scholarly journals Results from a meta-analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitors in first-line renal cancer patients: does PD-L1 matter?

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175883591986190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giandomenico Roviello ◽  
Silvia Paola Corona ◽  
Gabriella Nesi ◽  
Enrico Mini
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
First Line

Background: The aim of this study was to perform a literature-based meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of the novel immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), focusing on the predictive role of PD-L1 expression. Methods: The primary outcome was overall survival, and secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response. We planned a subgroup analysis for overall survival according to PD-L1 status. Results: Five studies were included in the analysis for a total of 4063 cases. Overall survival was greater in PD-L1 positive tumours (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.36–0.67; p < 0.001). The pooled analysis of the unselected cases showed a statistically significative improvement in PFS with the use of ICIs (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.72–0.99; p = 0.04) and we found a greater PFS benefit (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.57–0.74; p < 0.001) in patients with PD-L1 positive tumours. Conclusions: This study supports the efficacy of ICIs and, although a significant clinical benefit has been reported in PD-L1 negative patients, a greater efficacy of ICIs was observed in PD-L1 positive patients. More prospective randomized studies are needed to clarify the role of PDL-1 status in metastatic RCC treated with ICIs.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors versus other systemic therapies in advanced head and neck cancer: a network meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-555
Author(s):  
Lingrong Tang ◽  
Tingting Liu ◽  
Jun Chen ◽  
Jun Dang ◽  
Guang Li
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Systemic Therapies

Aim: We assessed the efficiency of immune checkpoint inhibitors relative to other systemic therapies in previously treated recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer. Materials & methods: Relative treatment effects were assessed from eligible randomized controlled trials using Bayesian network meta-analyses. Results: Among 15 trials evaluating 14 treatments, nivolumab achieved the best overall survival (OS) benefit; zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel provided the best progression-free survival benefit and objective response rate. Buparlisib + paclitaxel and zalutumumab were associated with the best OS rate at 6 and 12 months, respectively; nivolumab yielded the best OS rate at 18–24 months. Conclusion: Nivolumab was the most favorable treatment. Zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel had better efficiency, and might be a better selection for patients with programmed death-ligand 1-low/negative tumors than other treatments.

Landscape of immune-checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16632-e16632
Author(s):  
Dmitrii Shek ◽  
Scott A. Read ◽  
Adnan Nagrial ◽  
Bo Gao ◽  
Golo Ahlenstiel
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Forest Plot ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Advanced Hcc

e16632 Background: The WHO estimates that liver cancer will cause 1 million deaths by 2030. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a primary liver malignancy causing 4.3% of all cancer deaths in 2019 in Australia. Kinase inhibitors are standard of care (SoC) for metastatic HCC with median overall survival (mOS) of < 13 months. This meta-analysis primarily aimed to determine objective response rate (ORR) of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced HCC. Methods: Potentially relevant clinical studies were identified through PUBMED, Scopus, ASCO and ESMO databases. Studies evaluating ICIs in patients with HCC and reporting efficacy outcomes were considered as eligible. Publication bias was assessed with Funnel plots. Data analysis was performed employing fixed and random effects model depending on study heterogeneity evaluating by I2 statistic. STATA v16 software was used for all statistical considerations. Results: 12 single arm phase II/III studies and 2 randomized clinical trials on ICIs in HCC were included into this analysis. First-line ICI: Primary forest plot established the median ORR was 26.2% (95% CI 24.7 to 27.9) in patients treated with first line ICIs monotherapy; in comparison, ORR of current SoC sorafenib is 2-3% and lenvatinib 18.8%. Moreover, nivolumab resulted in 9.8 months of OS in Child-Pugh class B (CPB) patients, previously eligible only for supportive care due to a low efficacy of sorafenib (mOS < 4.5 months). Second-line ICI: Secondary forest plot established that nivolumab at 1 mg/kg with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W resulted in mOS of 23 months with ORR of 32% in sorafenib-progressors. In comparison, current second line SoC regorafenib has mOS of 10.6 months and ORR of 17%. Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that ICIs may be superior (ORR) to SoC sorafenib in advanced HCC, particularly nivolumab. Secondly, nivolumab with ipilimumab were confirmed to provide higher OS in sorafenib progressors as compared to regorafenib. Of note, many of the studies included were only available in abstract form and final reporting is pending. Nevertheless, our results support higher efficacy of ICIs in HCC patients.

Clinical significance of tumour mutation burden in immunotherapy across multiple cancer types: an individual meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (9) ◽  
pp. 1023-1031
Author(s):  
Zhenyu Yang ◽  
Shiyou Wei ◽  
Yulan Deng ◽  
Zihuai Wang ◽  
Lunxu Liu
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mutation Burden

Abstract Background Biomarkers for stratifying patients that could benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitors are necessary. Tumour mutation burden has recently become a promising biomarker in cancer, but the associations between tumour mutation burden and outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors treatment were not well-documented in present studies. Methods We searched PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE databases up to 1 October 2019. Studies evaluated the association between tumour mutation burden and clinical outcomes were included. Hazard ratios and odds ratios were applied to estimate the association of tumour mutation burden score with overall survival, progression-free survival and response rate, respectively. The best cut-off value was chosen by best discriminated overall survival using Contal and O’Quigley method. Results Twenty-two studies involving 6171 patients in diverse cancers were included. The individual participant data meta-analysis demonstrated that high tumour mutation burden was associated with better overall survival (HR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.50–0.64) and progression-free survival (HR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.40–0.63) and higher response rate. The best cut-off values in each cancer type were 17.7/MB in non-small cell lung cancer, 7.9/MB in bladder cancer, 6.1/MB in melanoma, 12.3/MB in colorectal cancer, 6.9/MB in esophagogastric cancer, 10.5/MB in head and neck cancer. The pooled meta-analysis showed the prognosis value was robust and the sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves in predicting response rates were 0.63, 0.71 and 0.73, respectively. Conclusions The present meta-analysis indicates tumour mutation burden is a promising predictor of immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy but the cut-off value differs in different cancers.

scholarly journals Results from a Meta-analysis of Combination of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 Inhibitors in Malignant Cancer Patients: Does PD-L1 Matter?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuqian Feng ◽  
Huimin Jin ◽  
Kaibo Guo ◽  
Yuying Xiang ◽  
Yiting Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Combination Immunotherapy

Background: Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been widely used for clinical treatment in recent years, which has a better survival benefit. However, not all patients can derive clinical benefit from combination immunotherapy. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the biomarkers of combination immunotherapy.Methods: We retrieved articles from electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan software. Progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) were the outcome indicators. In the unselect population, we compared combination therapy with other treatments. In addition, we also conducted subgroup analysis on PFS, OS and ORR according to PD-L1 status.Results: Seven studies were included in the analysis for a total of 3,515 cases. In the unselected population, we found that combination therapy has longer PFS, OS, and better ORR than other treatments for cancer patients. The longer PFS was showed in PD-L1 ≥ 5% cases (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56–0.76; p &lt; 0.001) than PD-L1 ≥ 1% cases (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.66–0.79; p &lt; 0.001), while ORR and OS have not related to the status of PD-L1.Conclusion: This study supported the efficacy of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and also showed that PFS in patients with malignant tumors is positively correlated with PD-L1 expression. Due to the limited number of trials included, more high-quality clinical randomized controlled trials should be conducted to confirm the review findings.

scholarly journals Treatment Strategies and Metabolic Pathway Regulation in Urothelial Cell Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (23) ◽  
pp. 8993
Author(s):  
Huang-Yu Yang ◽  
Chao-Yi Wu ◽  
Jia-Jin Chen ◽  
Tao-Han Lee
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Metabolic Pathways ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Comprehensive Review

For a long time, cisplatin-based chemotherapy had been viewed as first-line chemotherapy for advanced and metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, many patients with UC had been classified as cisplatin-ineligible who can only receive alternative chemotherapy with poor treatment response, and the vast majority of the cisplatin-eligible patients eventually progressed, even those with objective response with cisplatin-based chemotherapy initially. By understanding tumor immunology in UC, immune checkpoint inhibitors, targeting on programmed death 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) pathways, had been proven as first-line treatment for cisplatin-ineligible metastatic UC and as second-line treatment for patients with platinum-refractory metastatic UC by the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In 2020, JAVEIN bladder 100 further reported that PD-L1 inhibitors showed benefits on prolonged survival and progression-free survival as maintenance therapy. Besides targeting on immune checkpoint, manipulation of the tumor microenvironment by metabolic pathways intervention, including inhibition on tumor glycolysis, lactate accumulation and exogenous glutamine uptake, had been investigated in the past few years. In this comprehensive review, we start by introducing traditional chemotherapy of UC, and then we summarize current evidences supporting the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and highlight ongoing clinical trials. Lastly, we reviewed the tumor metabolic characteristic and the anti-tumor treatments targeting on metabolic pathways.

scholarly journals Immune-Related Adverse Events Predict the Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Lung Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donghui Wang ◽  
Cen Chen ◽  
Yanli Gu ◽  
Wanjun Lu ◽  
Ping Zhan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Lung Cancer Patients

BackgroundImmune-related adverse events (irAEs) have been reported to be associated with the efficacy of immunotherapy. Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to demonstrate that irAEs could predict the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in lung cancer patients.MethodsLiterature on the correlation between irAEs and the efficacy of immunotherapy in lung cancer patients were searched to collect the data on objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), or progression-free survival (PFS) of the patients. These data were incorporated into the meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 34 records encompassing 8,115 patients were examined in this study. The irAEs occurrence was significantly associated with higher ORR {risk ratio (RR): 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) [2.06–2.88], p &lt; 0.00001} and improved OS {hazard ratio (HR): 0.51, 95% CI [0.43–0.61], p &lt; 0.00001}, and PFS (HR: 0.50, 95% CI [0.44–0.57], p &lt; 0.00001) in lung cancer patients undergoing ICIs. Subgroup analysis revealed that OS was significantly longer in patients who developed dermatological (OS: HR: 0.53, 95%CI [0.42–0.65], p &lt; 0.00001), endocrine (OS: HR: 0.55, 95%CI [0.45–0.67], p &lt; 0.00001), and gastrointestinal irAEs (OS: HR: 0.58, 95%CI [0.42–0.80], p = 0.0009) than in those who did not. However, hepatobiliary, pulmonary, and high-grade (≥3) irAEs were not correlated with increased OS and PFS.ConclusionThe occurrence of irAEs in lung cancer patients, particularly dermatological, endocrine, and gastrointestinal irAEs, is a predictor of enhanced ICIs efficacy.

scholarly journals The Efficacy of Ramucirumab in the Treatment of Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of RCTs

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Hongqiong Yang ◽  
Yaojun Zhou ◽  
Liangzhi Wang ◽  
Tianyi Gu ◽  
Mengjia Lv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Five electronic databases were searched for eligible records. Outcomes were presented and analyzed according to the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) rate, and overall survival (OS) rate. Five records involving 2,024 participants were included in the study. The pooled analysis of OS and PFS were longer with ramucirumab (RAM) therapy than without RAM for OS (odds ratio OR = 0.90 , 95% confidence interval CI = 0.82 – 1.00 , p = 0.05 ) and PFS ( OR = 0.74 , 95 % CI = 0.57 – 0.96 , p = 0.02 ). Moreover, compared with the current first-line chemotherapy, the OS ( OR = 0.93 , 95 % CI = 0.83 – 1.04 , p = 0.19 ) and PFS ( OR = 0.82 , 95 % CI = 0.64 – 1.06 , p = 0.13 ) results were not significantly higher with RAM. The ORRs of the patients in the RAM therapy groups were significantly higher than those in the groups without RAM ( OR = 1.40 , 95 % CI = 1.14 – 1.73 , p = 0.001 ).

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and chemotherapy in first-line NSCLC: a meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fausto Petrelli ◽  
Roberto Ferrara ◽  
Diego Signorelli ◽  
Antonio Ghidini ◽  
Claudia Proto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
First Line ◽  
Random Effects Models ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Programmed Death ◽  
Quantitative Synthesis

This study is a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials involving first-line studies in which immune checkpoint inhibitors were added to chemotherapy and were compared with chemotherapy alone. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). The analyses used random-effects models and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to rate the quality of the evidence. Nine articles were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. A meta-analysis of the nine randomized trials showed a significant benefit in terms of OS (hazard ratio: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.66–0.85]; p < 0.01). Only programmed death ligand-1 positive-high cancers derive a significant OS benefit. In this meta-analysis, there is moderate evidence that the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors to chemotherapy may improve both OS compared with chemotherapy alone.

Effects of adding necitumumab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1331-1342
Author(s):  
Irena Ilic ◽  
Sandra Sipetic ◽  
Jovan Grujicic ◽  
Milena Ilic
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

Introduction Almost half of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Our aim was to assess the effects of adding necitumumab to chemotherapy in patients with stage IV NSCLC. Material and methods A comprehensive literature search was performed according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate and adverse events were extracted. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for time-to-event data and pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. Results The meta-analysis included four randomized clinical trials with 2074 patients. The pooled results showed significant improvement for overall survival (HR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.79–0.95), p = 0.004) when necitumumab was added to chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No statistically significant improvement was noted for progression-free survival and objective response rate (HR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.69–1.01), p = 0.06 and OR = 1.46 (95% CI 0.90–2.38), p = 0.13, respectively). Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with non-squamous NSCLC, there was no benefit in overall survival and objective response rate. Patients with advanced NSCLC who received necitumumab were at the highest odds of developing a skin rash (OR = 14.50 (95% CI 3.16–66.43), p = 0.0006) and hypomagnesaemia (OR = 2.77 (95% CI 2.23–3.45), p < 0.00001), while the OR for any grade ≥3 adverse event was 1.55 (95% CI 1.28–1.87, p < 0.00001). Conclusions The addition of necitumumab to standard chemotherapy in a first-line setting in patients with stage IV NSCLC results in a statistically significant improvement in overall survival, while the results were not significant for progression-free survival and objective response rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document