Despite advances in percutaneous coronary procedures, in-stent restenosis remains a significant challenge. Although sirolimus- and paclitaxel-coated balloons are promising alternatives, their comparative safety and efficacy remain uncertain. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched using relevant keywords from inception until August 2025. A total of 11 studies (7 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational cohort studies) were included, comprising 3633 participants overall. The primary outcomes assessed were target lesion revascularization and target lesion failure. Meanwhile, the Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, survival, binary restenosis, and angiographic endpoints (acute gain, diameter stenosis, in-segment late lumen loss, in-lesion late lumen loss, and in-segment minimal lumen diameter). Interstudy heterogeneity was assessed using I ² and X ² statistics ( I ²>50% = significant heterogeneity). Interstudy heterogeneity was low for most outcomes, including all primary clinical endpoints, with moderate heterogeneity observed only for select angiographic measures (notably in-segment late lumen loss and diameter stenosis). Statistical analysis was conducted using R software and RStudio (version 4.4.2), with a P value of < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. This meta-analysis examined studies that compared paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) versus standard balloon [sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB)] angioplasty. Regarding primary outcomes, there were no notable variations in target lesion failure [risk ratio (RR), 1.08, 95% CI, 0.90–1.29, P = 0.36] or target lesion revascularization (RR, 1.16, 95% CI, 0.98–1.37, P = 0.08). With all aggregated estimates being nonsignificant, secondary outcomes such as stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, and survival were similar between groups. Angiographic endpoints revealed no discernible variations in late lumen loss (in-lesion and in-segment), acute gain, or diameter stenosis. Nonetheless, the SCB group’s minimal lumen diameter was significantly smaller than that of the PCB group (MD, −0.08 mm, 95% CI, −0.14 to −0.01, P = 0.02). In treating coronary in-stent restenosis, SCB and PCBs show similar overall safety and effectiveness; lesion-specific angiographic variations indicate that customized selection may improve patient outcomes.
Comparative efficacy of PARP inhibitors in BRCA mutated HER2-negative breast cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
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.