Incidence and risk of peripheral neuropathy with nab-paclitaxel in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis

Nab-paclitaxel, a Cremophor EL-free formulation of paclitaxel, is used to treat various malignancies. Peripheral neuropathy is one of its major toxicities, although the overall incidence remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to calculate the incidence of peripheral neuropathy in cancer patients treated with nab-paclitaxel and to compare the relative risk (RR) with conventional taxanes. The electronic databases were searched for relevant clinical trials. Eligible studies included phase II and III prospective clinical trials of cancer patients treated with nab-paclitaxel with toxicity profile on peripheral neuropathy. Statistical analyses were done to calculate summary incidences, RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using fixed-effects or random-effects models based on the heterogeneity of the included studies. Nineteen trials were selected for the meta-analysis, yielding a total of 2878 cancer patients. The overall incidences of peripheral neuropathy (all-grade) was 51.0% (95% CI: 45.1-57.6%), and that of high-grade peripheral neuropathy was 12.4% (9.8-15.7%). The RRs of peripheral neuropathy of nab-paclitaxel compared to taxanes were not increased for all-grade and high-grade peripheral neuropathy. Nab-paclitaxel is associated with an increased risk of developing peripheral neuropathy. Future clinical studies are still needed to investigate the risk reduction and possible use of nab-paclitaxel.

Comparative study of the antitumor activity of Nab-paclitaxel and intraperitoneal solvent-based paclitaxel regarding peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer

Intraperitoneal (i.p.) chemotherapy with paclitaxel (PTX) has been shown to be a promising treatment strategy for peritoneal metastasis. The present study focused on the comparative evaluation of the therapeutic efficacy of nanoparticle albumin-bound PTX (Nab-PTX) and i.p. administration of the conventional solvent-based PTX (Sb-PTX). We also investigated the difference in antitumor activity depending on the route of administration in the Nab-PTX treatment. Nab-PTX was administered i.p. or intravenously (i.v.) and Sb-PTX was administered i.p. at equitoxic and equal doses to nude mice bearing gastric cancer OCUM-2MD3 cell subcutaneous and peritoneal xenografts. Therapeutic efficacy of Sb-PTX and Nab-PTX was evaluated as inhibition of tumor growth using a peritoneal metastatic model with subcutaneous xenografts. The survival rate was also investigated using mouse peritoneal models. For assessment of subcutaneous tumors, the change in tumor volume was measured, and for assessment of peritoneal tumors, the weight of ascitic fluid and the total peritoneal tumor burden were measured for each individual mouse. At equitoxic doses, treatment with Nab-PTX resulted in a greater reduction in the size of subcutaneous tumors and the weight of ascites and peritoneal burden as compared with i.p. Sb-PTX (p<0.05). Treatment with i.p. and i.v. Nab-PTX also achieved greater survival benefit than i.p. Sb-PTX (p<0.05). In contrast, there was no significant difference in the degree of tumor reduction and the survival time between both drugs at equal doses. With regard to the route of administration, the antitumor efficacy of Nab-PTX after i.v. administration was equivalent to the efficacy after i.p. administration. These results suggest that i.v. Nab-PTX may be another encouraging treatment option that can target peritoneal dissemination in gastric cancer.