Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis on Treating Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer After CDK4/6 Inhibitors.

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Current oncology Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.3390/curroncol32010053
Neha Pathak, Abhenil Mittal, Sudhir Kumar, Chitrakshi Nagpal, Eitan Amir, Partha Haldar, Bharath B Gangadharaiah, Akash Kumar, Ashutosh Mishra, Atul Batra
{"title":"Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis on Treating Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer After CDK4/6 Inhibitors.","authors":"Neha Pathak, Abhenil Mittal, Sudhir Kumar, Chitrakshi Nagpal, Eitan Amir, Partha Haldar, Bharath B Gangadharaiah, Akash Kumar, Ashutosh Mishra, Atul Batra","doi":"10.3390/curroncol32010053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The optimal treatment of estrogen receptor-positive (ER +) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after progression on cyclin-dependent 4/6 kinase inhibitors (CDK4/6i) is unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of phase-II/-III randomized trials of ER + MBC post CDK4/6i + ET progression. We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using generic inverse variance and odds ratios (ORs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method for adverse events (AEs) with Review-Manager version-5.4. NMA was executed using WINBUGS (Microsoft Excel). Three molecular subgroups were analyzed: HER2-low, PI3K/AKT/mTOR, and the ESR1 mutation subgroup for selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 studies were included. In the HER2-low group, Sacituzumab govitecan and trastuzumab deruxtecan had a similar efficacy (HR, 95% CI): PFS (0.98; 0.63-1.43) and OS (1.08; 0.76-1.55). In PI3K/AKT/mTOR-altered cases, capivasertib was superior to alpelisib PFS (0.77; 0.53-1.12), and OS (0.80; 0.48-1.35). SERDs had worse PFS and OS versus ongoing CDK 4/6i (ribociclib).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No therapy emerged as the unequivocal choice in the post-CDK 4/6i domain in unselected subgroups. In the HER2-low population, a similar efficacy and different toxicity spectrum was seen. In AKT-altered tumors, capivasertib was less toxic than alpelisib.</p><p><strong>Prospero id: </strong>CRD4202236412.</p>","PeriodicalId":11012,"journal":{"name":"Current oncology","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol32010053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The optimal treatment of estrogen receptor-positive (ER +) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after progression on cyclin-dependent 4/6 kinase inhibitors (CDK4/6i) is unknown.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of phase-II/-III randomized trials of ER + MBC post CDK4/6i + ET progression. We calculated the hazard ratio (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using generic inverse variance and odds ratios (ORs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method for adverse events (AEs) with Review-Manager version-5.4. NMA was executed using WINBUGS (Microsoft Excel). Three molecular subgroups were analyzed: HER2-low, PI3K/AKT/mTOR, and the ESR1 mutation subgroup for selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD).

Results: A total of 14 studies were included. In the HER2-low group, Sacituzumab govitecan and trastuzumab deruxtecan had a similar efficacy (HR, 95% CI): PFS (0.98; 0.63-1.43) and OS (1.08; 0.76-1.55). In PI3K/AKT/mTOR-altered cases, capivasertib was superior to alpelisib PFS (0.77; 0.53-1.12), and OS (0.80; 0.48-1.35). SERDs had worse PFS and OS versus ongoing CDK 4/6i (ribociclib).

Conclusion: No therapy emerged as the unequivocal choice in the post-CDK 4/6i domain in unselected subgroups. In the HER2-low population, a similar efficacy and different toxicity spectrum was seen. In AKT-altered tumors, capivasertib was less toxic than alpelisib.

Prospero id: CRD4202236412.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Current oncology
Current oncology ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
664
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Current Oncology is a peer-reviewed, Canadian-based and internationally respected journal. Current Oncology represents a multidisciplinary medium encompassing health care workers in the field of cancer therapy in Canada to report upon and to review progress in the management of this disease. We encourage submissions from all fields of cancer medicine, including radiation oncology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, pediatric oncology, pathology, and cancer rehabilitation and survivorship. Articles published in the journal typically contain information that is relevant directly to clinical oncology practice, and have clear potential for application to the current or future practice of cancer medicine.
期刊最新文献
MicroRNA-129-3p Suppresses Tumor Progression and Chemoradioresistance in Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Real-World Experience with CDK4/6 Inhibitors in the First-Line Palliative Setting for HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer. Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis on Treating Hormone Receptor-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer After CDK4/6 Inhibitors. The PREPARE Study: Acceptability and Feasibility of a Telehealth Trimodal Prehabilitation Program for Women with Endometrial Neoplasia. Advancing Radiobiology: Investigating the Effects of Photon, Proton, and Carbon-Ion Irradiation on PANC-1 Cells in 2D and 3D Tumor Models.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1