PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.
Journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 10 2019
07 10 2019
Historique:
aheadofprint:
07
10
2019
entrez:
8
10
2019
pubmed:
8
10
2019
medline:
8
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Endometrial cancer is one of the most common gynaecological cancers in developed countries. Treatment of advanced endometrial cancer usually involves radiotherapy, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy or a combination of these. However, survival outcomes are poor in advanced or metastatic disease. Better systemic treatment options are needed to improve survival and safety outcomes for these women. The PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is a frequently altered signalling pathway in endometrial cancer. Single-arm studies have reported some encouraging results of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibition in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. To assess the efficacy and safety of PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor-containing regimens in women with locally-advanced, metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase to 16 January 2019; and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov in July 2018. We also reviewed reference lists from included studies and endometrial cancer guidelines. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a regimen with a PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor (either alone or in combination with other treatments, such as chemotherapy or hormonal therapy) versus a comparator regimen without a PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor. There were no restrictions on which comparator(s) were included. We extracted data independently, and assessed risks of bias and the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measures were progression-free survival and toxicity (grade 3/4 where available). We derived hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective tumour response rate, quality of life and treatment-related death. We used GRADEproGDT to assess the certainty of the evidence for the most important outcomes (by first-line and second/third-line therapy for progression-free survival and overall survival). We included two RCTs involving 361 women. One study assessed the effects of the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus, in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel and bevacizumab in treatment-naïve women with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. The second study compared the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus alone versus progestin or investigator choice of chemotherapy in women who had received prior treatment for metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer. We identified five ongoing studies on the effects of PI3K and AKT inhibitors, metformin and dual mTOR inhibitors.For first-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor-containing regimen may worsen progression-free survival (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.93; 1 study, 231 participants; low-certainty evidence), while for second/third-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor probably improves progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy or endocrine therapy (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.91; 1 study, 95 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Data on toxicity were available from both studies: administering an mTOR inhibitor regimen may increase the risk of grade 3/4 mucositis (RR 10.42, 95% CI 1.34 to 80.74; 2 studies, 357 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference in risk of anaemia or interstitial pneumonitis (low-certainty evidence for both toxicities). Overall, event rates were low. For first-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor-containing regimen may result in little to no difference in overall survival compared to chemotherapy (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.781 study, 231 participants; low-certainty evidence). The finding was similar for second/third-line therapy (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.61; 1 study, 130 participants; low-certainty evidence). Administering mTOR inhibitor-containing regimens may result in little to no difference in tumour response compared to chemotherapy or hormonal therapy in first-line or second/third-line therapy (first line: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.17; 1 study, 231 participants; second/third line: RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.40; 1 study, 61 participants; low-certainty evidence).Neither study collected or reported quality-of-life data. Two RCTs have been reported to date, with low certainty of evidence. In a recurrent disease setting, mTOR inhibitors may result in improved progression-free survival, but we found no clear benefit in overall survival or tumour response rate. We await the publication of at least five ongoing studies investigating the role of PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer before any conclusions can be drawn on their use.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Endometrial cancer is one of the most common gynaecological cancers in developed countries. Treatment of advanced endometrial cancer usually involves radiotherapy, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy or a combination of these. However, survival outcomes are poor in advanced or metastatic disease. Better systemic treatment options are needed to improve survival and safety outcomes for these women. The PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is a frequently altered signalling pathway in endometrial cancer. Single-arm studies have reported some encouraging results of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibition in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor-containing regimens in women with locally-advanced, metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and Embase to 16 January 2019; and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov in July 2018. We also reviewed reference lists from included studies and endometrial cancer guidelines.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a regimen with a PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor (either alone or in combination with other treatments, such as chemotherapy or hormonal therapy) versus a comparator regimen without a PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor. There were no restrictions on which comparator(s) were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data independently, and assessed risks of bias and the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measures were progression-free survival and toxicity (grade 3/4 where available). We derived hazard ratios (HRs) for time-to-event outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective tumour response rate, quality of life and treatment-related death. We used GRADEproGDT to assess the certainty of the evidence for the most important outcomes (by first-line and second/third-line therapy for progression-free survival and overall survival).
MAIN RESULTS
We included two RCTs involving 361 women. One study assessed the effects of the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus, in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel versus carboplatin/paclitaxel and bevacizumab in treatment-naïve women with advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. The second study compared the mTOR inhibitor ridaforolimus alone versus progestin or investigator choice of chemotherapy in women who had received prior treatment for metastatic or recurrent endometrial cancer. We identified five ongoing studies on the effects of PI3K and AKT inhibitors, metformin and dual mTOR inhibitors.For first-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor-containing regimen may worsen progression-free survival (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.93; 1 study, 231 participants; low-certainty evidence), while for second/third-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor probably improves progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy or endocrine therapy (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.91; 1 study, 95 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Data on toxicity were available from both studies: administering an mTOR inhibitor regimen may increase the risk of grade 3/4 mucositis (RR 10.42, 95% CI 1.34 to 80.74; 2 studies, 357 participants; low-certainty evidence), but may result in little to no difference in risk of anaemia or interstitial pneumonitis (low-certainty evidence for both toxicities). Overall, event rates were low. For first-line therapy, an mTOR inhibitor-containing regimen may result in little to no difference in overall survival compared to chemotherapy (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.781 study, 231 participants; low-certainty evidence). The finding was similar for second/third-line therapy (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.61; 1 study, 130 participants; low-certainty evidence). Administering mTOR inhibitor-containing regimens may result in little to no difference in tumour response compared to chemotherapy or hormonal therapy in first-line or second/third-line therapy (first line: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.17; 1 study, 231 participants; second/third line: RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.40; 1 study, 61 participants; low-certainty evidence).Neither study collected or reported quality-of-life data.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Two RCTs have been reported to date, with low certainty of evidence. In a recurrent disease setting, mTOR inhibitors may result in improved progression-free survival, but we found no clear benefit in overall survival or tumour response rate. We await the publication of at least five ongoing studies investigating the role of PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitors in advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer before any conclusions can be drawn on their use.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31588998
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012160.pub2
pmc: PMC6953296
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
CD012160Références
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Oct;193(4):1369-75
pubmed: 16202728
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2007 Sep-Oct;17(5):964-78
pubmed: 17442022
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2016 Dec;108:1-12
pubmed: 27931828
Cancer Med. 2015 Feb;4(2):161-73
pubmed: 25417601
Cancer. 2014 Feb 15;120(4):603-10
pubmed: 24166148
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Nov 1;33(31):3576-82
pubmed: 26077241
CA Cancer J Clin. 2008 Mar-Apr;58(2):71-96
pubmed: 18287387
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Jun 1;22(11):2159-66
pubmed: 15169803
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120
Front Oncol. 2019 May 07;9:359
pubmed: 31134155
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Oct 10;24(29):4783-91
pubmed: 17028294
Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2009 Jul;9(7):905-16
pubmed: 19589030
J Clin Oncol. 2013 Apr 1;31(10):e167-9
pubmed: 23358980
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jan 1;24(1):36-44
pubmed: 16330675
Int J Cancer. 2015 Mar 1;136(5):E359-86
pubmed: 25220842
Nature. 2006 May 25;441(7092):424-30
pubmed: 16724053
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008 Jul-Aug;18(4):803-8
pubmed: 17944917
Am J Clin Oncol. 2014 Apr;37(2):131-4
pubmed: 23241506
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Nov 1;18(21):5856-64
pubmed: 23082003
Eur J Cancer. 2005 Mar;41(5):673-5
pubmed: 15763641
Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Jul;114(1):121-7
pubmed: 19406460
Trials. 2007 Jun 07;8:16
pubmed: 17555582
Int J Cancer. 2010 Dec 15;127(12):2893-917
pubmed: 21351269
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Aug;123(1):271-9
pubmed: 20135346
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 28;9(4):e95219
pubmed: 24777052
Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Aug;150(2):274-281
pubmed: 29804638
Ann Oncol. 2016 Jan;27(1):16-41
pubmed: 26634381
Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2013 Apr;71(4):829-42
pubmed: 23377372
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Dec;205(6):518-25
pubmed: 21802066
Cancer Res. 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10804-12
pubmed: 18006825
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Dec 08;(12):CD007926
pubmed: 21154390
Stat Med. 1998 Dec 30;17(24):2815-34
pubmed: 9921604
Nature. 2013 May 2;497(7447):67-73
pubmed: 23636398
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 07;10:CD012160
pubmed: 31588998