Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE: The present meta-analysis study was performed to identify the potential cardiotoxicity risks when using Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) as anticancer drugs in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Regist...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hou, Wanting, Ding, Mingfu, Li, Xiaohua, Zhou, Xiaohan, Zhu, Qing, Varela-Ramirez, Armando, Yi, Cheng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8236482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33725154
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03521-w
_version_ 1783714548514029568
author Hou, Wanting
Ding, Mingfu
Li, Xiaohua
Zhou, Xiaohan
Zhu, Qing
Varela-Ramirez, Armando
Yi, Cheng
author_facet Hou, Wanting
Ding, Mingfu
Li, Xiaohua
Zhou, Xiaohan
Zhu, Qing
Varela-Ramirez, Armando
Yi, Cheng
author_sort Hou, Wanting
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The present meta-analysis study was performed to identify the potential cardiotoxicity risks when using Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) as anticancer drugs in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials. We have included 45 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) associated with nine VEGFR-TKIs Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs used to treat patients with solid tumors. To evaluate the trials’ risk of bias, Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was assessed. A direct comparison was assessed by RevMan5.3 software, calculating the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was tested by the I(2) statistic and Chi-square test for P value. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 and GeMTC 0.14.3 software, calculated OR along with corresponding 95% credible interval (CrI). The model’s convergence was evaluated by the potential scale reduced factor (PSRF). Consistency between direct and indirect comparisons was assessed by the “node-splitting” method. RESULTS: In this network meta-analysis, a total of 20,027 patients from 45 randomized controlled trials and associated with nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs (axitinib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, nintedanib, pazopanib, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, vandetanib), were enrolled. Findings indicated that lenvatinib had the most significant probability of provoking all grades cardiovascular incident and hypertension, followed by vandetanib, cabozantinib, axitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, regorafenib and nintedanib. The nine agent’s severe cardiovascular and severe hypertension risk was probably similar. The ranking probability of cardiac toxicity shows that vandetanib ranked most likely to have the highest risk for cardiotoxicity among all the VEGFR-TKIs reviewed, followed by pazopanib, axitinib, sorafenib, sunitinib. In contrast, regorafenib and nintedanib did not exhibit an increased risk of cardiac damage. CONCLUSIONS: The association between the nine VEGFR-TKIs with potential cardiotoxicity occurrence was reviewed. Both the regorafenib and nintedanib did not display detectable signs of cardiotoxic damage. In contrast, lenvatinib and vandetanib are ranked to have the most severe cardiotoxicity side impacts. These results may provide information for clinical practice guidelines, implementing strategies in selecting the adequate VEGFR-TKIs, and understanding the cardiovascular toxicity inflicted by the VEGFR-TKIs. PROSPERO IDENTIFIER: CRD 42,020,167,307. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-021-03521-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8236482
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82364822021-07-09 Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials Hou, Wanting Ding, Mingfu Li, Xiaohua Zhou, Xiaohan Zhu, Qing Varela-Ramirez, Armando Yi, Cheng J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Original Article – Clinical Oncology PURPOSE: The present meta-analysis study was performed to identify the potential cardiotoxicity risks when using Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) as anticancer drugs in patients with solid tumors. METHODS: Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials. We have included 45 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) associated with nine VEGFR-TKIs Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs used to treat patients with solid tumors. To evaluate the trials’ risk of bias, Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was assessed. A direct comparison was assessed by RevMan5.3 software, calculating the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity was tested by the I(2) statistic and Chi-square test for P value. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using Stata 15.0 and GeMTC 0.14.3 software, calculated OR along with corresponding 95% credible interval (CrI). The model’s convergence was evaluated by the potential scale reduced factor (PSRF). Consistency between direct and indirect comparisons was assessed by the “node-splitting” method. RESULTS: In this network meta-analysis, a total of 20,027 patients from 45 randomized controlled trials and associated with nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs (axitinib, cabozantinib, lenvatinib, nintedanib, pazopanib, regorafenib, sorafenib, sunitinib, vandetanib), were enrolled. Findings indicated that lenvatinib had the most significant probability of provoking all grades cardiovascular incident and hypertension, followed by vandetanib, cabozantinib, axitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, regorafenib and nintedanib. The nine agent’s severe cardiovascular and severe hypertension risk was probably similar. The ranking probability of cardiac toxicity shows that vandetanib ranked most likely to have the highest risk for cardiotoxicity among all the VEGFR-TKIs reviewed, followed by pazopanib, axitinib, sorafenib, sunitinib. In contrast, regorafenib and nintedanib did not exhibit an increased risk of cardiac damage. CONCLUSIONS: The association between the nine VEGFR-TKIs with potential cardiotoxicity occurrence was reviewed. Both the regorafenib and nintedanib did not display detectable signs of cardiotoxic damage. In contrast, lenvatinib and vandetanib are ranked to have the most severe cardiotoxicity side impacts. These results may provide information for clinical practice guidelines, implementing strategies in selecting the adequate VEGFR-TKIs, and understanding the cardiovascular toxicity inflicted by the VEGFR-TKIs. PROSPERO IDENTIFIER: CRD 42,020,167,307. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-021-03521-w. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-03-16 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8236482/ /pubmed/33725154 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03521-w Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article – Clinical Oncology
Hou, Wanting
Ding, Mingfu
Li, Xiaohua
Zhou, Xiaohan
Zhu, Qing
Varela-Ramirez, Armando
Yi, Cheng
Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine FDA-approved VEGFR-TKIs in patients with solid tumors: a Bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort comparative evaluation of cardiovascular risks among nine fda-approved vegfr-tkis in patients with solid tumors: a bayesian network analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Original Article – Clinical Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8236482/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33725154
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03521-w
work_keys_str_mv AT houwanting comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT dingmingfu comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT lixiaohua comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhouxiaohan comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhuqing comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT varelaramirezarmando comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yicheng comparativeevaluationofcardiovascularrisksamongninefdaapprovedvegfrtkisinpatientswithsolidtumorsabayesiannetworkanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials