A comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis: the role of anti-angiogenic agents in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic drug monotherapy and combination therapy for ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

As the development of novel anti-angiogenic drugs and the continuous evolution of guideline recommendations, the efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic agents in ovarian cancer (OC) remains unclear. Consequently, a meta-analysis was carried out to assess the efficacy and safety of anti-angiogenic drug monotherapy and combination therapy for OC.

Methods

An exhaustive literature review was performed across multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane, encompassing all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up until 6 April 2024. The evaluation of efficacy outcomes incorporated progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR). Safety was assessed through the occurrence of any grade adverse events (AEs) and grade ≥3 AEs. Synthesis of the data involved the calculation of hazard ratios (HRs), relative risks (RRs), and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and prediction intervals (PIs). Trial sequential analysis was executed employing TSA v0.9.5.10 Beta software, STATA 12.0, and R software 4.3.1.

Results

In this meta-analysis, 35 RCTs were included, encompassing 16,199 subjects in total. The overall analysis indicated that anti-angiogenic drug combination therapy significantly improved PFS (HR [95% CI] = 0.678 [0.606-0.759], 95% PI: 0.415-1.108), OS (HR [95% CI] = 0.917 [0.870-0.966], 95% PI: 0.851-0.984), and ORR (RR [95% CI] = 1.441 [1.287-1.614], 95% PI: 1.032-2.014), but also increased the incidence of grade ≥3 AEs (RR [95% CI] = 1.137 [1.099-1.177], 95% PI: 1.011-1.252). The analysis did not corroborate any benefit of anti-angiogenic monotherapy over placebo concerning PFS (HR [95% CI] = 0.956 [0.709-1.288], 95% PI: 0.345-2.645) and OS (HR [95% CI] = 1.039 [0.921-1.173], 95% PI: 0.824-1.331). However, it was observed that monotherapy with anti-angiogenic drugs did increase the incidence of any grade AEs (RR [95% CI] = 1.072 [1.036-1.109], 95% PI: 0.709-1.592).

Conclusion

Our study confirmed the PFS, OS, and ORR benefits of anti-angiogenic drug combination therapy for OC patients. The efficacy results of anti-angiogenic monotherapy necessitates further evaluation as more RCTs become available. Clinicians should be vigilant of AEs when administering anti-angiogenic agents in a clinical setting.

The role of maintenance therapy in the treatment of advanced urothelial cancer: a comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis

Concerns increase with maintenance therapy for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC). We perform a comprehensive network meta-analysis (NMA) to investigate the efficacy and toxicities of maintenance therapy in aUC patients. Trials assessing maintenance treatment with either a continuous or a switch strategy for aUC were identified. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicities. Nine articles reporting eight trials were included. The pooled hazard ratio demonstrated that maintenance therapy significantly improved OS giving HR 0.83 (95%CI: 0.74-0.93, P = 0.0013) and PFS with HR of 0.78 (95%CI: 0.62-0.99, P = 0.05), but increased the risk of developing severe adverse events and treated-related discontinues (P < 0.05). Sub-group analysis indicated that 'switch' ICI (immune checkpoint inhibitor) maintenance therapy significantly improved OS and PFS when compared to best support care (BSC) (P < 0.05). NMA showed that chemotherapy followed by 'switch' maintenance with ICI significantly improved OS (HR 0.70, 95%CI: 0.57-0.87) when compared to BSC. 'Continuous' maintenance with ICI alone had a tendency to improve OS (HR 0.85, 95%CI: 0.71-1.01), and TA (HR0.93, 95%CI: 0.58-1.50) and vinflunine (HR 0.74, 95%CI: 0.44-1.24) was no significantly associated with a lower likelihood of disease death. Based on the analysis of the treatment ranking, 'switch' maintenance with ICI appeared as the best treatment approach. Our pooled results confirm that maintenance therapy yields a significant survival advantage for aUC patients. NMA indicates that switch maintenance with ICI is the optimum maintenance treatment for aUC and reduces mortality by about a third.

Neo-vascularization-based therapeutic perspectives in advanced ovarian cancer

The process of angiogenesis is well described for its potential role in the development of normal ovaries, and physiological functions as well as in the initiation, progression, and metastasis of ovarian cancer (OC). In advanced stages of OC, cancer cells spread outside the ovary to the pelvic, abdomen, lung, or multiple secondary sites. This seriously limits the efficacy of therapeutic options contributing to fatal clinical outcomes. Notably, a variety of angiogenic effectors are produced by the tumor cells to initiate angiogenic processes leading to the development of new blood vessels, which provide essential resources for tumor survival, dissemination, and dormant micro-metastasis of tumor cells. Multiple proangiogenic effectors and their signaling axis have been discovered and functionally characterized for potential clinical utility in OC. In this review, we have provided the current updates on classical and emerging proangiogenic effectors, their signaling axis, and the immune microenvironment contributing to the pathogenesis of OC. Moreover, we have comprehensively reviewed and discussed the significance of the preclinical strategies, drug repurposing, and clinical trials targeting the angiogenic processes that hold promising perspectives for the better management of patients with OC.

Angiogenesis inhibitors for the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Many women, and other females, with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) develop resistance to conventional chemotherapy drugs. Drugs that inhibit angiogenesis (development of new blood vessels), essential for tumour growth, control cancer growth by denying blood supply to tumour nodules.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and toxicities of angiogenesis inhibitors for treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) by searching CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase (from 1990 to 30 September 2022). We searched clinical trials registers and contacted investigators of completed and ongoing trials for further information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing angiogenesis inhibitors with standard chemotherapy, other types of anti-cancer treatment, other angiogenesis inhibitors with or without other treatments, or placebo/no treatment in a maintenance setting, in women with EOC.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), quality of life (QoL), adverse events (grade 3 and above) and hypertension (grade 2 and above).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 50 studies (14,836 participants) for inclusion (including five studies from the previous version of this review): 13 solely in females with newly-diagnosed EOC and 37 in females with recurrent EOC (nine studies in platinum-sensitive EOC; 19 in platinum-resistant EOC; nine with studies with mixed or unclear platinum sensitivity). The main results are presented below.  Newly-diagnosed EOC Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), given with chemotherapy and continued as maintenance, likely results in little to no difference in OS compared to chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.07; 2 studies, 2776 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence is very uncertain for PFS (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.05; 2 studies, 2746 participants; very low-certainty evidence), although the combination results in a slight reduction in global QoL (mean difference (MD) -6.4, 95% CI -8.86 to -3.94; 1 study, 890 participants; high-certainty evidence). The combination likely increases any adverse event (grade ≥ 3) (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.26; 1 study, 1485 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in hypertension (grade ≥ 2) (RR 4.27, 95% CI 3.25 to 5.60; 2 studies, 2707 participants; low-certainty evidence). Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) to block VEGF receptors (VEGF-R), given with chemotherapy and continued as maintenance, likely result in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.17; 2 studies, 1451 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and likely increase PFS slightly (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.00; 2 studies, 2466 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The combination likely reduces QoL slightly (MD -1.86, 95% CI -3.46 to -0.26; 1 study, 1340 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but it increases any adverse event (grade ≥ 3) slightly (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.55; 1 study, 188 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and may result in a large increase in hypertension (grade ≥ 3) (RR 6.49, 95% CI 2.02 to 20.87; 1 study, 1352 participants; low-certainty evidence).  Recurrent EOC (platinum-sensitive) Moderate-certainty evidence from three studies (with 1564 participants) indicates that bevacizumab with chemotherapy, and continued as maintenance, likely results in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.02), but likely improves PFS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.63) compared to chemotherapy alone. The combination may result in little to no difference in QoL (MD 0.8, 95% CI -2.11 to 3.71; 1 study, 486 participants; low-certainty evidence), but it increases the rate of any adverse event (grade ≥ 3) slightly (RR 1.11, 1.07 to 1.16; 3 studies, 1538 participants; high-certainty evidence). Hypertension (grade ≥ 3) was more common in arms with bevacizumab (RR 5.82, 95% CI 3.84 to 8.83; 3 studies, 1538 participants).  TKIs with chemotherapy may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.11; 1 study, 282 participants; low-certainty evidence), likely increase PFS (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.72; 1 study, 282 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and may have little to no effect on QoL (MD 6.1, 95% CI -0.96 to 13.16; 1 study, 146 participants; low-certainty evidence). Hypertension (grade ≥ 3) was more common with TKIs (RR 3.32, 95% CI 1.21 to 9.10). Recurrent EOC (platinum-resistant) Bevacizumab with chemotherapy and continued as maintenance increases OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.88; 5 studies, 778 participants; high-certainty evidence) and likely results in a large increase in PFS (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.58; 5 studies, 778 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The combination may result in a large increase in hypertension (grade ≥ 2) (RR 3.11, 95% CI 1.83 to 5.27; 2 studies, 436 participants; low-certainty evidence). The rate of bowel fistula/perforation (grade ≥ 2) may be slightly higher with bevacizumab (RR 6.89, 95% CI 0.86 to 55.09; 2 studies, 436 participants). Evidence from eight studies suggest TKIs with chemotherapy likely result in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.08; 940 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), with low-certainty evidence that it may increase PFS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; 940 participants), and may result in little to no meaningful difference in QoL (MD ranged from -0.19 at 6 weeks to -3.40 at 4 months). The combination increases any adverse event (grade ≥ 3) slightly (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.49; 3 studies, 402 participants; high-certainty evidence). The effect on bowel fistula/perforation rates is uncertain (RR 2.74, 95% CI 0.77 to 9.75; 5 studies, 557 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Bevacizumab likely improves both OS and PFS in platinum-resistant relapsed EOC. In platinum-sensitive relapsed disease, bevacizumab and TKIs probably improve PFS, but may or may not improve OS. The results for TKIs in platinum-resistant relapsed EOC are similar. The effects on OS or PFS in newly-diagnosed EOC are less certain, with a decrease in QoL and increase in adverse events. Overall adverse events and QoL data were more variably reported than were PFS data. There appears to be a role for anti-angiogenesis treatment, but given the additional treatment burden and economic costs of maintenance treatments, benefits and risks of anti-angiogenesis treatments should be carefully considered.

Treatment options for recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on RCTs

Background

There are a variety of treatment options for recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, and the optimal specific treatment still remains to be determined. Therefore, this Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the optimal treatment options for recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

Methods

Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for articles published until 15 June 2022. The outcome measures for this meta-analysis were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) of Grade 3-4. The Cochrane assessment tool for risk of bias was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included original studies. The Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted. This study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022347273).

Results

Our systematic review included 11 RCTs involving 1871 patients and 11 treatments other than chemotherapy. The results of meta-analysis showed that the overall survival (OS) was the highest in adavosertib + gemcitabine compared with conventional chemotherapy, (HR=0.56,95%CI:0.35-0.91), followed by sorafenib + topotecan (HR=0.65, 95%CI:0.45-0.93). In addition, Adavosertib + Gemcitabine regimen had the highest PFS (HR=0.55,95%CI:0.34-0.88), followed by Bevacizumab + Gemcitabine regimen (HR=0.48,95%CI:0.38-0.60) and the immunotherapy of nivolumab was the safest (HR=0.164,95%CI:0.312-0.871) with least adverse events of Grades 3-4.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicated that Adavosertib (WEE1 kinase-inhibitor) + gemcitabine regimen and Bevacizumab + Gemcitabine regimen would be significantly beneficial to patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, and could be preferred for recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. The immunotherapeutic agent, Nivolumab, is of considerable safety, with a low risk for grade-III or IV adverse events. Its safety is comparable to Adavosertib + gemcitabine regimen. Pazopanib + Paclitaxel (weekly regimen), Sorafenib + Topotecan/Nivolumab could be selected if there are contraindications of the above strategies.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022347273.

Analysis of Efficacy-To-Safety Ratio of Angiogenesis-Inhibitors Based Therapies in Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

(1) Background: Among new anti-angiogenesis agents being developed and ever-changing guidelines indications, the question of the benefits/safety ratio remains unclear. (2) Methods: We performed a systematic review combined with a meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials (12,081 patients), evaluating overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and toxicity (grade ≥ 3 toxic effects, type, and number of all adverse effects. (3) Results: The analysis showed improvement of pooled-PFS (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.64-0.78; I² = 77%; p < 0.00001) in first-line (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93; p = 0.0003) or recurrent cancer (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.56-0.70; p < 0.00001) and regardless of the type of anti-angiogenesis drug used (Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors, VEGF-receptors (VEGF-R) inhibitors or angiopoietin inhibitors). Improved OS was also observed (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.90-0.99; p = 0.03). OS benefits were only observed in recurrent neoplasms, both platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant neoplasms. Grade ≥ 3 adverse effects were increased across all trials. Anti-angiogenetic therapy increased the risk of hypertension, infection, thromboembolic/hemorrhagic events, and gastro-intestinal perforations but not the risk of wound-related issues, anemia or posterior leukoencephalopathy syndrome. (4) Conclusions: Although angiogenesis inhibitors improve PFS, there are little-to-no OS benefits. Given the high risk of severe adverse reactions, a careful selection of patients is required for obtaining the best results possible.

The optimal regional irradiation volume for breast cancer patients: A comprehensive systematic review and network meta-analysis of published studies

Background

Currently, the optimal adjuvant regional nodal irradiation (RNI) volume for breast cancer (BC) remained controversial. We aimed to define the optimal RNI treatment volume for BC by using a comprehensive network meta-analysis (NMA) of published studies.

Materials and methods

PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception to 30 May 2022. Studies assessing different adjuvant RNI volumes for BC were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), and secondary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS) and distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS).

Results

A total of 29,640 BC patients from twenty studies were included. The pooled hazard ratio demonstrated that internal mammary node irradiation (IMNI) in BC patients significantly improved OS giving HR (hazard ratio) of 0.87 (95%CI: 0.83-0.91, p<0.001), DFS with HR of 0.78 (95%CI: 0.68-0.90, p<0.01), and DMFS with HR of 0.87 (95%CI: 0.79-0.97, p<0.01) when compared to controls. Sub-group analysis indicated that RNI with IMNI significantly improved OS (HR 0.87, 95%CI: 0.81-0.93, p<0.01), DFS (HR 0.65, 95%CI: 0.56-0.77, p<0.01), and DMFS (HR 0.90, 95%CI: 0.82-0.98, p=0.02) when compared to RNI without IMNI. NMA showed that CW/WB (chest wall/whole breast) + RNI with IMNI significantly improved DFS (HR 0.93, 95%CI: 0.86-1.00) and DMFS (HR 0.90, 95%CI: 0.81-0.99), but not for OS (HR 0.93, 95%CI: 0.84-1.03) when compared to CW/WB alone. Based on the analysis of the treatment ranking, CW/WB+RNI with IMNI appeared as the best treatment approach for BC patients.

Conclusions

Our pooled results demonstrated that RNI with IMNI yielded a significant survival advantage for BC patients. NMA showed that CW/WB+RNI with IMNI was the optimal radiation volume for BC patients.

Antibody therapeutics for epithelial ovarian cancer

INTRODUCTION

High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) is an aggressive subtype of epithelial ovarian carcinoma (EOC) and remains the most lethal gynecologic cancer. A lack of effective and tolerable therapeutic options and nonspecific symptoms at presentation with advanced stage of disease are among the challenges in the management of the disease.

AREAS COVERED

An overview of ovarian cancer, followed by a discussion of the current therapeutic regimes and challenges that arise during and after the treatment of EOC. We discuss different formats of antibody therapeutics and their usage in targeting validated targets implicated in ovarian cancer, as well as three emerging novel proteins as examples recently implicated in their contribution to adaptive resistance in ovarian cancer.

EXPERT OPINION

Antibody therapeutics allow for a unique and effective way to target proteins implicated in cancer and other diseases, and have the potential to radically change the outcomes of patients suffering from ovarian cancer. The vast array of targets that have been implicated in ovarian cancer and yet the lack of effective therapeutic options for patients further stresses the importance of discovering novel proteins that can be targeted, as well as predictive biomarkers that can inform the stratification of patients into treatment-specific populations.