Association between control group therapy and magnitude of clinical benefit of cancer drugs

Little is known about the impact of control group therapy on clinical benefit scales such as American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (ASCO-VF), European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS), National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Evidence Blocks and ASCO Cancer Research Committee (ASCO-CRC). We searched Drugs@FDA to identify cancer drugs approved between January 2012 and December 2021 based on randomized trials (RCTs). Definition of substantial clinical benefit was based on recommendations for each scale. Associations between characteristics of control group therapy and clinical benefit were explored using logistic regression. RCTs with a control group of active treatment plus placebo were associated with significantly lower odds of substantial benefit with ESMO-MCBS (OR 0.27, P = 0.003) and ASCO-VF (OR 0.30, P = 0.008) but not with NCCN Evidence Blocks or ASCO-CRC. This effect was attenuated and lost statistical significance without adjustment for quality of life (QoL) and/or toxicity (ESMO-MCBS OR 0.50, P = 0.17; ASCO-VF OR 0.49, P = 0.11). Clinical benefit scales can be sensitive to control group therapy. RCTs with substantial overlap between experimental and control therapy showed lower magnitude of clinical benefit using ESMO-MCBS and ASCO-VF scales; possibly due to differences in the weighting of QoL and toxicity between different frameworks

Benefit of adjuvant bisphosphonates in early breast cancer treated with contemporary systemic therapy: A meta-analysis of randomized control trials

Background: The absolute and relative benefits of adjuvant bisphosphonates on disease-free survival and overall survival in patients receiving contemporary systemic therapy for early breast cancer is uncertain. Methods: Data from randomized trials of adjuvant bisphosphonates that recruited patients exclusively after 2000 and reported disease free survival and overall survival was utilized. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival in bisphosphonates and control group along with associated hazard ratios were extracted. Absolute data were weighted by sample size and hazard ratios were pooled using inverse variance and random effects modelling. Meta-regression comprising linear regression weighted by sample size (mixed effects) was performed to explore association between disease and treatment related factors and absolute differences in benefit from bisphosphonates. Results: Eleven trials comprising 24023 patients were included in the analysis. For disease free survival, pooled hazard ratio was 0.89 (0.81–0.97, p = 0.008) with a 1.5 % weighted mean difference favoring bisphosphonates over control. There was no significant overall survival benefit (0.92, 0.82–1.03, p = 0.16). Among patients receiving anthracycline and taxane based chemotherapy, there were no differences in either disease free survival (0.95, 0.80–1.12) or overall survival (1.04, 0.81–1.32). Meta-regression showed lower benefits in higher risk patients (node-positive, larger tumor size, estrogen receptor-, grade 3 or those receiving chemotherapy). Overall, 1 % (95 % CI 0.75–1.15) of patients experienced osteonecrosis of jaw related to zoledronic acid. Conclusions: Compared to the Early Breast Cancer Trialist's Collaborative Group meta-analysis, benefit from adjuvant bisphosphonates is lower in recent trials especially in higher risk patients receiving contemporary chemotherapy. The balance between benefits and risks of adjuvant bisphosphonates should be considered in individual patients

Filling the Gap after CDK4/6 Inhibitors: Novel Endocrine and Biologic Treatment Options for Metastatic Hormone Receptor Positive Breast Cancer

The rise of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitors has rapidly reshaped treatment algorithms for hormone receptor (HR)-positive metastatic breast cancer, with endocrine treatment (ET) plus a CDK4/6-inhibitor currently representing the standard of care in the first line setting. However, treatment selection for those patients experiencing progression while on ET + CDK4/6-inhibitors remains challenging due to the suboptimal activity or significant toxicities of the currently available options. There is also a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of older regimens, such as everolimus + exemestane, post-CDK4/6 inhibition. In this setting of high unmet need, several clinical trials of novel drugs have recently reported encouraging results: the addition of the AKT-inhibitor capivasertib to fulvestrant demonstrated a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS); the oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD) elacestrant prolonged PFS compared to traditional ET in a phase 3 trial, particularly among patients with detectable ESR1 mutations; finally, PARP inhibitors are available treatment options for patients with pathogenic BRCA1/2 germline mutations. Overall, a plethora of novel endocrine and biologic treatment options are finally filling the gap between first-line ET and later line chemotherapy. In this review article, we recapitulate the activity of these novel treatment options and their potential role in future treatment algorithms

Prognostic value of human leukocyte antigen G expression in solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IntroductionIdentification of modulators of the immune response with inhibitory properties that could be susceptible for therapeutic intervention is a key goal in cancer research. An example is the human leukocyte antigen G (HLA-G), a nonclassical major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I molecule, involved in cancer progression. MethodsIn this article we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between HLA-G expression and outcome in solid tumors. This study was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO.ResultsA total of 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies comprised data from 4871 patients reporting overall survival (OS), and 961 patients, reporting disease free survival (DFS). HLA-G expression was associated with worse OS (HR 2.09, 95% CI = 1.67 to 2.63; P < .001), that was higher in gastric (HR = 3.40; 95% CI = 1.64 to 7.03), pancreatic (HR = 1.72; 95% CI = 0.79 to 3.74) and colorectal (HR = 1.55; 95% CI = 1.16 to 2.07) cancer. No significant differences were observed between the most commonly utilized antibody (4H84) and other methods of detection. HLA-G expression was associated with DFS which approached but did not meet statistical significance. DiscussionIn summary, we describe the first meta-analysis associating HLA-G expression and worse survival in a variety of solid tumors. Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022311973