symptom to prevent suboptimal dosing and quality of life impairment.

Alopecia with endocrine therapies in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Whereas the frequency of alopecia to cytotoxic chemotherapies has been well described, the incidence of alopecia during endocrine therapies (i.e., anti-estrogens, aromatase inhibitors) has not been investigated. Endocrine agents are widely used in the treatment and prevention of many solid tumors, principally those of the breast and prostate. Adherence to these therapies is suboptimal, in part because of toxicities. We performed a systematic analysis of the literature to ascertain the incidence and risk for alopecia in patients receiving endocrine therapies. METHODS: An independent search of citations was conducted using the PubMed database for all literature as of February 2013. Phase II-III studies using the terms "tamoxifen," "toremifene," "raloxifene," "anastrozole," "letrozole," "exemestane," "fulvestrant," "leuprolide," "flutamide," "bicalutamide," "nilutamide," "fluoxymesterone," "estradiol," "octreotide," "megestrol," "medroxyprogesterone acetate," "enzalutamide," and "abiraterone" were searched. RESULTS: Data from 19,430 patients in 35 clinical trials were available for analysis. Of these, 13,415 patients had received endocrine treatments and 6,015 patients served as controls. The incidence of all-grade alopecia ranged from 0% to 25%, with an overall incidence of 4.4% (95% confidence interval: 3.3%-5.9%). The highest incidence of all-grade alopecia was observed in patients treated with tamoxifen in a phase II trial (25.4%); similarly, the overall incidence of grade 2 alopecia by meta-analysis was highest with tamoxifen (6.4%). The overall relative risk of alopecia in comparison with placebo was 12.88 (p < .001), with selective estrogen receptor modulators having the highest risk. CONCLUSION: Alopecia is a common yet underreported adverse event of endocrine-based cancer therapies. Their long-term use heightens the importance of this condition on patients' quality of life. These findings are critical for pretherapy counseling, the identification of risk factors, and the development of interventions that could enhance adherence and mitigate this psychosocially difficult event.

Risk of hand-foot skin reaction with the novel multikinase inhibitor regorafenib: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Regorafenib is a novel receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for use in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and locally advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). The drug targets multiple receptors, including VEGF-R1/-R2/-R3, TIE-2, FGFR-1, PDGFR-α/ß, KIT, RET, RAF, p38 MAPK. Adverse events include asthenia, hypertension, diarrhea, and hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), with the latter representing one of the most clinically significant untoward events. The incidence and risk of HFSR with regorafenib have not been systematically investigated. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis to ascertain the incidence and risk of developing HFSR in cancer patients treated with regorafenib. Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) and the ASCO website were searched for publications from January 1998-January 2013. Eligible studies were limited to Phase II/III clinical trials employing regorafenib (160 mg/day). The incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95 % CIs were calculated using random- or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies. RESULTS: A total of 1,078 patients treated with regorafenib for mCRC, GIST, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) were included. The overall incidence of all-grade and high-grade HFSR were 60.5 % (95 % CI: 48.3-71.6 %) and 20.4 % (95 % CI: 15.4-26.6 %), respectively. The RRs of all-grade and high-grade HFSR with regorafenib in comparison to controls were increased for all-grade (RR = 5.4, 95 % CI: 3.76-7.76, p < 0.001) and high-grade (RR = 41.99, 95 % CI: 5.88-299.93, p < 0.001) HFSR. The incidence of HFSR varied significantly with tumor type (p = 0.007), and was 71.4 % (95 % CI: 57.4-82.3 %) for RCC, 60.2 % (95 % CI: 52.3-67.6 %) for GIST, 50.0 % (95 % CI: 34.2-65.8 %) for HCC, and 46.6 % (95 % CI: 42.3-51.0 %) for mCRC. CONCLUSION: The incidence and risk of development of HFSR with regorafenib is high, and may vary significantly with tumor type. Knowledge of this is important for patient counseling and clinical trial development, to ensure adherence and maximize clinical outcomes.

The risk of hand-foot skin reaction to axitinib, a novel VEGF inhibitor: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis.

Axitinib is a potent, selective vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor. We have performed a systematic analysis to investigate the risk of hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) to axitinib and compare the differences in incidences between sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib and axitinib. Relevant studies were identified from PubMed (1998-2012). Eligible studies were limited to prospective Phase II-III clinical trials in which cancer patients were treated with axitinib monotherapy at a starting dose of 5 mg orally twice daily. Incidence, relative risk (RR), and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on heterogeneity of included studies. A total of 984 patients from 6 prospective clinical trials were included in the analysis. The overall incidence of all-grade and high-grade HFSR was 29.2 % (95 % CI: 14.0-51.1 %) and 9.6 % (95 % CI: 4.2-20.7 %), respectively. The relative risks of all-grade and high-grade HFSR to axitinib compared to sorafenib were decreased for all-grade (RR=0.54, 95 % CI: 0.44-0.65, p<0.001) and high-grade HFSR (RR=0.31, 95 % CI: 0.19-0.52, p<0.001). The risk of all-grade and high-grade HFSR to axitinib, sunitinib and sorafenib was significantly higher as compared to pazopanib (RR=6.49, 95 % CI: 4.65-9.05, p<0.001; RR=6.40, 95 % CI: 3.60-11.37, p<0.001, and RR=4.20, 95 % CI: 3.07-5.75, p<0.001; RR=3.67, 95 % CI: 2.15-6.24, p<0.001, and RR=7.51, 95 % CI: 5.5-10.3, p<0.001; RR=5.93, 95 % CI: 3.5-10.0, p<0.001, respectively). Similar to sorafenib and sunitinib, axitinib is associated with a significant risk of HFSR, despite having an increased specificity for VEGF receptors. These findings underscore the importance of supportive dermatologic care in patients treated with axitinib, in order to maintain quality of life, adherence, and persistence to therapy.

Rash with the multitargeted kinase inhibitors nilotinib and dasatinib: meta-analysis and clinical characterization.

OBJECTIVES: Nilotinib and dasatinib are second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors approved for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). In clinical trials, they have both been reported to cause rash in a significant number of patients, but its incidence varies significantly and has not been characterized clinically or histologically. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of rash with nilotinib and dasatinib, and to provide a clinical and histopathological description of the rash. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials evaluating nilotinib and dasatinib to determine and compare the incidence of rash with these medications. Additionally, we performed a retrospective chart review to analyze the clinical presentation and histology of patients presenting with rash. RESULTS: The incidence of all-grade (grade 1-4) rash with nilotinib was 34.3% (95% CI, 27.9-41.3), higher (P = 0.017) than with dasatinib (23.3%; 95% CI, 18.8-28.6). Similarly, the incidence of high-grade rash with nilotinib (2.6%; 95% CI, 2.1-3.4) was higher (P = 0.002) than with dasatinib (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.8-1.6). The clinical presentation often consisted of a pruritic, perifollicular hyperkeratotic, occasionally erythematous papular rash affecting most areas of the body, depending on the severity. CONCLUSIONS: Both nilotinib and dasatinib are associated with rash in a significant number of patients. Further studies to prevent and treat rash with nilotinib and dasatinib are required to improve patient quality of life, adherence with therapy and oncologic outcome.

The efficacy of temozolomide for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The efficacy of temozolomide (TMZ) in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) has been evaluated by several clinical trials. A meta-analysis to assess the overall efficacy of TMZ in the treatment of recurrent GBM was carried out by the authors. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE database and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant studies. Eligible studies were clinical trials of recurrent GBMs assigned to TMZ with data on efficacy including tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) available. The overall efficacy was calculated using a random-effects or fixed-effects model, depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials. RESULTS: A total of 15 phase II clinical trials including 902 recurrent GBMs were analyzed. The overall clinical benefit rate was 50.5% (95% CI: 44.3-56.7%) with significant difference between metronomic and standard schedules of TMZ (61.4% vs. 46.3%, P = 0.037). The overall 6-month PFS (PFS-6) rate was found to be 27.8% (95% CI: 22.7-33.5%) with significant difference between metronomic and standard schedules (33.1% vs. 20.1%, P < 0.001). In addition, significant difference in PFS-6 was detected between high (average daily dose >100 mg/m(2) ) and low (average daily dose ≤ 100 mg/m(2) ) dose metronomic schedules (RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.17-2.09, P = 0.002). The overall 6-month OS (OS-6) and 12-month OS (OS-12) rates were 65.0% (95% CI: 57.4-71.9%) and 36.4% (95% CI: 26.9-47.1%) separately. There was no significant difference in OS-6 between metronomic and standard schedules (P = 0.266); however, a trend was noted favoring the metronomic schedule for OS-12 (P = 0.089). CONCLUSIONS: Temozolomide is effective for recurrent GBMs, and its efficacy may be increased with metronomic schedule and high average daily dose (>100 mg/m(2) ).

Risk of liver toxicity with the angiogenesis inhibitor pazopanib in cancer patients.

PURPOSE: The angiogenesis inhibitor pazopanib has been approved for the treatment of advanced renal cell cancer (RCC) and soft tissue sarcoma. Severe and fatal hepatotoxicity has been observed in its clinical studies. This analysis was conducted to determine the risk of liver toxicity by a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meetings up to January, 2012 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective trials of cancer patients treated with pazopanib starting at 800 mg daily. Summary incidence rates, relative risks, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a fixed- or random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 1478 patients from 10 clinical trials were included. The incidences of all-grade aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT), and bilirubin elevation were 39.6% (95% CI 31.2-48.6%), 41.4% (95% CI 34.1-49.0%), and 24.8% (95% CI 16.3-35.3%), respectively. The incidences of high-grade (Grade 3 and 4) AST, ALT and bilirubin elevation were 6.9% (95% CI 5.5-8.6%), 9.4% (95% CI 7.8-11.4%), and 3.4% (2.4-5.0%), respectively. In comparison with placebo, pazopanib significantly increased the risk of high-grade AST elevation (RR 6.56, 95% CI 2.04-21.07, p = 0.002) and ALT elevation (RR 4.33, 95% CI 1.88-10.0, p = 0.001). However, the risks of high-grade bilirubin elevation (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.47-3.64) and fatal hepatotoxicity (RR 2.51, 95% CI 0.12-51.91, p = 0.55) were not significantly elevated. CONCLUSION: The use of pazopanib was associated with a significantly increased risk of severe non-fatal hepatotoxicity in cancer patients.

Pruritus in patients treated with targeted cancer therapies: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pruritus has been anecdotally described in association with targeted cancer therapies. The risk of pruritus has not been systematically ascertained. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature was conducted for axitinib, cetuximab, dasatinib, erlotinib, everolimus, gefitinib, imatinib, ipilimumab, lapatinib, nilotinib, panitumumab, pazopanib, rituximab, sorafenib, temsirolimus, tositumomab, vandetanib, and vemurafenib. METHODS: Databases from PubMed, Web of Science (January 1998 through July 2012), and American Society of Clinical Oncology abstracts (2004 through 2012) were searched. Incidence and relative risk of pruritus were calculated using random- or fixed-effects model. RESULTS: The incidences of all-grade and high-grade pruritus were 17.4% (95% confidence interval 16.0%-19.0%) and 1.4% (95% confidence interval 1.2%-1.6%), respectively. There was an increased risk of all-grade pruritus (relative risk 2.90 [95% confidence interval 1.76-4.77, P < .001]) and variation among different drugs (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: The reporting of pruritus may vary, resulting from concomitant medications, comorbidities, and underlying malignancies. We found a higher incidence of pruritus in patients with solid tumors, concordant with those targeted therapies with the highest pruritus incidences. CONCLUSION: There is a significant risk of developing pruritus in patients receiving targeted therapies. To prevent suboptimal dosing and decreased quality of life, patients should be counseled and treated against this untoward symptom.

The risk of rash associated with ipilimumab in patients with cancer: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab is a human antibody that inhibits cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, leading to increases in T-cell activation and interleukin 2 secretion and has been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma. Dermatologic adverse events such as rash, pruritus, and vitiligo have been reported in trials, with varying incidences. The overall incidence and risk of rash to ipilimumab is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review of the literature and performed a meta-analysis to ascertain the incidence and risk of developing rash among patients receiving ipilimumab. METHODS: Databases from PubMed and Web of Science from January 1998 until July 2011 and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings from 2004 through 2011 were searched to identify relevant studies. The incidence and relative risk of rash were calculated using random effects or fixed effects model depending on the heterogeneity of included studies. RESULTS: A total of 1208 patients from clinical trials were included in this analysis. The overall incidence of all-grade rash was 24.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 21.4%-27.6%), with a relative risk of 4.00 (95% CI 2.63-6.08, P < .001). The overall incidence of high-grade rash was 2.4% (95% CI 1.1%-5.1%), with a relative risk of 3.31 (95% CI 0.70-15.76, P = .13). LIMITATIONS: The ability to detect rash may vary among institutions. CONCLUSION: There is a significant risk of developing rash in patients with cancer receiving ipilimumab. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of rash based on dose or underlying tumor. Adequate monitoring and early intervention are recommended to prevent decreased quality of life and inconsistent dosing.