Search

Introduction: Incorporation of AKT inhibitors into adjuvant therapy for advanced or metastatic breast cancer has improved clinical outcomes. However, the safety of AKT inhibitors should be better evaluated, given the possibility of prolonging survival and impacting patient quality of life. Our aim was to assess how the addition of AKT inhibitors to adjuvant therapy affects treatment-related adverse events. Methods: We evaluated binary outcomes with risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used DerSimonian and Laird random-effect models for all endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. R, version 4.2.3, was used for statistical analyses. Results: A total of seven RCTs comprising 1619 patients with BC. The adverse effects that show significance statistical favoring the occurrence of adverse effects in AKT inhibitor were diarrhea (RR 3.05; 95% CI 2.48–3.75; p < 0.00001; I2 = 49%), hyperglycemia (RR 3.4; 95% CI 1.69–6.83; p = 0.00058; I2 = 75%), nausea (RR 1.69; 95% CI 1.34–2.13; p = 0.000008; I2 = 42%), rash (RR 2.79; 95% CI 1.49–5.23; p = 0.0013; I2 = 82%), stomatitis (RR 2.24; 95% CI 1.69–2.97; p < 0.00001; I2 = 16%) and vomiting (RR 2.99; 95% CI 1.85–4.86; p = 0.00009; I2 = 42%). There was no significant difference between the groups for alopecia (p = 0.80), fatigue (p = 0.087), and neuropathy (p = 0.363380). Conclusion: The addition of AKT inhibitors to adjuvant therapy was associated with an increase in treatment-related adverse events. These results provide safety information for further clinical trials evaluating AKT inhibitor therapy for patients with metastatic BC. Clinicians should closely monitor patients for treatment-related adverse events to avoid discontinuation of therapy and morbidity caused by these early-stage therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the neurocognitive adverse events (NAEs) related to lorlatinib in patients with ALK/ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis and the proportions were pooled with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). In our pooled analysis, cognitive and mood effects were the most important NAEs, with 14% and 11% overall rates, respectively. Speech changes and psychotic effects had an overall frequency of 7% and 5%, respectively. In a subanalysis, mood effects were significantly more frequent in clinical trials than in real-world studies. Therefore, this study showed that lorlatinib-related NAEs are emerging important toxicities in clinical practice. Hence, increasing awareness about NAEs is paramount to improving their recognition and reporting, and thus enhancing patients' quality of life. Lorlatinib has been FDA-approved as a systemic therapy for ALK/ROS1-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, it has been associated with an increased frequency of neurocognitive adverse events (NAEs). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the NAEs related to lorlatinib therapy in NSCLC patients. PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and prominent conference proceedings were searched for eligible studies of lorlatinib in NSCLC patients. NAEs included cognitive, mood, speech, and psychotic effects. A total of 1147 patients from 12 studies were included; 62% had brain metastases. A pooled analysis of NAEs showed frequencies of cognitive effects of 14.57% (95% CI, 8.37 to 24.14, I2 = 84%), mood effects of 11.17% (95% CI, 5.93 to 20.07, I2 = 84%), speech effects of 7.24% (95% CI, 3.39 to 15.20, I2 = 72%), and psychotic effects of 4.97% (95% CI, 3.27 to 7.49, I2 = 21%). Clinical trials reported a significantly higher frequency of mood effects than was indicated by real-world data. These results highlight the importance of educating patients and healthcare professionals about lorlatinib-related NAEs for early detection and management to improve NSCLC patients' quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: New therapies for resistant hypertension (RH), including renal denervation (RDN), have been studied. Aim: Access the safety and effectiveness of radiofrequency-based RDN vs pharmacological treatment for RH. Methods: A thorough literature search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane databases, focusing on studies that compared the effects of radiofrequency-based RDN versus pharmacological treatment for RH. Treatment effects for binary and continuous endpoints were pooled and used, respectively, odds-ratio (OR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to analyze continuous outcomes. Results: In the 10 included studies, involving 1.182 patients, 682 received radiofrequency-based RDN. The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 84 months. Analysis revealed that the RDN group had a significant reduction in office systolic blood pressure (BP) (MD − 9.5 mmHg; 95% CI − 16.81 to − 2.29; P = 0.01), office diastolic BP (MD − 5.1 mmHg; 95% CI − 8.42 to − 2.80; P < 0.001), 24 h systolic BP (MD − 4.8 mmHg; 95% CI − 7.26 to − 2.42; P < 0.001). For 24 h diastolic BP RDN did not have a significant reduction (MD − 2.3 mmHg; 95% CI − 4.19 to − 0.52; P = 0.012). The heterogeneity between the studies was high, visible in the funnel and Baujat plots. The OR was non-significant for non-serious adverse events, but also clinically significant for hypertensive crises and strokes for the RDN group. Conclusions: While the pharmacological regimen of 3 or more anti-hypertensive, including a diuretic, still be the first-line option for RH treatment, our results support that radiofrequency-based RDN is superior in reducing global BP and is safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]