4.6 Review

Safety profile of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors with concurrent radiation therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

期刊

CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS
卷 119, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102586

关键词

Breast cancer; CDK4; 6 inhibitors; Radiotherapy; Toxicity; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

CDK4/6 inhibitors have become the standard treatment for HR+ and HER2- metastatic breast cancer, improving survival outcomes. Combining CDK4/6 inhibitors with endocrine therapy has shown significant benefits for high-risk HR+/HER2- early breast cancer. Each CDK4/6 inhibitor (palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaciclib) has distinct toxicity profiles.
The cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) have become the standard of care for hormone receptor-positive (HR + ) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer, improving survival outcomes compared to endocrine therapy alone. Abemaciclib and ribociclib, in combination with endocrine therapy, have demonstrated significant benefits in invasive disease-free survival for high-risk HR+/HER2-early breast cancer patients. Each CDK4/6i-palbociclib, ribociclib, and abemaci-clib-exhibits distinct toxicity profiles. Radiation therapy (RT) can be delivered with a palliative or ablative intent, particularly using stereotactic body radiation therapy for oligometastatic or oligoprogressive disease. However, pivotal randomized trials lack information on concomitant CDK4/6i and RT, and existing preclinical and clinical data on the potential combined toxicities are limited and conflicting. As part of a broader effort to establish international consensus recommendations for integrating RT and targeted agents in breast cancer treatment, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety profile of combining CDK4/6i with palliative and ablative RT in both metastatic and early breast cancer settings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据