Search

BACKGROUND: Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including aspirin, NSAID, statin (including specific statin drug names), metformin, ACE inhibitors, and ARBs (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with cancer. Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival. RESULTS: We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.

PurposePatients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) that harbor driver mutations are associated with a cancer diagnosis at a younger age. While targeted therapies provide deep remissions and durable benefit in a subset of patients, it is unclear whether targeted therapies bridge the gap in years of life lost (YLL) in these younger NSCLC patients with targetable mutations in comparison to generally older NSCLC patients without actionable driver mutations.Materials and methodsRetrospective cross-sectional study using landmark trials leading to the approval of targeted therapies in NSCLC with actionable mutations. We evaluated all targeted therapies as well as chemotherapy and IO regimens for the treatment of NSCLC through FDA Oncology Announcements and NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC (version 4.2021).ResultsWe estimated the YLL for each driver mutation, cumulative median duration of response (DOR) with targeted therapies by mutation type, and percentage of estimated improvement in YLL from NSCLC targeted therapies. The median ages at diagnosis (in years) for patients whose tumors express targetable mutations were: 47.6 (NTRK); 52.0 (ALK); 62.0 (HER2); 57.0 (ROS1); 61.4 (RET); 63.0 (BRAF); 69.0 (EGFR); and 72.0 (MET). For comparison, the median age at diagnosis for patients without driver mutations, regardless of PD-L1 status was 71 years. The median DOR (in years) for patients whose tumors express the same mutations include: 0.9 (NTRK); 3.9 (ALK); 0.6 (HER2); 6.2 (ROS1); 2.2 (RET); 1.5 (BRAF); 3.1 (EGFR); and 2.4 (MET). The median DOR for patients without driver mutations was 1.2 years. The cumulative estimated survival time (years; median age at diagnosis plus the median DOR or OS) for patients whose tumors express targetable mutations were: 48.5 (NTRK); 55.9 (ALK); 62.6 (HER2); 63.2 (ROS1); 63.6 (RET); 64.5 (BRAF); 72.1 (EGFR); and 74.4 (MET). The cumulative estimated survival time for patients without driver mutations, regardless of PD-L1 status, was 72.2 years of age. We calculated the number of years NSCLC is diagnosed earlier in patients with targetable mutations as follows: 23.4 (NTRK), 19 (ALK), 14 (ROS1), 11 (EGFR), 9.6 (RET), 9 (HER2), and 8 (BRAF). The percent difference (%) ameliorated in YLL by mutation type is as follows: 44.3 (ROS1), 28.2 (EGFR), 22.9 (RET), 20.5 (ALK), 18.8 (BRAF), 6.4 (HER2), and 3.7 (NTRK).ConclusionAlthough targeted therapies have paved the way for significant progress toward providing a survival benefit to many young patients with advanced NSCLC with actionable mutations, it is evident that these therapies still leave a wide gap in the YLL in these younger patients compared to generally older individuals with advanced NSCLC without targetable mutations.

Background: Spinal cord compression (SCC) in metastatic prostate cancer (MPC) is a critical complication and multiple factors influence the optimal therapeutic strategy. We investigated the differences in practice patterns between teaching hospitals (TH) and non-teaching hospitals (NTH) across the United States. Method: Using the National Inpatient Sample Database (NIS), we performed a retrospective study on hospitalizations with MPC and SCC between 2016 and 2020 in US. We compared demographic factors, comorbidities, treatment modalities, duration of hospitalization, financial expenditures, and mortality between TH and NTH. We also examined the patients' characteristics and outcomes in TH and NTH based on their chosen therapeutic strategy. Results: We identified 11,380 admissions with metastatic prostate cancer and SCC; 9610 in TH and 1770 in NTH. The median cost of hospitalization was $21,922 in TH and $15,141 in NTH. Although the median age and Charlson comorbidity score did not differ between two groups, patients in TH were more likely to receive intervention (radiation or surgery) compared to NTH (Surgery: 28.2% in TH vs. 23.0% in NTH & Radiation: 12.1% in TH vs. 8.2% in NTH). Mortality was lower in TH than NTH (4.5% vs. 7.9%). In both TH and NTH, a higher proportion of patients with private insurance underwent surgery (TH: Surgery 25.1% vs. Radiation 18.8% & NTH: Surgery 27.0% vs. 6.9%). Black patients were more likely to receive radiation than surgery in TH (34.2% vs. 26.8%). Conclusion: This study showed a greater percentage of patients underwent surgical intervention at TH compared to NTH. Additionally, the type of insurance and racial background were associated with distinctive treatment approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]