Kashif, Muhammad Arham Bin

e13162 Background: BRCA1/2 mutations impair homologous recombination repair, forcing cancer cells to rely on alternative DNA repair pathways, such as those mediated by poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP). PARP inhibitors (PARPis), like iniparib, olaparib, talazoparib, niraparib, and veliparib, exploit this dependency, inducing lethality in cells of BRCA-mutated, HER2-negative breast cancers (BRCAm, HER2-BC). Only 2 PARPis, talazoparib and olaparib, are FDA-approved for BRCAm, HER2-BC. However, the treatment with the highest efficacy remains unclear. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy of PARPis in treating BRCAm, HER2-BC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and ClinicalTrials.gov (up to December 2024) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) following PRISMA-NMA guidelines. Primary outcome was overall survival(OS), with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Survival times were converted to HRs under the assumption of exponential distribution. Standard of care (SOC) was defined as taxane/anthracycline-based regimens with additional platinum-based chemotherapy. Physician's choice chemotherapy (PCT) included capecitabine, eribulin, gemcitabine, or vinorelbine. A frequentist approach with random-effects modeling was used to pool estimates, and P-scores ranked treatment efficacy. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were assessed using τ², I², and Q-statistics. Analyses were conducted in R version 4.4.1. Results: 8 studies including 4432 participants incorporating 8 pairwise comparisons and 7 treatments were analyzed for OS. Compared to SOC (reference), HRs of OS were significantly reduced with talazoparib+SOC (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.32–0.74; P = 0.64), olaparib+SOC (HR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.36–0.59; P = 0.69), niraparib+SOC (HR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.26–0.76; P = 0.76), and veliparib+SOC (HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.29–0.48; P = 0.91). No heterogeneity or inconsistency was detected (τ² = 0; I² = 0; Q = 1.27, p = 0.53). For PFS, iniparib/gemcitabine, talazoparib, olaparib, and niraparib showed significant reduction in HR with increasing order of P-scores, in combination with SOC. Conclusions: Veliparib combined with SOC showed the highest OS improvement, while niraparib ranked highest for PFS, followed by talazoparib and olaparib. Further trials are needed to confirm these findings and refine treatment strategies for BRCAm, HER2-BC.

Abstract Aim Type 1 diabetes mellitus is widely recognized as a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by the pathogenic destruction of beta cells, resulting in the loss of endogenous insulin production. Insulin administration remains the primary therapy for symptomatic treatment. Recent studies showed that disease‐modifying agents, such as anti‐CD3 monoclonal antibodies, have shown promising outcomes in improving the management of the disease. In late 2022, teplizumab received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as the first disease‐modifying agent for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. This review aims to evaluate the clinical evidence regarding the efficacy of anti‐CD3 monoclonal antibodies in the prevention and treatment of type 1 diabetes. Methods A comprehensive search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) was conducted up to December 2022 to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. Meta‐analysis was performed using a random‐effects model, and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to quantify the effects. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was employed for quality assessment. Results In total, 11 randomized controlled trials involving 1397 participants (908 participants in the intervention arm, 489 participants in the control arm) were included in this review. The mean age of participants was 15 years, and the mean follow‐up time was 2.04 years. Teplizumab was the most commonly studied intervention. Compared with placebo, anti‐CD3 monoclonal antibody treatment significantly increased the C‐peptide concentration in the area under the curve at shorter timeframes (mean difference = 0.114, 95% CI: 0.069 to 0.159, p = .000). Furthermore, anti‐CD3 monoclonal antibodies significantly reduced the patients' insulin intake across all timeframes (mean difference = −0.123, 95% CI: −0.151 to −0.094, p < .001). However, no significant effect on glycated haemoglobin concentration was observed. Conclusion The findings of this review suggest that anti‐CD3 monoclonal antibody treatment increases endogenous insulin production and improves the lifestyle of patients by reducing insulin dosage. Future studies should consider the limitations, including sample size, heterogeneity and duration of follow‐up, to validate the generalizability of these findings further.