The Burden of Metastatic Cancer-Induced Bone Pain: A Narrative Review.

Bone pain is one of the most common forms of pain reported by cancer patients with metastatic disease. We conducted a review of oncology literature to further understand the epidemiology of and treatment approaches for metastatic cancer-induced bone pain and the effect of treatment of painful bone metastases on the patient's quality of life. Two-thirds of patients with advanced, metastatic, or terminal cancer worldwide experience pain. Cancer pain due to bone metastases is the most common form of pain in patients with advanced disease and has been shown to significantly reduce patients' quality of life. Treatment options for cancer pain due to bone metastases include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, palliative radiation, bisphosphonates, denosumab, and opioids. Therapies including palliative radiation and opioids have strong evidence supporting their efficacy treating cancer pain due to bone metastases; other therapies, like bisphosphonates and denosumab, do not. There is sufficient evidence that patients who experience pain relief after radiation therapy have improved quality of life; however, a substantial proportion are nonresponders. For those still requiring pain management, even with available analgesics, many patients are undertreated for cancer pain due to bone metastases, indicating an unmet need. The studies in this review were not designed to determine why cancer pain due to bone metastases was undertreated. Studies specifically addressing cancer pain due to bone metastases, rather than general cancer pain, are limited. Additional research is needed to determine patient preferences and physician attitudes regarding choice of analgesic for moderate to severe cancer pain due to bone metastases.

Comparison of palbociclib in combination with letrozole or fulvestrant with endocrine therapies for advanced/metastatic breast cancer: network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Palbociclib is the first cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor approved in the United States for HR+/HER2- advanced/metastatic breast cancer, in combination with letrozole as initial endocrine-based therapy in postmenopausal women or with fulvestrant in women with disease progression following endocrine therapy. We compared progression-free survival (PFS) and discontinuations due to adverse events for palbociclib combinations against other endocrine therapies using a mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. METHODS: A systematic literature review identified relevant trials. Separate analyses were conducted for each palbociclib combination using a Bayesian approach. Treatment rankings were established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Sixty-five unique studies met inclusion criteria. Palbociclib plus letrozole had the highest SUCRA value (99.9%) and was associated with significantly longer PFS than all comparators in treatment-naïve patients (hazard ratios [HRs] ranged from 0.41 to 0.58). Palbociclib plus fulvestrant had the second highest SUCRA value (93.9%) and, in previously treated patients, yielded significantly longer PFS than most comparators (HRs ranged from 0.26 to 0.46); the exception was everolimus plus exemestane, with similar PFS (HR, 1.04; 95% credible interval [CrI], 0.58-1.76). Palbociclib plus fulvestrant was associated with significantly lower odds of discontinuation due to adverse events than everolimus plus exemestane (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CrI, 0.05-0.39). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the two palbociclib combinations yielded significantly greater PFS than endocrine therapy in treatment-naïve and previously treated patients with advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Palbociclib plus fulvestrant was associated with significantly less toxicity than everolimus plus exemestane.

A Systematic Literature Review of Adverse Events Associated with Systemic Treatments Used in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

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.

Randomized controlled trials in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic literature review evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of interventions used in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Primary efficacy outcomes were objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. Safety endpoints were grade 3/4 toxicities, serious adverse events and withdrawals or deaths due to toxicity. Studies were selected if they were randomized controlled trials reporting on the efficacy or safety of treatments for relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma, and if outcomes were reported separately from trials that included other lymphoid neoplasms. We used the Bucher method for conducting adjusted indirect comparisons within a meta-analysis. We identified 10 randomized controlled trials of treatments for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. The most prominent drug investigated (alone or in combination) was rituximab. Most trials did not report median overall survival. Two trials reported median event-free survival (range, 1.2-23.2 months). Six of ten trials reported objective response rate (range, 9-93%). Meta-analysis showed only one statistically significant result: rituximab + bortezomib yielded a significantly higher objective response rate than rituximab monotherapy (relative risk, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.47). Otherwise, there were no discernable differences in overall survival or progression-free survival, partly due to insufficient reporting of results in the clinical trials. The relatively small number of randomized controlled trials, few overlapping treatment arms, and variability in the randomized controlled trial features and in the endpoints studied complicate the formal comparison of therapies for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma. Additional well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to fully understand the relative outcomes of older and more recently developed therapies.

Randomized controlled trials in relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic literature review with meta-analysis was conducted on the clinical efficacy and safety of interventions used in the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We systematically searched databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase; 1997 to August 2, 2012), conference abstracts, bibliographic reference lists, recent reviews, and Clinicaltrials.gov. Primary efficacy outcomes were objective response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Safety end points were Grade 3/4 toxicities, serious adverse events, withdrawals because of toxicity, and deaths due to toxicity. Studies were selected if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the efficacy or safety of relapsed or refractory CLL and if outcomes for CLL were reported separately from trials that included other lymphoid neoplasms. We used the Bucher method for conducting adjusted indirect comparisons within a meta-analysis. We identified 6 RCTs of pharmacologic treatment for relapsed/refractory CLL. The most common drugs investigated (alone or in combination) were fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. When reported, median overall survival ranged from 27.3 to 52.9 months, and overall response rate from 58% to 82%. Although meta-analysis of efficacy results was considered, details are not presented because only 3 studies qualified and the common comparator treatment was not clinically relevant. The relatively small number of RCTs, few overlapping treatment arms, and variability in end points studied make it difficult to formally compare therapies for relapsed/refractory CLL. Significant variability in RCT features presents a further challenge to meaningful comparisons. Additional well-designed RCTs are needed to fully understand the relative efficacy and safety of older and more recently developed therapies.

Clinical efficacy and safety in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma: a systematic literature review.

A systematic literature review was performed to collect and review information on the clinical efficacy and safety of treatments for relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), with a meta-analysis, if possible. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published in English from January 1, 1997, to August 2, 2012. Conference proceedings, bibliographic reference lists of included articles, recent reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for phase II to IV studies displaying results. Studies were included if they reported on patients with R/R MCL who were ineligible to receive high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplant. Studies of patients with several non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes were only included if they reported MCL outcomes separately. We identified 59 studies in R/R MCL. Forty distinct treatment regimens were evaluated. Thirty studies included more than 15 patients with R/R MCL. Six studies were comparative (including 5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs]); 53 were single-arm. There were no common treatments among the RCTs; therefore, a meta-analysis was not feasible. Thirty-one of 59 studies reported baseline data for patients with R/R MCL. Of the 30 studies with > 15 patients with R/R MCL, 30 reported overall response rate data, 14 reported progression-free survival (PFS), and 12 reported overall survival (OS). The small number of RCTs in R/R MCL precludes identifying an optimal treatment. Small sample sizes, infrequent reporting of OS and PFS, and limited information on patient characteristics made a comparison of results difficult. High-quality comparative studies of novel therapies that have the potential to demonstrate OS advantages in R/R MCL are needed.

Clinical efficacy and safety in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a systematic literature review.

This systematic literature review was designed to assess information on the clinical efficacy and safety of interventions used in the treatment of refractory or relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) and to perform a meta-analysis if possible. We searched databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for articles from 1997 to August 2, 2012 reported in English), conference abstracts, bibliographic reference lists, and the ClinicalTrials.gov database for phase II to IV studies with results. Studies had to report on patients with R/R DLBCL who were not eligible to receive high-dose therapy (HDT) with stem cell transplantation (SCT) (autologous or allogeneic). Mixed-type non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) studies were required to report R/R DLBCL outcomes separately. We identified 55 studies that presented outcomes data separately for patients with R/R DLBCL. Of 7 comparative studies, only 4 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In the 2 RCTs with a common regimen, the patient populations differed too greatly to perform a valid meta-analysis. The 48 single-arm studies identified were typically small (n < 50 in most), with 31% reporting median progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) specifically for the R/R DLBCL population. In these studies, median OS ranged from 4 to 13 months. The small number of RCTs in R/R DLBCL precludes identifying optimal treatments. Small sample size, infrequent reporting of OS and PFS separated by histologic type, and limited information on patient characteristics also hinder comparison of results. Randomized studies are needed to demonstrate which current therapies have advantages for improving survival and other important clinical outcomes in patients with R/R DLBCL.

Systematic literature review assessing tobacco smoke exposure as a risk factor for serious respiratory syncytial virus disease among infants and young children.

BACKGROUND: The role of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure as a risk factor for serious respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease among infants and young children has not been clearly established. This systematic review was conducted to explore the association between ETS exposure and serious RSV disease in children younger than 5 years, including infants and young children with elevated risk for serious RSV disease. METHODS: A systematic review of English-language studies using the PubMed and EMBASE databases (1990-2009) was performed to retrieve studies that evaluated ETS as a potential risk factor for serious RSV illness. Studies assessing risk factors associated with hospitalization, emergency department visit, or physician visit due to RSV (based on laboratory confirmation of RSV or clinical diagnosis of RSV) in children under the age of 5 years were included. RESULTS: The literature search identified 30 relevant articles, categorized by laboratory confirmation of RSV infection (n = 14), clinical diagnosis of RSV disease (n = 8), and assessment of RSV disease severity (n = 8). Across these three categories of studies, at least 1 type of ETS exposure was associated with statistically significant increases in risk in multivariate or bivariate analysis, as follows: 12 of 14 studies on risk of hospitalization or ED visit for laboratory-confirmed RSV infection; 6 of 8 studies of RSV disease based on clinical diagnosis; and 5 of the 8 studies assessing severity of RSV as shown by hospitalization rates or degree of hypoxia. Also, 7 of the 30 studies focused on populations of premature infants, and the majority (5 studies) found a significant association between ETS exposure and RSV risk in the multivariate or bivariate analyses. CONCLUSION: We found ample evidence that ETS exposure places infants and young children at increased risk of hospitalization for RSV-attributable lower respiratory tract infection and increases the severity of illness among hospitalized children. Additional evidence is needed regarding the association of ETS exposure and outpatient RSV lower respiratory tract illness. Challenges and potential pitfalls of assessing ETS exposure in children are discussed.

A review and characterization of the various perceptions of quality cancer care.

BACKGROUND: It is important to maintain high-quality cancer care while reducing spending. This requires an understanding of how stakeholders define "quality." The objective of this literature review was to understand the perceptions patients, physicians, and managed care professionals have about quality cancer care, especially chemotherapy. METHODS: A computerized literature search was conducted for articles concerning quality cancer care in patients who received chemotherapy. Among >1100 identified sources, 25 presented interviews/survey results from stakeholders. RESULTS: Patients defined quality cancer care as being treated well by providers, having multiple treatment options, and being part of the decision-making process. Waiting to see providers, having problems with referrals, going to different locations for treatment, experiencing billing inaccuracies, and navigating managed care reimbursement negatively affected patients' quality-of-care perceptions. Providers perceived quality cancer care as making decisions based on the risks-benefits of specific chemotherapy regimens and patients' health status rather than costs. Providers objected to spending substantial time interacting with payers instead of delivering care to patients. Payers must control the costs of cancer care but do not want an adversarial relationship with providers and patients. Payers' methods of managing cancer more efficiently involved working with providers to develop assessment and decision-assist tools. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering quality cancer care is increasingly difficult because of the shortage of oncologists and rising costs of chemotherapy agents, radiation therapy, and imaging tests. The definition of quality cancer care differed among stakeholders, and healthcare reform must reflect these various needs to maintain and improve quality while controlling costs.