Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Sanjay Awasthi x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Kyaw Z. Thein, Sriman Swarup, Anita Sultan, Subhanudh Thavaraputta, Myo H. Zaw, Nicholas D’Cunha, Sanjay Awasthi, Fred Hardwicke and Lukman Tijani

Background: Tyrosine kinases such as VEGFR, KIT, RET, MET are implicated in development and progression of several solid tumors. Cabozantinib is an oral multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor and has shown survival benefits in several solid tumors. Yet, there are notable toxicities. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to determine the risk of palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE) and hypertension in patients with metastatic solid tumors treated with cabozantinib. Methods: We systematically conducted a comprehensive literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE databases, and meeting abstracts through September 2018. Phase III RCTs that mention PPE and hypertension as adverse effects were incorporated in the analysis. Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the estimated pooled risk ratio (RR), and risk difference (RD) with 95% CI. Random effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic. Results: 4 phase III RCTs with total of 2,703 patients, comparing cabozantinib (C) vs everolimus, C vs placebo, C vs prednisone, were included. I2 statistic was 70.70, suggesting some heterogeneity among RCTs. All grade-PPE incidence was 666 (39.3%) in cabozantinib arm vs 38 (3.76%) in control arm with a RR of 11.378 (95% CI: 6.545–19.782; P<.0001). The absolute RD was 0.383 (95% CI: 0.294–0.473; P<.0001). High-grade PPE was reported in 172 (10.15%) in cabozantinib group vs 3 (0.29%) in control group with a RR of 19.077 (95% CI: 5.733–63.476; P<.0001). The RD was 0.105 (95% CI: 0.049–0.160; P<.0001). The overall incidence of hypertension was noted at 524 (30.95%) in cabozantinib arm vs 84 (8.31%) in control arm. The pooled RR of hypertension was 4.131 (95% CI: 2.656–6.425; P<.0001) and RD was 0.240 (95% CI: 0.186–0.295; P<.0001). High-grade hypertension was reported in 276 (16.30%) in cabozantinib group vs 41 (4.05%) in control group with a RR of 4.324 (95% CI: 2.484–7.525; P<.0001) and RD was 0.115 (95% CI: 0.085–0.144; P<.0001). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that cabozantinib contributed to significant toxicity of any-grade and high-grade PPE as well as hypertension, with a RR of 19.07 for grade 3 and 4 PPE. Recognizing these toxicities and prompt intervention with proper supportive care may enhance patients’ quality of life, ultimately leading to better compliance.

Full access

Kyaw Z. Thein, Somedeb Ball, Sriman Swarup, Anita Sultan, Myo H. Zaw, Lukman Tijani, Sanjay Awasthi, Fred Hardwicke and Catherine Jones

Introduction: Ribociclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor, has improved survival in patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER 2)-negative advanced breast cancer. Despite remarkable efficacy, potential cardiac toxicities remain a concern. We undertook a combined analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to estimate the incidence of prolongation of corrected QT interval (QTcF) associated with ribociclib. Methods: We performed systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, and meeting abstracts till September 30, 2018, to find all phase 3 RCTs comparing ribociclib with other agents or placebo in patients with advanced breast cancer and reporting QTc prolongation as adverse event. Mantel-Haenszel method was used to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) and absolute risk difference (RD) with 95% CI. Fixed effects model was applied. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistic. Results: Three phase III studies with 2,062 participants were included. Randomization ratio was 1 to 1 in MONALEESA-2 and 7 studies and 2 to 1 in MONALEESA-3 study. I2 statistic was 0, suggesting homogeneity across studies. Prolongation of QTcF >60 msec from baseline was observed in 72 patients (61 had post-baseline QTcF >480 msec) in ribociclib arm, compared to 7 in control arm. Pooled RR for prolongation of QTcF was 7.956 (95%CI: 3.683–17.187; P<.001) and RD was 0.055 (95%CI: 0.040–0.070; P<.001). The risk of having a post-baseline QTcF >480 msec was significantly higher with ribociclib vs control (pooled RR, 4.002; 95%CI: 2.161–7.412; P<.001; and RD, 0.039; 95%CI: 0.024–0.055; P<.001). A total of 16 (1.38%) patients in the ribociclib arm had dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation due to QTcF prolongation, as opposed to 3 (0.33%) in control arm. Pooled RR and RD were statistically significant at 4.204 (95%CI: 1.333–3.260; P=.014) and 0.012 (95%CI: 0.004–0.021; P=.006), respectively. Conclusion: Advanced breast cancer patients may have cardiac dysfunction due to prior cardiotoxic chemotherapies. In our meta-analysis, ribociclib was associated with significantly higher risk of QTc prolongation and the resultant dosing inconsistencies and discontinuation. Early detection of this potential adverse event and timely intervention are critical.