RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi) provided significant antitumor activity in various tumors, mainly carrying deleterious mutations of BRCA1/BRCA2 genes. Only few data are available regarding the cardiac and vascular safety profile of this drug class. We carried out a meta-analysis for assessing the incidence and relative risk (RR) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), hypertension, and thromboembolic events in patients with solid tumors treated with PARPi-based therapy. METHODS: Prospective studies were identified by searching the Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ASCO Meeting abstracts. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Combined odds ratios (ORs), RRs, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed- or random-effects methods, depending on studies heterogeneity. RevMan software for meta-analysis (v.5.2.3) was used to carry out statistical analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were selected for the final analysis. The incidence of PARPi-related MACEs of any and high grade was 5.0% and 0.9%, respectively, compared with 3.6% and 0.9% in the control arms, corresponding to a significant increased risk of MACEs of any grade (Peto OR 1.62; P = 0.0009) but not of high grade (P = 0.49). The incidence of hypertension of any grade and high grade was 17.5% and 6.0% with PARPi, respectively, compared with 12.6% and 4.4% in the controls. Treatment with PARPi significantly increased the risk of hypertension of any grade (random-effects, RR = 1.53; P = 0.03) but not of high grade (random-effects, RR = 1.47; P = 0.09) compared with controls. Finally, PARPi-based therapies significantly increased the risk of thromboembolic events of any grade (Peto OR = 1.49, P = 0.004) and not of high grade (Peto OR = 1.31; P = 0.13) compared with controls. CONCLUSIONS: PARPi-based therapy is associated with a significantly increased risk of MACEs, hypertension, and thromboembolic events of any grade compared with controls. The lack of a significant increased risk of high-grade events together with the absolute low incidence of these adverse events led not to consider routine cardiovascular monitoring as recommended in asymptomatic patients.