Different Chemotherapy Regimens and Pathologic Complete Response in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis of Phase 3 Trials.

Background and Objectives: Currently, the standard treatment for non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) consists of a systemic neoadjuvant (or perioperative) anthracycline plus taxane-based chemotherapy, delivered either sequentially or concomitantly. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the relative efficacy of different neoadjuvant treatments for TNBC in terms of pathologic complete response (pCR). Materials and Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched from database inception to 1 November 2023. Randomized clinical trials were used that enrolled adults with stage I-III TNBC and provided data on pCR defined as residual ypT0/TisN0M0. Between-group comparisons were estimated using risk ratios (RRs) with 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs). The primary outcome was the pCR rate. Results: 1129 citations were screened, and 12 randomized clinical trials were included. In Bayesian comparisons, all regimens, except anthracycline/taxanes plus gemcitabine or capecitabine, resulted in a higher pCR than the standard regimen in both direct and indirect comparisons. In particular, immunotherapy-based regimens resulted in more than double the pCR compared to historical regimens (RR = 2.3, 95% CI 1.9-2.9) and ranked as being the optimal regimen with a probability of 97%. Disease-free survival was better for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based chemotherapy (HR = 0.36, 95% 1.21-2.09) than for historical regimens. Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirmed that incorporating immunotherapy with neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy is the best option to guarantee remarkable pathologic downstaging and improve clinical outcomes.

Third dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine: A systematic review of 30 published studies.

We analyzed published studies on the efficacy and safety of the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in various general population settings. We conducted systematic searches of PubMed and EMBASE for series published in the English language through November 15, 2021, using the search terms "third" or "booster" or "three" and "dose" and "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2." All articles were selected according to the MOOSE guidelines. The seroconversion risk after third doses was descriptively expressed as a pooled rate ratio ([seroconversion rate after the third dose]/[seroconversion rate after the second dose]). The search returned 30 studies that included a total of 2 734 437 vaccinated subjects. In more than 2 700 000 Israeli patients extracted from the general population, the reduction in the risk of infection ranged from 88% to 92%. Conversion rates for IgG anti-spike ranged from 95% to 100%. In cancer or immunocompromised patients, mean IgG seroconversion was 39.4% before and 66.6% after third doses. A third dose seems necessary to protect against all COVID-19 infection, severe disease, and death risk.

Effects of hypertension on cancer survival: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is usually associated with increased cardiovascular mortality. Uncertainty exists about the possible role of hypertension as a poor prognostic factor for cancer-specific mortality (CSM). To assess the association between pre-existing hypertension and the risk of mortality and relapse after a diagnosis of cancer, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched from inception until May 2020, without language restrictions, for observational studies reporting the prognosis of patients with hypertension and cancer. The primary outcome of the study refers to CSM in hypertensive vs nonhypertensive patients, and secondary endpoints were overall mortality (OM) and progression- or relapse-free survival. The effect size was reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: Mortality and relapse associated with hypertension in patients with various cancers were evaluated among 1 603 437 participants (n = 66 studies). Overall, diagnosis of cancer and hypertension was associated with an increased independent risk of OM (HR = 1.2 [95% CI, 1.13-1.27], P < .01) and CSM (HR = 1.12 [95% CI, 1.04-1.21], P < .01) but not of relapse (HR = 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.19], P = .14). CONCLUSIONS: Among cancer patients, those with pre-existing hypertension have a poorer outcome, probably due to multifactorial reasons. Adequate control of lifestyle, more intensive follow-ups, monitoring for hypertension- and anticancer-related cardiovascular complications, and establishing multidisciplinary cardio-oncology units can be useful measures for reducing mortality and improving care in this setting.

Red blood cell transfusions and the survival in patients with cancer undergoing curative surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Allogenic red blood cell transfusions exert a potential detrimental effect on the survival when delivered to cancer patients undergoing surgery with curative intent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the association between perioperative allogenic red blood cell transfusions and risk of death as well as relapse after surgery for localized solid tumors. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2019 for studies reporting the outcome of patients receiving transfusions during radical surgery for non-metastatic cancer. Risk of death and relapse were pooled to provide an adjusted hazard ratio with a 95% confidence interval [hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval {CI})]. Mortality and relapse associated with perioperative transfusion due to cancer surgery were evaluated among participants (n = 123 studies). Overall, RBC transfusions were associated with an increased risk of death [HR = 1.50 (95% CI 1.42-1.57), p < 0.01] and relapse [HR = 1.36 (95% CI 1.26-1.46), p < 0.01]. The survival was reduced even in cancer at early stages [HR = 1.45 (1.36-1.55), p < 0.01]. In cancer patients undergoing surgery, red blood cell transfusions reduced the survival and increased the risk of relapse. Transfusions based on patients' blood management policy should be performed by applying a more restrictive policy, and the planned preoperative administration of iron, if necessary, should be pursued.

Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Treatment Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The addition of induction chemotherapy to concomitant neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer could increase pathological downstaging and act on occult micrometastatic disease, leading ultimately to a better outcome. A systematic review was carried out of the existing literature on the treatment outcomes of total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) on locally advanced rectal cancer. TNT was defined as chemotherapy using cycles of induction and/or consolidation in conjunction with standard chemoradiotherapy prior to surgery. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed according to the PRISMA statement up until January 2019. The primary endpoints were complete pathologic response (pCR), disease-free survival, and overall survival rates. RESULTS: A total of 28 studies (3 retrospective and 25 prospective for a total of 3579 patients) were included in the final analysis (n = 2688 treated with TNT and n = 891 with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy therapy). The pooled pCR rate was 22.4% (95% CI 19.4%-25.7%) in all patients treated with TNT (n = 27 studies with data available). In n = 10 comparative studies with data available, TNT was found to increase the odds of pCR by 39% (1.40, 95% CI 1.08-1.81, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of induction or consolidation chemotherapy to standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy results in a higher pCR rate. Given that the comparative analysis was derived from few randomized publications, large confirmatory trials should be carried out before a strong recommendation is made in favor of TNT.

Pharmacological issues concerning olaparib capsule and tablet formulations in treating ovarian cancer: Are they really the same drug?

Olaparib is a first-in-class PARP inhibitor that has demonstrated efficacy as maintenance therapy in patients with ovarian cancer. It has been approved as a capsule formulation and after the publication of data from SOLO2 study became available also as tablet formulation. Due to different pharmacokinetic properties, these different formulations cannot be considered bioequivalent nor interchangeable. The tablet formulation has improved bioavailability, reducing pill burden and offering a more convenient dosage regimen. Furthermore, olaparib tablet formulation had a manageable tolerability profile if compared to capsule one, with most of adverse events of mild or moderate severity. Under this light, olaparib tablet formulation is a useful maintenance strategy for recurrent, platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, providing a more convenient dosing option than the capsule formulation.

Comparative efficacy of palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib for ER+ metastatic breast cancer: an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Several trials have demonstrated the benefit of anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine therapy in estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) advanced breast cancer (BC), in first or subsequent lines of therapy. However, due to the lack of direct/indirect comparisons, there are no data demonstrating the superiority of one drug over the other. We compared the effectiveness of palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib in advanced ER + BC via an indirect adjusted analysis. METHODS: We performed electronic searches in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for prospective phase 3 randomized trials evaluating anti-CDK4/6 inhibitors plus endocrine agents. We compared the results with an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Outcomes of interest were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and G3-4 toxicities occurring in ≥ 5% of patients. RESULTS: Six trials and six treatment arms including a total of 3743 participants, were included. For PFS and ORR analysis, the three agents were similar in both first- and second-line studies. All G3-4 toxicities were similar, with reduced risk of diarrhea for palbociclib versus abemaciclib (relative risk [RR] 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.92; P = 0.04) and of QTc prolongation for palbociclib versus ribociclib (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0-0.83; P = 0.03). Despite different inclusion criteria and length of follow-up, similar features were noticed among second-line studies with the exception of increased risk of anemia G3-4 and diarrhea G3-4 for abemaciclib. CONCLUSIONS: Based on PFS and ORR results of this indirect meta-analysis, palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib are equally effective in either first- or second-line therapy for advanced ER + BC. They, however, ported different toxicity profiles.

Neoadjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies.

Large operable or locally advanced breast cancers (BCs) are usually treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) before surgery. However, there is no evidence to support an improvement in efficacy with dose-dense (DD) CT in this setting. We, therefore, carried out a meta-analysis to investigate whether DD-CT was more effective than the reference (every 3 weeks anthracyclines±taxanes) standard-dose CT as neoadjuvant treatment for BC. We searched Pubmed, SCOPUS, EMBASE, the Web of Science, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized trials comparing conventional versus DD neoadjuvant CT for BC. Odds ratios (ORs) for pathologic complete responses (ypT0N0M0: pCR) and hazard ratios (HRs) of death and recurrence [overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS)] were estimated and pooled. A QUADAS-2 report for all studies included in the final analysis was tabulated for the risk of bias and applicability. A total of six randomized trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The pooled rates of the pCR were 13.5 and 9.2% in the experimental and control arms. A significant increase in the pCR [OR=1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.18-2.02, P=0.001] was noted with neoadjuvant DD-CT. However, the patients who received DD-CT did not have significantly better DFS and OS rates (DFS: HR=0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.01, P=0.06; OS: HR=0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.02, P=0.08). Even with the limitation of a relatively short follow-up period, this meta-analysis shows that DD neoadjuvant CT, despite not leading to a significant increase in survival, increases by 46.7% the possibility of achieving a pCR in operable and locally advanced BC. This treatment should thus be considered one of the backbone treatments of choice when neoadjuvant therapy is planned.

Adjuvant dose-dense chemotherapy in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Dose-dense (DD) chemotherapy (CT) aimed at achieving a higher rate of cancer cell destruction has been adopted as an adjuvant therapy in high-risk breast cancer (BC), with the goal being to improve outcomes. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing data from randomized phase III trials regarding the efficacy and toxicity of this adjuvant DD-CT strategy in early BC. Randomized-controlled trials that compared a DD with a standard adjuvant CT schedule in adult women with resected BC were identified by searching the databases of Pubmed, the Cochrane Cancer Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and the Web of Science up to March 2015. Hazard ratios (HRs) of death and recurrence, and the relative risks of adverse events, were estimated and pooled. A total of 8 phase III trials encompassing 17,188 randomized patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients who received DD-CT had better overall survival (OS: HR 0.86, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.93, P = 0.0001) and disease-free survival (DFS: HR 0.84, 95 % CI 0.77-0.91, P < 0.0001) than those on the conventional schedule. A statistically significant OS benefit was observed in patients with hormone receptor-negative (ER-) tumors (HR 0.8, P = 0.002), but not in those with ER-positive BC (HR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.82-1.05; P = 0.25). DD-CT leads to better OS and DFS, particularly in women with ER- early BC. These results suggest that the DD strategy should be the standard care offered to high-risk ER- BC patients.

Efficacy of fourth-line chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and pooled analysis of published studies.

There are no agents labelled for use as fourth-line therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer, even though it is currently prescribed in about 5-10% of patients. Here, we provide a pooled analysis of published studies on the efficacy of treatments in patients who have had at least three unsuccessful lines of therapy. The literature search was performed on Pubmed, EMBASE, the Web of Science, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Google Scholar and the Cochrane Library using the terms 'lung cancer' OR NSCLC AND 'fourth line'. The response rates and disease control rates were pooled using a random-effect or a fixed-effect model according to heterogeneity. Median progression-free survival and overall survival data were also collected and aggregated to obtain pooled median values of the included studies. Overall, 14 studies (673 patients), which were almost entirely published by Asian institutions, were eligible for this pooled analysis. Among these were two phase II trials and 12 retrospective cohort series. In general, the pooled overall response rate was 13.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 10-18.3] and the pooled overall disease control rate was 47.3% (95% CI 38-56.9). The pooled median progression-free survival for these studies was 3.34 months (95% CI 2.42-4.27). The pooled median overall survival for these studies was 10.5 months (95% CI 9.57-11.52). In conclusion, for non-small-cell lung cancer patients who have undergone three or more unsuccessful lines of therapy, fourth-line treatment could be offered in select cases to those with a good performance status.

Hepatic resection for gastric cancer liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Resection of liver metastases from gastric cancer (GC) is rarely performed, and the outcome after hepatic surgery has not been systematically evaluated in the literature. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of outcome and prognostic factors for survival after liver metastasectomy for GC. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of published studies that focused on long-term outcomes (5-year overall survival [OS]) after surgical management of liver metastases from GC, and included more than 10 patients each. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for variables considered as potential prognostic factors for OS in at least three publications. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies comprising a total of 870 patients were considered in this analysis. The pooled weighted median OS was 22 months (95%CI 17.6-27.2). The pooled 5-year OS after liver resection was 23.8% (95%CI 19-29.3%). The pooled 5-year OS rates for metachronous and synchronous metastases were 30% (95%CI 24.7-35.8%) and 22.6% (95%CI 14-34.4%), respectively. Parameters associated with poor survival were (i) multiple metastases, and (ii) large size of metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic resection of GC liver metastases is associated with an acceptable 5-year OS, in particular after surgery of metachronous lesions, and could be offered to selected patients.

Prognostic role of lactate dehydrogenase in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 76 studies.

BACKGROUND: In cancer cells, metabolism is shifted to aerobic glycolysis with lactate production coupled with a higher uptake of glucose as the main energy source. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) catalyzes the reduction of pyruvate to form lactate, and serum level is often raised in aggressive cancer and hematological malignancies. We have assessed the prognostic value of LDH in solid tumors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review of electronic databases was conducted to identify publications exploring the association of LDH with clinical outcome in solid tumors. Overall survival (OS) was the primary outcome, and cancer-specific survival (CSS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were secondary outcomes. Data from studies reporting a hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were pooled in a meta-analysis. Pooled HRs were computed and weighted using generic inverse-variance and random-effect modeling. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Seventy-six studies comprising 22 882 patients, mainly with advanced disease, were included in the analysis. Median cut-off of serum LDH was 245 U/L. Overall, higher LDH levels were associated with a HR for OS of 1.7 (95% CI 1.62-1.79; p < 0.00001) in 73 studies. The prognostic effect was highest in renal cell, melanoma, gastric, prostate, nasopharyngeal and lung cancers (all p < 0.00001). HRs for PFS was 1.75 (all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A high serum LDH level is associated with a poor survival in solid tumors, in particular melanoma, prostate and renal cell carcinomas, and can be used as a useful and inexpensive prognostic biomarker in metastatic carcinomas.

Long response to eribulin in breast cancer: a case report.

No definitive cure is available for metastatic breast cancer and current therapies mainly focus on symptom control and minimization of adverse events to extend survival and maintain a good quality of life. Current treatment options include hormonal and chemotherapeutic agents which are characterized by different toxicity profiles and are selected based on patients' performance status and prior therapies. Eribulin is a microtubule dynamic inhibitor which acts by sequestering tubulin molecules into aggregates, thus preventing microtubule growth and causing apoptosis. Many studies show that heavily pretreated metastatic breast cancer patients benefit from eribulin treatment both in terms of efficacy and for the favorable toxicity profile. In the Phase III EMBRACE study, eribulin treatment resulted in a significant improvement in overall survival. We report here the case of a patient who experienced a time to progression of several months with eribulin after three lines of chemotherapy and two lines of hormonal therapy.

Progression-free survival as surrogate endpoint in advanced pancreatic cancer: meta-analysis of 30 randomized first-line trials.

BACKGROUND: Progression-free survival (PFS) has not been extensively investigated as a surrogate for survival in the first-line treatments of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this review was to evaluate PFS as a potential surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in advanced pancreatic cancer in trials comparing poly-chemotherapy to gemcitabine alone. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. The key words included randomized trial, first-line chemotherapy, pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine and poly-chemotherapy. Adjusted weighted linear regression was used to calculate RS (Spearman's rank-order correlation coefficient) between PFS and post-progression survival (PPS) with OS (RS) and between treatment effects on PFS and OS (RHR). RESULTS: A total of 30 trials including 8467 patients met the inclusion criteria. Correlation between the treatment effects on PFS and OS (RHR=0.78) and between the endpoint PFS and OS was high across all studies (RS=0.75). The slope of the regression line was 0.76+/-0.26, indicating that an agent producing a 10% risk reduction for PFS will provide a 7.6%+/-2.6% risk reduction for OS. Correlation between PPS and OS was very strong (RS=0.71) and accounted for more than 50% of the whole OS variability (R2=0.57). CONCLUSION: Because of the robust correlation with OS and the potential influence of PPS caused by the second line therapies, it may be justified to consider PFS as a surrogate endpoint in trials evaluating new cytotoxic agents when gemcitabine is the control arm.

The value of platinum agents as neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Platinum agents such as cisplatin and carboplatin are DNA-damaging agents with activity in breast cancer (BC), particularly in the triple negative (TN) subgroup. The utility of platinum agents, in addition to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), is controversial. To assess the activity of platinum agents in patients with TNBC treated with NAC, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies. A search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Web of Science, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was performed to identify studies that investigated platinum-based NAC in patients with TNBC. Random effect models were adopted to estimate the summary risk ratio (RR), and the publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot and Egger's regression asymmetry test. The primary endpoints were the pooled rate of the pathologic complete response (pCR) and the RR to obtain a pCR in patients treated versus not treated with NAC containing platinum agents. 28 studies were included (six randomized controlled trials and 22 retrospective or prospective studies) for a total of 1,598 TNBC patients. Overall, the pooled rate of pCR in patients treated with platinum-based NAC was 45 %. In randomized trials, NAC containing cisplatin or carboplatin significantly increased the rate of pCR compared with nonplatinum agents (RR = 1.45, 95 % CI 1.25-1.68; P < 0.0001). Compared with non-TN, TNBCs were associated with a threefold increase in the pCR rate when treated with platinum-based NAC (RR 3.32, 95 % CI 2.39-4.61; P < 0.0001). In conclusion, pCR rates increase significantly with the addition of cisplatin or carboplatin in TNBC compared with NAC containing no platinum drugs. TN status is a predictor of benefit from platinum-based NAC.

Five or more years of adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published randomised trials.

Five years of adjuvant hormonal therapy is the standard of care in early breast cancer (BC) expressing oestrogen receptors (ER+). Prolonged duration of adjuvant endocrine therapy is implemented to prevent recurrence and death; in particular, its carryover effect may prevent very late events. This meta-analysis compares the efficacy of 5 years of hormonal therapy alone with that of additional years of hormonal therapy, in patients with early BC. Randomised trials comparing 5 years versus more than 5 years of hormonal therapy in BC were identified by electronic searches of PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Meta-analysis was performed using the fixed- or random-effects models. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), BC-specific survival (BCSS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) reported as odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). Eight trials, including 29,138 patients, were identified. Overall, in ER+ BCs, extended endocrine therapy beyond 5 years of tamoxifen significantly improved OS (OR, 0.89; 95 % CI 0.80-0.99; P = 0.03), BCSS (OR, 0.78; 95 % CI 0.69-0.9; P = 0.0003) and RFS (OR 0.72; 95 % CI 0.56-0.92; P = 0.01) compared with 5 years of hormonal therapy alone. Loco-regional and distant relapses were reduced by 36 and 13 %, respectively. Compared with 5 years of tamoxifen, additional adjuvant endocrine therapy reduced risk of death and relapse of ER+ BC by ~10 and 30 %, respectively. This strategy should be considered in patients free of disease after 5 years of hormonal therapy.

Vitamin D3 and COVID-19 Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

BACKGROUND: The immune system (innate and adaptive) is influenced by vitamin D3, which affects gene expression and inflammatory pathways. An umbrella review was conducted to evaluate the power and accuracy of data connecting vitamin D3 to the outcomes of COVID-19 infection and to appraise the proof provided by published meta-analyses. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from database inception to 31 May 2022. Meta-analyses of prospective or retrospective observational studies and randomized trials were included. Evidence of association was graded according to the established criteria: strong, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant. RESULTS: From 74 publications, 27 meta-analyses described five associations between vitamin D3 levels and supplementation and COVID-19 outcomes. Low levels of vitamin D3 were significantly associated with severity (highly suggestive evidence; OR = 1.97 [95% CI, 1.55-2.51], p < 0.01; I2 = 77%, p < 0.01) and mortality risk due to COVID-19 disease (OR = 1.83 [95% CI, 1.55-2.16], p < 0.01; I2 = 50%, p < 0.01). Vitamin D3 supplementation, after a diagnosis of COVID-19 infection, was associated with significantly reduced infection severity (e.g., ICU admission) and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This umbrella review of the available evidence suggests that insufficient vitamin D3 may increase COVID-19 infection risk, severity, and mortality, in addition to showing a highly suggestive association between vitamin D3 supplementation and reduced severity and mortality among infected patients.

The risk for anemia with targeted therapies for solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is a common manifestation in patients with cancer. Little is known about the frequency of and risk for anemia with targeted therapies used to treat solid tumors. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of solid tumors by comparing targeted therapy (alone or in combination) with standard therapy alone to calculate the incidence and relative risk (RR) for anemia events associated with these agents. Overall, 24,310 patients were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The addition of targeted therapies to standard treatment (chemotherapy or placebo/best supportive care) increased the risk for all grades of anemia by 7%. The RR for all grades (incidence, 44%) and grades 1-2 (incidence, 38.9%) of anemia was higher with biological therapies alone but not when combined with chemotherapy. The risk was significant for erlotinib, trastuzumab, and sunitinib. Bevacizumab was associated with a lower risk for anemia. Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor, anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, and tyrosine kinase inhibitors predicted RRs of 1.24, 1.20, 0.82, and 1.33, respectively, and all of these values were significant. CONCLUSION: Grade 1-2 anemia is frequently associated with biological agents. The risk is particularly associated with small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (gefitinib and erlotinib), breast cancer, and lung cancer. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are not labeled for use with targeted therapies (without chemotherapy) and the treatment is supportive only.

Mortality, leukemic risk, and cardiovascular toxicity of adjuvant anthracycline and taxane chemotherapy in breast cancer: a meta-analysis.

The contribution of adjuvant taxanes (T) in cardiovascular toxicity, leukemic risk, and non-cancer-related deaths is unknown when they are added to anthracycline (A)-based chemotherapy for breast cancer. We performed a meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the risk of cardiovascular toxicity, leukemia, neurotoxicity, and non-breast cancer-related mortality associated with T added to adjuvant A in breast cancer. PubMed was searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective RCTs in which approved T in combination with A (A + T) were compared with A alone as adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer. Summary incidence rates, relative risks (RRs), and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated by means of fixed- or random-effects models. A total of 27,039 patients from 15 RCTs were included. Compared with A alone, A + T was associated with a statistically similar risk of toxicity. Compared with control arms, A + T schedules with less cumulative dose of anthracyclines than control arms were associated with lower severe cardiotoxicity (RR = 0.41, [95% CI 0.26-0.66], P = 0.0002), venous thromboembolic events (RR 0.45, [95% CI 0.26-0.79], P = 0.006), and leukemic risk (RR 0.39; [95%CI 0.18-0.87] P = 0.02), but with an increased risk of non-breast cancer-related mortality (RR = 1.79, [95% CI 1.06-3.04] P = 0.03). In particular, this risk of death is greater when >3 cycles of A precede T in sequential schedules (RR 2.24, [1.2-4.21] P = 0.01). This meta-analysis suggests that A + T-based adjuvant chemotherapy is as toxic as A alone with no significant difference in non-breast cancer-related mortality. However, sequential A + T schedules are associated with less toxicity, but a significant increase in non-breast cancer-related mortality compared with control arms with a greater dose of A.

COVID-19 and Lung Cancer Survival: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: The outbreak of COVID-19 poses an unprecedented challenge to global public health. Patients with cancer are at a higher risk during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Patients with lung cancer and COVID-19 were compared to those without cancer and those with other malignancies for the main outcome of this study. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in susceptibility, disease severity, and mortality between lung cancer patients and the general population. Methods: Using PRISMA reporting guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature. The Cochrane Library database, PubMed, EMBASE, and PubMed Central were comprehensively searched for published papers until 31 May 2022. A pooled risk ratio (OR) with 95% CI was presented as the result of this meta-analysis. Results: We included 29 studies involved 21,257 patients with lung cancer and SARS-CoV-2 infection. Analysis data showed that mortality in patients with lung cancer was significantly higher than that in patients without cancer (HR = 2.00 [95%CI 1.52, 2.63], p < 0.01) or with other malignancies (HR = 1.91 [95%CI 1.53, 2.39], p < 0.01). In addition, we also observed a higher risk of severe infection in terms of life-threatening or required ICU admission/mechanical ventilation for lung cancer patients (HR = 1.47 [95%CI 1.06, 2.03], p = 0.02) than for patients with no cancer or other malignancies. Regarding lung cancer as a risk factor for acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection, we could not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio [HR] =2.73 [95%CI 0.84, 8.94], p = 0.1). Conclusion: Lung cancer represents an important comorbidity and modifies COVID-19 prognosis in terms of disease severity and mortality. More patients experience severe or even fatal events. Considering their inherent fragility, patients with lung cancer, and generally all oncological populations, should be treated more carefully during the COVID-19 pandemic.