Efficacy of PARP Inhibitors as Maintenance Therapy for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Antineoplastic Agents
/ therapeutic use
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Disease-Free Survival
Humans
Male
Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors
/ therapeutic use
Progression-Free Survival
Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant
/ drug therapy
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PARP inhibitors
metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC)
overall survival
progression-free survival
Journal
Oncology (Williston Park, N.Y.)
ISSN: 0890-9091
Titre abrégé: Oncology (Williston Park)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8712059
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 11 2021
18 11 2021
Historique:
entrez:
28
1
2022
pubmed:
29
1
2022
medline:
11
2
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Background: PARP inhibitors have been recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Their effectiveness is seen when used with androgen deprivation therapy in patients with or without deleterious germline and somatic genetic mutations. Objectives: To identify all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which PARP inhibitors have been assessed in the treatment of mCRPC, and to compare the efficacy of PARP inhibitors in these patients with standard-of-care (S/nonhormonal therapies like abiraterone acetate (Zytiga) or enzalutamide (Xtandi) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Search strategy: A systemic review search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Central Cochrane Registry. Selection criteria: Randomized clinical trials with PARP inhibitors, with or without antihormonal therapy, as the intervention arm, with SOC as control. Data analysis: HRs were calculated for PFS and OS. For effect sizes, a confidence interval of 95% was used, and for statistical significance, a P value of less than .05 was used. Analysis was done using random effects and fixed models and both were reported. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 statistic. Results: Three RCTs were included in the analysis. PARP inhibitors showed a statistically significant improvement in OS when calculated using a fixed model (HR, 0.751; 95% CI, 0.582-0.968) but the improvement was not significant when calculated using a random model (HR, 0.758; 95% CI, 0.565-1.017; I2 = 23). Similarly, the improvement in PFS was statistically significant when calculated using a fixed model (HR, 0.626; 95% CI, 0.521-0.752), and no statistical significance was noted with a random model (HR, 0.674; 95% CI, 0.437-1.039; I2 = 80). Conclusions: PARP inhibitors contributed to significant increases in PFS and OS when used with or without antihormonal agents like abiraterone or enzalutamide. This efficacy was pronounced among the patients with deleterious germline or somatic homologous recombination repair gene mutations, although patients without these mutations also showed a better PFS and OS in comparison with SOC therapy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35088974
doi: 10.46883/ONC.2021.3511.0708
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antineoplastic Agents
0
Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM