Correction: Serum bicarbonate is a marker of peri-operative mortality but is not associated with long term survival in colorectal cancer.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228466.].

PARP (Poly ADP-Ribose Polymerase) inhibitors for locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer remains a challenge to treat. With emerging study results, it is important to interpret the available clinical data and apply the evidence offering the most effective treatment to the right patient. Poly(ADP Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are a new class of drug and their role in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer is being established. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase (PARP) inhibitors in the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival; secondary outcomes included progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: On 8 June 2020, we searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via OvidSP, Embase via OvidSP, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) search portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences as well as scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors of trials for further information, where needed. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials on participants with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer comparing 1) chemotherapy in combination with PARP inhibitors, compared to the same chemotherapy without PARP inhibitors or 2) treatment with PARP inhibitors, compared to treatment with other chemotherapy. We included studies that reported on our primary outcome of overall survival and secondary outcomes including progression-free survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 49 articles for qualitative synthesis, describing five randomised controlled trials that were included in the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). A sixth trial was assessed as eligible but had ended prematurely and no data were available for inclusion in our meta-analysis. Risk of bias was predominately low to unclear across all studies except in regards to performance bias (3/5 high risk) and detection bias for the outcomes of quality of life (2/2 high risk) and reporting of adverse events (3/5 high risk). High-certainty evidence shows there may be a small advantage in overall survival (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.00; 4 studies; 1435 patients). High-certainty evidence shows that PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in PFS in locally advanced/metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer patients (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 5 studies; 1474 patients). There was no statistical heterogeneity for these outcomes. Subgroup analyses for PFS outcomes based on trial level data were performed for triple-negative breast cancer, hormone-positive and/or HER2-positive breast cancer, BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline mutations, and patients who had received prior chemotherapy for advanced breast cancer or not. The subgroup analyses showed a persistent PFS benefit regardless of the subgroup chosen. Pooled analysis shows PARP inhibitors likely result in a moderate improvement in tumour response rate compared to other treatment arms (66.9% vs 48.9%; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.54; 5 studies; 1185 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The most common adverse events reported across all five studies included neutropenia, anaemia and fatigue. Grade 3 or higher adverse events probably occur no less frequently in patients receiving PARP inhibitors (59.4% for PARP arm versus 64.5% for non-PARP arm, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.04; 5 studies; 1443 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only two studies reported quality of life outcomes so this was not amenable to meta-analysis. However, both studies that did assess quality of life showed PARP inhibitors were superior compared to physician's choice of chemotherapy in terms of participant-reported outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative, BRCA germline mutated breast cancer, PARP inhibitors offer an improvement in progression-free survival, and likely improve overall survival and tumour response rates. This systematic review provides evidence supporting the use of PARP inhibitors as part of the therapeutic strategy for breast cancer patients in this subgroup. The toxicity profile for PARP inhibitors is probably no worse than chemotherapy but more information is required regarding quality of life outcomes, highlighting the importance of collecting such data in future studies. Future studies should also be powered to detect clinically important differences in overall survival and could focus on the role of PARP inhibitors in other relevant breast cancer populations, including HER2-positive, BRCA-negative/homologous recombination repair-deficient and Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PDL1) positive.

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy for glioblastoma in adults.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma is an uncommon but highly aggressive type of brain tumour. Significant gains have been achieved in the molecular understanding and the pathogenesis of glioblastomas, however clinical improvements are difficult to obtain for many reasons. The current standard of care involves maximal safe surgical resection followed by chemoradiation and then adjuvant chemotherapy European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the NCIC Clinical Trials Group (EORTC-NCIC) protocol with a median survival of 14.6 months. Successive phase III international randomised controlled studies have failed to significantly demonstrate survival advantage with newer drugs. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is observed to be aberrant in 30% to 60% of glioblastomas. The receptor aberrancy is driven by abnormal gene amplification, receptor mutation, or both, in particular the extracellular vIII domain. EGFR abnormalities are common in solid tumours, and the advent of anti-EGFR therapies in non-small cell lung cancer and colorectal adenocarcinomas have greatly improved clinical outcomes. Anti-EGFR therapies have been investigated amongst glioblastomas, however questions remain about its ongoing role in glioblastoma management. This review aimed to report on the available evidence to date and perform a systematic analysis on the risks and benefits of use of anti-EGFR therapies in glioblastomas. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and harms of anti-EGFR therapies for glioblastoma in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, EBM Reviews databases, with supplementary handsearches to identify all available and relevant studies to 20 April 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using anti-EGFR therapies in adults with glioblastoma were eligible for inclusion. Anti-EGFR therapies included tyrosine kinase inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies, or vaccines. The comparison included investigational product added to standard of care versus standard of care or placebo, or investigational product against standard of care or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The authorship team screened the search results and recorded the extracted data for analysis. We used standard Cochrane methodology to performed quantitative meta-analysis if two or more studies had appropriate and available data. Otherwise, we conducted a qualitative and descriptive analysis. We used the GRADE system to rate the certainty of the evidence. The analysis was performed along the two clinical settings: first-line (after surgery) and recurrent disease (after failure of first line treatment). Where information was available, we documented overall survival, progression-free survival, adverse events, and quality of life data from eligible studies. MAIN RESULTS: The combined searches initially identified 912 records (after removal of duplicates), and further screening resulted in 19 records for full consideration. We identified nine eligible studies for inclusion in the review. There were three first-line studies and six recurrent studies. Five studies used tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs); two studies used monoclonal antibodies; and two studies used targeted vaccines. More recent studies presented greater detail in the conduct of their studies and thus had a lower risk of bias. We observed no evidence benefit in overall survival with the use of anti-EGFR therapy in the first-line or recurrent setting (hazard ratio (HR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 1.04; 3 RCTs, 1000 participants, moderate-certainty evidence; and HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.21, 4 RCTs, 489 participants, low-certainty evidence, respectively). All the interventions were generally well tolerated with low-certainty evidence for lymphopenia (odds ratio (OR) 0.97, 95% CI 0.19 to 4.81; 4 RCTs, 1146 participants), neutropenia (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.03; 4 RCTs, 1146 participants), and thrombocytopenia (OR 3.69, 95% CI 0.51 to 26.51; 4 RCTs, 1146 participants). A notable toxicity relates to ABT-414, where significant ocular issues were detected. The addition of anti-EGFR therapy showed no evidence of an increase in progression-free survival (PFS) in the first-line setting (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.10; 2 RCTs, 894 participants, low-certainty evidence). In the recurrent setting, there was an increase in PFS with the use of anti-EGFR therapy (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96, 3 RCTs, 275 participants, low-certainty evidence). The available quality of life assessment data showed that anti-EGFR therapies were neither detrimental or beneficial when compared to standard care (not estimable). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In summary, there is no evidence of a demonstrable overall survival benefit with the addition of anti-EGFR therapy in first-line and recurrent glioblastomas. Newer drugs that are specially designed for glioblastoma targets may raise the possibility of success in this population, but data are lacking at present. Future studies should be more selective in pursuing people displaying specific EGFR targets.

Serum bicarbonate is a marker of peri-operative mortality but is not associated with long term survival in colorectal cancer.

AIMS: Inflammation is a hallmark of cancer whose activity is modulated within the tumor microenvironment by low tumoral pH. Recent evidence in the literature has suggested a link between low serum bicarbonate, low tumoral pH and cancer related inflammation. There is however little clinical evidence in human patients regarding the prognostic role of serum bicarbonate. Therefore, the primary aim of this study was to investigate the short and long-term prognostic utility of serum bicarbonate in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients undergoing resection of their primary tumor. The study also aimed to investigate the association of serum bicarbonate with known markers of systemic inflammation. METHODS: A total of 3281 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection of their primary CRC from January 1998 to December 2012. Of these, 2223 stage I-IV patients had available data for analysis. The association of serum bicarbonate with overall survival was assessed using univariate and multivariate cox regression analyses. The association of bicarbonate with other clinicopathological variables was assessed by chi squared and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Serum bicarbonate was associated with peri-operative mortality in multivariate analysis (p<0.001). Age (p = 0.004), grade (p = 0.043), creatinine (p = 0.036) and sodium (p = 0.036) were also markers associated with peri-operative mortality. For long term survival at 5 years, bicarbonate was significantly associated with overall survival in univariate analysis (p<0.001) but was not significant in multivariate analysis (p = 0.075). In exploratory analysis, serum bicarbonate was found to be significantly associated with the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (p<0.001) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In peri-operative colorectal cancer patients, serum bicarbonate was associated with 30-day survival but not 5-year survival.

Tumor sidedness is not an independent prognostic marker of colorectal cancer patients undergoing curative resection: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has suggested that tumor sidedness in colorectal cancer (CRC) is an independent prognostic and potentially predictive marker of survival. The aims of the study were to determine the prognostic significance of tumor sidedness in colorectal cancer patients undergoing primary tumor resection and to assess associated tumor biology. METHODS: A total of 3281 consecutive patients who underwent surgical resection of their primary CRC from January 1998 to December 2012 were analyzed for association with tumor biologic factors and with overall survival. Metastatic patients were excluded from analysis. RESULTS: Left sided CRCs were associated with a number of additional key prognostic markers including BRAFV600E wildtype status (P<0.001), mismatch repair proficiency (p<0.001), absence of peritumoral lymphocytic response (p = 0.001), high lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (p<0.001) and low neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (p<0.001). In primary analysis with 3067 patients, there was no statistical difference in sidedness in the univariate analysis (p = 0.291). Three further subgroup analyses were performed. In the first subgroup, only stage III patients were analyzed. In the second, patients with mismatch repair deficiency were removed. In the third, additional clinicopathologic variables known to be independently prognostic were added into analysis. In all three subgroup analyses tumor sidedness was not an independent prognostic marker. CONCLUSIONS: Tumor sidedness was not an independent prognostic marker of CRC. However, right sided CRCs were associated with several key independent prognostic markers supporting a hypothesis that tumor sidedness is a surrogate for other biomarkers.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors prevent cell growth and have shown benefit in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer, whether used as single agents or in combination with chemotherapy. Clear benefit has been shown in trials of EGFR monoclonal antibodies (EGFR MAb) but not EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR TKI). However, there is ongoing debate as to which patient populations gain maximum benefit from EGFR inhibition and where they should be used in the metastatic colorectal cancer treatment paradigm to maximise efficacy and minimise toxicity. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy, safety profile, and potential harms of EGFR inhibitors in the treatment of people with metastatic colorectal cancer when given alone, in combination with chemotherapy, or with other biological agents.The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival; secondary outcomes included overall survival, tumour response rate, quality of life, and adverse events. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library, Issue 9, 2016; Ovid MEDLINE (from 1950); and Ovid Embase (from 1974) on 9 September 2016; and ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) on 14 March 2017. We also searched proceedings from the major oncology conferences ESMO, ASCO, and ASCO GI from 2012 to December 2016. We further scanned reference lists from eligible publications and contacted corresponding authors for trials for further information where needed. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials on participants with metastatic colorectal cancer comparing: 1) the combination of EGFR MAb and 'standard therapy' (whether chemotherapy or best supportive care) to standard therapy alone, 2) the combination of EGFR TKI and standard therapy to standard therapy alone, 3) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI) and standard therapy to another EGFR inhibitor (or the same inhibitor with a different dosing regimen) and standard therapy, or 4) the combination of EGFR inhibitor (whether MAb or TKI), anti-angiogenic therapy, and standard therapy to anti-angiogenic therapy and standard therapy alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures defined by Cochrane. Summary statistics for the endpoints used hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for overall survival and progression-free survival, and odds ratios (OR) for response rate (RR) and toxicity. Subgroup analyses were performed by Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) and neuroblastoma RAS viral (V-Ras) oncogene homolog (NRAS) status - firstly by status of KRAS exon 2 testing (mutant or wild type) and also by status of extended KRAS/NRAS testing (any mutation present or wild type). MAIN RESULTS: We identified 33 randomised controlled trials for analysis (15,025 participants), including trials of both EGFR MAb and EGFR TKI. Looking across studies, significant risk of bias was present, particularly with regard to the risk of selection bias (15/33 unclear risk, 1/33 high risk), performance bias (9/33 unclear risk, 9/33 high risk), and detection bias (7/33 unclear risk, 11/33 high risk).The addition of EGFR MAb to standard therapy in the KRAS exon 2 wild-type population improves progression-free survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.82; high-quality evidence), overall survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; high-quality evidence), and response rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.41; high-quality evidence). We noted evidence of significant statistical heterogeneity in all three of these analyses (progression-free survival: I2 = 76%; overall survival: I2 = 40%; and response rate: I2 = 77%), likely due to pooling of studies investigating EGFR MAb use in different lines of therapy. Rates of overall grade 3 to 4 toxicity, diarrhoea, and rash were increased (moderate-quality evidence for all three outcomes), but there was no evidence for increased rates of neutropenia.For the extended RAS wild-type population (no mutations in KRAS or NRAS), addition of EGFR MAb improved progression-free survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.75; moderate-quality evidence) and overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.88; high-quality evidence). Response rate was also improved (OR 4.28, 95% CI 2.61 to 7.03; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the progression-free survival analysis (I2 = 61%), likely due to the pooling of studies combining EGFR MAb with chemotherapy with monotherapy studies.We observed no evidence of a statistically significant difference when EGFR MAb was compared to bevacizumab, in progression-free survival (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.12; high quality evidence) or overall survival (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; moderate-quality evidence). We noted significant statistical heterogeneity in the overall survival analysis (I2 = 51%), likely due to the pooling of first-line and second-line studies.The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy in molecularly unselected participants did not show benefit in limited data sets (meta-analysis not performed). The addition of EGFR MAb to bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer did not improve progression-free survival (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29; very low quality evidence), overall survival (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.47; low-quality evidence), or response rate (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.12; very low-quality evidence) but increased toxicity (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.57; low-quality evidence). We noted significant between-study heterogeneity in most analyses.Scant information on quality of life was reported in the identified studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The addition of EGFR MAb to either chemotherapy or best supportive care improves progression-free survival (moderate- to high-quality evidence), overall survival (high-quality evidence), and tumour response rate (moderate- to high-quality evidence), but may increase toxicity in people with KRAS exon 2 wild-type or extended RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (moderate-quality evidence). The addition of EGFR TKI to standard therapy does not improve clinical outcomes. EGFR MAb combined with bevacizumab is of no clinical value (very low-quality evidence). Future studies should focus on optimal sequencing and predictive biomarkers and collect quality of life data.