Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has undergone a major change in the last decade in terms of survival and prognosis due to the introduction of new drugs in the last 10 years. One of the drugs with the most promising preliminary results in NSCLC are PARP inhibitors (iPARPs), whose clinical trials have very heterogeneous results. The use of iPARPs in NSCLC may lead to increased survival in several selected patients, and their use may become a standard in the coming years. However, there is currently controversy about the efficacy and safety of these drugs in NSCLC. Therefore, future studies are needed to evaluate their role in these tumours. The aim of this review is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of iPARPs in the treatment of NSCLC. Methods: We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis using the different clinical trials (PubMed, COCHRANE, Science Direct, EMBASE and the clinical trial registry) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of iPARP in NSCLC by PRISMA criteria. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the efficacy of iPARPs in the treatment of NSCLC through overall and progression-free survival (OS and PFS). Two authors independently reviewed the articles and abstracts (A.O.H. and J.R.R.), with subsequent confirmation by a third independent reviewer (E.B.M.). The heterogeneity of the included studies in the meta-analysis was assessed by using the I² statistic. Results: A total of 14 articles were included for analysis (2,651 patients). A total of 1,503 patients were randomised in iPARP arms and 1,148 patients were included in control arms. Three clinical trials were conducted in localised or locally advanced NSCLC and 11 in advanced or metastatic stages. The global OS of the meta-analysis showed a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.85 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74–0.97] with a heterogeneity (I²) of 0% (P=0.84). PFS showed a HR of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.74–1.17) with an I²=51% (P=0.07). The overall adverse event rate (grade 1–5) was similar in both iPARP and placebo arms. Conclusions: iPARPs are a future promising in the treatment of NSCLC in terms of efficacy and safety. Proper patient selection [homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) positive] is key for future clinical trials. The studies conducted to date open a new approach for a novel treatment modality in NSCLC.

Introduction: Immunotherapy represents a key pillar of cancer treatments, with high response rates and long survival. Its use is increasing, mainly at the expense of the geriatric population due to the ageing of this population. However, despite its benefit, its safety in certain areas such as cardiotoxicity is largely unknown. The aim of this study is to assess the safety of immunotherapy in elderly patients using real-world data. Methods: This is an ambispective study of patients ≥ 70 years old with solid tumours who were treated with immunotherapy at the University Hospital of Salamanca. Cardiotoxicity was assessed using the CTCAEv5.0 criteria. Results: In total, 195 patients were included (76.9% male and 23.1% female), with a mean age of 75 years [70–93]. The percentage of patients with cardiotoxicity was 1.54%; 1.35% of patients with previous heart disease were diagnosed with cardiotoxicity, and 1.65% of those without previous heart disease were diagnosed with cardiotoxicity. The median time from the initiation of treatment until the cardiac event was 45 days [14–96]. The most frequent toxicity was myocarditis in 66.7% of patients, followed by arrhythmias in 33.3% of patients. Conclusions: Immunotherapy is shown to be a safe treatment in elderly cancer patients in terms of cardiotoxicity. The event rate shows no difference between patients with or without cardiac comorbidity.