Meta-Analysis of Single-Agent Chemotherapy Compared With Combination Chemotherapy As Second-Line Treatment of Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1836-1843 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimo Di Maio ◽  
Paolo Chiodini ◽  
Vassilis Georgoulias ◽  
Dora Hatzidaki ◽  
Koji Takeda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Doublet Chemotherapy

Purpose Doublet chemotherapy is more effective than single-agent as first-line treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). As second-line treatment, several randomized trials have been performed comparing single-agent with doublet chemotherapy, but each trial had an insufficient power to detect potentially relevant differences in survival. Methods We performed meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials, both published and unpublished, comparing single-agent with doublet chemotherapy as second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. Primary end point was overall survival (OS). All statistical analyses were stratified by trial. Results Eight eligible trials were identified. Data of two trials were not available, and data of six trials (847 patients) were collected. Median age was 61 years. Performance status was 0 or 1 in 90%; 80% of patients had received previous platin-based chemotherapy. OS was not significantly different between arms (P = .32). Median OS was 37.3 and 34.7 weeks in the doublet and single-agent arms, respectively. Hazard ratio (HR) was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.79 to 1.08). Response rate was 15.1% with doublet and 7.3% with single-agent (P = .0004). Median progression-free survival was 14 weeks for doublet and 11.7 weeks for single agent (P = .0009; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.91). There was no significant heterogeneity among trials for the three efficacy outcomes. Patients treated with doublet chemotherapy had significantly more grade 3 to 4 hematologic (41% v 25%; P < .0001) and grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicity (28% v 22%; P = .034). Conclusion Doublet chemotherapy as second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC significantly increases response rate and progression-free survival, but is more toxic and does not improve overall survival compared to single-agent.

A Comparison of nivolumab and pembrolizumab for advanced NSCLC in the second-line treatment: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
jie zhang ◽  
rui zhou ◽  
jing zhu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Objectives : As reported, nivolumab and pembrolizumab have shown to be superior to docetaxel in advanced NSCLC. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Materials and Methods : Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect and safety of nivolumab or pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with advanced NSCLC in the second-line treatment were included. Two investigators independently searched articles, extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies. After that, we performed pairwise direct meta-analyses (nivolumab vs. docetaxel and pembrolizumab vs. docetaxel) and indirect comparison (nivolumab vs. pembrolizumab) using network meta-analyses methods. Results : Four RCTs involving 2391 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In analyses of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) in the direct meta-analysis, nivolumab and pembrolizumab both showed survival benefits when compared with docetaxel. For the indirect comparison, nivolumab show no signifcant difference in OS, PFS and ORR when compared with pembrolizumab (OS: HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.84–1.26; PFS: HR 0.95; 95% CI 0.80–1.14; ORR: HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.67–1.73). For the safety analysis, nivolumab and pembrolizumab both have less toxicity than docetaxel. In indirect comparison, nivolumab showed less all-grade toxicity (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.49–1.04) and grade 3–5 toxicity (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.21–0.49) when compared with pembrolizumab.Conclusion : Our meta-analysis suggests that nivolumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated similar clinical benefit for patients with advanced NSCLC in the second-line treatment. It seems that nivolumab has less toxicity when compared with pembrolizumab.

Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel as Second-Line Chemotherapy following FOLFIRINOX in Patients with Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Single-Institution, Retrospective Analysis

Chemotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Kotone Hayuka ◽  
Hiroyuki Okuyama ◽  
Akitsu Murakami ◽  
Yoshihiro Okita ◽  
Takamasa Nishiuchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer have a poor prognosis. FOLFIRINOX (FFX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been established as first-line treatment, but they have not been confirmed as second-line treatment after FFX. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of GnP as second-line therapy after FFX in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Twenty-five patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer were enrolled. The patients were treated with GnP after FFX between September 2015 and September 2019. Tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and incidence of adverse events were evaluated. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The response rate, disease control rate, median PFS, and median OS were 12%, 96%, 5.3 months, and 15.6 months, respectively. The common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (76%) and anemia (16%). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> GnP after FOLFIRINOX is expected to be one of the second-line recommendations for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Evaluation of efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab combined with or without docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Wang ◽  
Jun Nie ◽  
Ling Dai ◽  
Weiheng Hu ◽  
Jie Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Doublet Chemotherapy ◽  
Platinum Doublet

Abstract Background The combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor and chemotherapy has been clinically confirmed to be beneficial as the first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. This study aimed to assess the effect of nivolumab + docetaxel versus nivolumab monotherapy in patients with NSCLC after the failure of platinum doublet chemotherapy. Materials and methods The efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab + docetaxel combination therapy versus nivolumab monotherapy were compared in this retrospective study. Primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Results Between November 2017 and December 2019, 77 patients were included in this study, with 58 patients in the nivolumab group and 19 in the nivolumab + docetaxel group. The median follow-up was 18 months, and the PFS was 8 months for patients receiving nivolumab + docetaxel and 2 months for those receiving nivolumab alone (p = 0.001), respectively. Nivolumab + docetaxel showed superior OS compared with nivolumab, with the median OS unreached versus 7 months (p = 0.011). Among patients without EGFR/ALK variation, compared to nivolumab monotherapy, nivolumab + docetaxel showed better PFS (p = 0.04) and OS (p  = 0.05). There was no significant difference in grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) between the two groups (p = 0.253). Conclusions The combination of nivolumab and docetaxel demonstrated a meaningful improvement in progression-free survival and overall survival compared to nivolumab monotherapy, in patients with NSCLC after the failure of platinum doublet chemotherapy, irrespective of EGFR/ALK variation status.

A meta-analysis of comparing EGFR-TKI with chemotherapy as the second-line treatment of NSCLC patients with wild-type EGFR.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19166-e19166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guanghui Gao ◽  
Shengxiang Ren ◽  
Aiwu Li ◽  
Yayi He ◽  
Xiaoxia Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Egfr Mutations ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
Egfr Tki

e19166 Background: The efficacy of comparing the EGFR-TKI with standard chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with wide-type EGFR were still controversial. To derive a more precise estimation of the two regimens, a meta-analysis was performed. Methods: Medical databases and conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials which compared EGFR-TKI (gefitinib or erlotinib) with standard second-line chemotherapy (docetaxel or pemetrexed) in patients with NSCLC. Endpoints were overall survival, progression-free survival and overall response. Results: Three eligible trials (INTEREST, TITAN and TAILOR) were identified. Lacking for data of overall survival of TAILOR trial, So we only make a preliminary meta-analysis for overall survival. The intention to treatment (ITT) analysis demonstrated that the patients receiving EGFR-TKI had a significantly shorter progression-free survival (PFS) than patients treated with chemotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.31; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 1.10-1.56; P = 0.002). The overall survival (OS) and overall response rate (ORR) were coparable between this two groups (HR = 0.96; 95%CI = 0.77-1.19; P = 0.69; relative risk (RR) = 0.37; 95%CI = 0.09-1.54; P = 0.17). Conclusions: Although chemotherapy had a clear superiority in PFS as second-line treatment for patients without EGFR mutations compared with EGFR-TKI, OS and ORR were equal in this two regimens. The toxicity profiles might play an important role in the decision to choose EGFR-TKI or chemotherapy. These findings still need to be verified in larger confirmatory studies in future.

A phase II trial comparing pemetrexed with gefitinib as the second-line treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC patients with wild-type EGFR (CTONG0806).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8042-8042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinji Yang ◽  
Ying Cheng ◽  
Mingfang Zhao ◽  
Qing Zhou ◽  
Hong hong Yan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Egfr Mutation ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
Nsclc Patients

8042 Background: Pemetrexed or gefitinib is one of the standard second-line treatments for advanced non-squamousNSCLC in East Asia. The CTONG 0806 a multi-center, randomized, controlled, open-label phase II trial was designed to explore the efficacy of pemetrexed versus gefitinib as the second-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients without EGFR mutation. Methods: The patients with locally advanced or metastatic, non-squamous NSCLC previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and no EGFR mutation in exons 18-21 were enrolled. Patients were 1:1 randomized to receive either gefitinib 250 mg per oral every day (G arm) or pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 iv day 1 with vitamin B12 and folic acid supplement every 21 days (P arm) until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or discontinuation of treatment due to other reason. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were 4-month and 6-month progression-free survival rate, overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life using the FACT-L questionnaire and safety, EGFR and K-ras mutation status were evaluated and correlated with outcomes. Results: From Feb. 2009 to Aug. 2012, 157 evaluable patients were randomized (81 cases in G arm and 76 in P arm). Baseline age, gender, and ECOG performance status were balanced between arms. The primary endpoint of PFS was met with 1.6 months for G arm versus 4.8 months for P arm, the HR is 0.51 (95% CI 0.36~0.73, P<0.001). Overall response rates were 14.7 % and 13.3 % (P=0.814) and DCR were 32.0% and 61.3% (P<0.001) for G arm and P arm, respectively. OS data were not yet mature. More skin rash and diarrhoea were seen in G arm, but more fatigue and ALT increased in P arm. CTCAE grade 3 or 4 of AEs was 12.3% in G arm and 32.9% in P arm (p=0.002). The further analyses of efficacy evaluated by IRR and biomarkers analysis will be presented on the ground. Conclusions: CTONG0806 is the first trial to show significant improvements in PFS and DCR with pemetrexed compared with gefitinib in second-line setting for advanced NSCLC with EGFR wild type. Patients with EGFR wild type did not benefit from EGFR TKI gefitinb in second-line setting. Clinical trial information: NCT00891579.

Second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A meta-analysis.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15779-e15779
Author(s):  
Mohamad Bassam Sonbol ◽  
Belal Firwana ◽  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Daniel H. Ahn ◽  
Mitesh J. Borad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Modest Improvement ◽  
Random Effects Models

e15779 Background: There is paucity of data regarding the best available second-line treatment following progression on gemcitabine-based regimens in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While a Nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan (MM398) is considered a standard of care, there is conflicting data relating to the use of oxaliplatin in this setting. We performed a meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of adding oxaliplatin (OX) or various irinotecan (IRI) formulations to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) as a second-line in PDAC patients. Methods: We searched different databases, including PubMed, Embase and Cochrane, to identify randomized controlled trials comparing FP monotherapy to FP combination therapy that includes either oxaliplatin (FPOX) or various irinotecan formulations (FPIRI) in PDAC patients who progressed after first-line treatment. Secondary analyses were planned to assess the effectiveness of FPOX and FPIRI compared to FP. Outcomes of interest included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The overall effect was pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects models. Results: Five studies (2 with FPIRI and 3 with FPOX) with 895 patients were identified. Patients randomized to FPIRI/FPOX had a significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.74, CI 0.62 to 0.89) and a trend towards an improved OS compared to FP monotherapy (HR = 0.88, CI 0.65 to 1.19). When comparing FPIRI to FP, there was an improvement in both PFS (HR = 0.64, CI 0.47 to 0.87) and OS (HR = 0.70, CI 0.55 to 0.89) in patients treated with the combination. Conversely, FPOX showed only a modest improvement in PFS (HR = 0.81, CI 0.67, 0.97) with no improvement in OS (HR = 1.03, CI 0.64 to 1.67). Conclusions: Combination chemotherapy with oxaliplatin or various irinotecan formulations seem to improve PFS vs. single agent FP. FPIRI, but not FPOX seem to confer an OS advantage. Oxaliplatin with FP following gemcitabine failure may need further confirmatory studies to establish its role in refractory pancreas cancer.

scholarly journals A comparison of FOLFIRI (Folinic Acid, Fluorouracil and Irinotecan) Plus Bevacizumab and FLOLFIRI Plus Aflibercept as Second-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Sang Lee ◽  
Yong-Pyo Lee ◽  
Hongsik Kim ◽  
Jung Yong Hong ◽  
Jeeyun Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Folinic Acid ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients

Abstract Background: To date, there are few clinical studies comparing the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRI (folinic acid, fluorouracil and irinotecan) plus bevacizumab or aflibercept in metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC) pretreated with oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Methods: We analyzed the treatment outcomes of patients receiving FOLFIRI in combination with bevacizumab or aflibercept as second-line treatment for mCRC between October 2017 and March 2020. This analysis included 67 patients receiving FOLFIRI plus aflibercept and 83 receiving FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab. Results: The overall response rate (ORR) was 13.6% (95% CI: 4.85-22.34) in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group and 14.7% (95% CI: 6.68-22.71) in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group. This difference in ORR was not statistically significant. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 8.6 months in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group and 8.5 months in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group (P = 0.752) (Fig. 1). Patients in the FOLFIRI-bevacizumab group showed a median overall survival (OS) of 12.4 months, while patients in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group had a median OS of 13.7 months (P = 0.276). There were no significant differences in survival between the two treatment groups. The adverse events were also largely similar between the two groups. However, hypertension of grade 3 or more was more frequent in the FOLFIRI-aflibercept group. Conclusion: FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab and FOLFIRI plus aflibercept had similar anti-tumor activities and toxicity profiles when used as second-line therapy in mCRC patients. Based on these data, both aflibercept and bevacizumab are suitable anti-angiogenic agents when used in combination with FOLFIRI for mCRC.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of second-line nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine after progression on FOLFIRINOX for unresectable or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: multicenter retrospective analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592092342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heejung Chae ◽  
Hyehyun Jeong ◽  
Jaekyung Cheon ◽  
Hong Jae Chon ◽  
Hyewon Ryu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Treatment Option ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Ductal Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3

Background: FOLFIRINOX (fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan plus oxaliplatin) is an effective standard first-line treatment option for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). There is no clear consensus on the second-line treatment following progression on FOLFIRINOX. In this multicenter retrospective analysis, we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of second-line nab-P/Gem (nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine) after progression on FOLFIRNOX in PDAC. Methods: Patients with unresectable or metastatic PDAC who received nab-P/Gem after progression on FOLFIRINOX between February 2016 and February 2019 were identified from five referral cancer centers in South Korea. Baseline characteristics, treatment history, survival outcomes, and toxicity profile were obtained retrospectively from medical records. Results: A total of 102 patients treated with second-line nab-P/Gem for advanced PDAC after progression on FOLFIRINOX were included. At the time of nab-P/Gem, the median age was 60 years, with males comprising 49.0%, and most (75.5%) had metastatic disease. Patients received a median of three cycles (range 1–12) of nab-P/Gem. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from the start of second-line nab-P/Gem therapy were 9.8 (95% CI, 8.9–10.6) and 4.6 months (3.7–5.5), respectively. A partial response was achieved in 8.5%, and the disease control rate was 73.6%. From the start of first-line FOLFIRIOX, the OS1+2 and PFS1+2 were 20.9 (15.7–26.1) and 13.9 (10.8–17.0) months, respectively, with a 2-year survival rate of 45.1%. There was no treatment-related mortality and grade ⩾3 toxicity was observed in 60.2%. Conclusion: Our results showed that nab-P/Gem was an effective and tolerable second-line treatment option in medically fit patients with advanced PDAC who progressed on first-line FOLFIRNOX. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04133155

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document