A new modified sunitinib schedule for metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC): A pilot study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. 471-471
Author(s):  
Sebastiano Buti ◽  
Maddalena Donini ◽  
Silvia Lazzarelli ◽  
Matteo Brighenti ◽  
Rodolfo Passalacqua
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Treatment Delays ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Dose Reductions ◽  
Modified Schedule

471 Background: Oral sunitinib administration at 50 mg daily given for 4 weeks followed by 2 weeks off treatment (4+2 schedule) is a standard first line for mRCC treatment. About 20% of patients had to discontinue treatment permanently and 50% of patients are forced to reduce the doses due to adverse events [Motzer RJ, J Clin Oncol. 2009]. A meta-analysis showed that increase exposure to sunitinib is associated with improved clinical outcome [Houk BE, Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2010]. Methods: This is a pilot study in which consecutive mRCC patients admitted to our hospital who had at least a grade 2 toxicity with sunitinib, were switched to a modified schedule maintaining the same dose-intensity of 4+2 schedule: starting on Monday, 1 tablet (50 mg) a day for 5 consecutive days a week for 5 weeks and 1 tablet per day on days 1, 3 and 5 in the sixth week (28 tablets in 6 weeks), until disease progression. Primary end points were toxicity changes assessment and schedule feasibility, secondary end point was overall progression free survival (PFS). Results: Eight nephrectomized patient were enrolled: 6 males; median age 61; 37% good, 50% intermediate and 13% poor MSKCC risk; 3 patient pretreated; 6 clear cell histologies, 1 papillary and 1 undifferentiated histotypes. Median time from start therapy to switch was 7.4 months (range 1.4-16.1). Treatment delays and dose reductions were reduced from 50% to 25% and from 37% to 12% of patients respectively. The table shows the toxicity changes: there were no new toxicities. PFS was 16.3 months (CI 95% 5.6-23.4). Conclusions: This new modified schedule requires and deserves further studies. [Table: see text]

An Italian, multicenter, real-world, retrospective study of first-line pazopanib in unselected metastatic renal-cell carcinoma patients: the ‘Pamerit’ study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Mosca ◽  
Ugo De Giorgi ◽  
Giuseppe Procopio ◽  
Umberto Basso ◽  
Giacomo Cartenì ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Rcc

Abstract Objective Despite the current immunotherapy era, VEGFR inhibitors maintain effectiveness in metastatic renal cell cancer. Real-world data concerning pazopanib are limited. The aim of this study is to add information about efficacy and safety of pazopanib as first-line treatment in metastatic renal cell cancer patients not enrolled into clinical trials. Methods Retrospective analysis (the PAMERIT study) of first-line pazopanib in real-world metastatic renal cell cancer patients among 39 Centers in Italy. Outcomes were progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate and treatment-related adverse events. Kaplan–Meier curves, log-rank test and multivariable Cox’s models were used and adjusted for age, histology, previous renal surgery, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium score and pazopanib initial dose. Results Among 474 patients, 87.3% had clear cell metastatic renal cell cancer histology. Most of them (84.6%) had upfront renal surgery. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 15.8 and 34.4 months, respectively, significantly correlating with International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s good prognosis (P < 0.001), ECOG PS 0 (P < 0.001), age (<75 years, P = 0.005), surgery (P < 0.001) and response to pazopanib (P < 0.001). After 3 months of pazopanib, overall disease control rate have been observed in 76.6% patients. Among International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s favorable group patients, 57/121 (47%) showed complete/partial response. No unexpected AEs emerged. Conclusions In this real-world study, metastatic renal cell cancer patients treated with first-line pazopanib reached greater progression-free survival and overall survival than in pivotal studies and had high response rates when belonging to International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s favorable group, without new toxicities. Pazopanib has been confirmed a valid first-line option for International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium’s good prognosis metastatic renal cell cancer patients who cannot be submitted to immunotherapy.

scholarly journals The benefits and risks of pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in small-cell lung cancer: a single-arm meta-analysis of noncomparative clinical studies and randomized control trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiangyun Liu ◽  
Yixuan Zhang ◽  
Miaowen Liu ◽  
Ruoxin Xu ◽  
Fengming Yi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Conventional Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background Although pembrolizumab has shown clinical benefit in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), its actual efficacy in combination with a conventional chemotherapy drug has not been determined. We performed this study to discern the efficacy and risk of pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in SCLC patients. Methods We systematically searched the PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases for relevant studies. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results We identified 2980 articles and included 6 studies (5 were noncomparative open-label studies and 1 was a randomized controlled trial [RCT]) involving 396 patients in our meta-analysis. The pooled median OS (mOS) was 9.6 months (95% CI, 8.0-11.2), and the pooled median PFS (mPFS) was 4.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-6.1). The 1-year overall survival rate (OSR-1y) and 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFSR-6m) were 45.1% (95% CI, 33-57.2%) and 41.6% (95% CI, 24.3-59%), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 38.8% (95% CI, 11.9-65.67%), disease control rate (DCR) was 69.30% (95% CI, 51.6-87.0%), complete response (CR) was 2.20% (95% CI, 0.8-3.7%), partial response (PR) was 34.70% (95% CI, 7.8-61.5%), and stable disease (SD) was 20.90% (95% CI, 9.1-32.6%). The grade 3-4 adverse effect (AE) rate was 20.88% (95% CI, 1.22-54.85%). The most common AEs were neutropenia (90.16%), anemia (53.21%), dysphagia (41.96%), platelet count decrease (34.87%), and esophagitis (32.89%); severe AEs included neutropenia, respiratory failure, pneumonitis, acute coronary syndrome, and colitis/intestinal ischemia. Conclusions The combination of pembrolizumab with conventional chemotherapy is an effective therapeutic schedule with acceptable and manageable efficacy and toxicity in patients with SCLC. More high-quality and well-designed RCTs with large sample sizes are warranted to further validate our findings.

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 ).

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.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor mutated, non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l5460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi Zhao ◽  
Jingting Liu ◽  
Xiuyu Cai ◽  
Zhenkui Pan ◽  
Jun Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Combination Treatments ◽  
Exon 19 Deletion ◽  
Egfr Mutated

AbstractObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and several international conference databases, from inception to 20 May 2019.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesPublished and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing two or more treatments in the first line setting for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC were included in a bayesian network meta-analysis. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following clinical outcome measures: progression free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and adverse events of grade 3 or higher.Results18 eligible trials involved 4628 patients and 12 treatments: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed based chemotherapy, pemetrexed free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (afatinib plus cetuximab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed). Consistent with gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% credible interval 0.72 to 1.24), osimertinib showed the most favourable progression free survival, with significant differences versus dacomitinib (0.74, 0.55 to 1.00), afatinib (0.52, 0.40 to 0.68), erlotinib (0.48, 0.40 to 0.57), gefitinib (0.44, 0.37 to 0.52), icotinib (0.39, 0.24 to 0.62), pemetrexed based chemotherapy (0.24, 0.17 to 0.33), pemetrexed free chemotherapy (0.16, 0.13 to 0.20), afatinib plus cetuximab (0.44, 0.28 to 0.71), and gefitinib plus pemetrexed (0.65, 0.46 to 0.92). Osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were also consistent (0.94, 0.66 to 1.35) in providing the best overall survival benefit. Combination treatments caused more toxicity in general, especially erlotinib plus bevacizumab, which caused the most adverse events of grade 3 or higher. Different toxicity spectrums were revealed for individual EGFR-TKIs. Subgroup analyses by the two most common EGFR mutation types indicated that osimertinib was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the exon 19 deletion, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the Leu858Arg mutation.ConclusionsThese results indicate that osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were associated with the best progression free survival and overall survival benefits for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC, compared with other first line treatments. The treatments resulting in the best progression free survival for patients with the exon 19 deletion and Leu858Arg mutations were osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, respectively.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42018111954.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of first-line therapy for advanced EGFR-positive non-small-cell lung cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (24) ◽  
pp. 2857-2871 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Franek ◽  
Joseph C Cappelleri ◽  
Kelly A Larkin-Kaiser ◽  
Keith D Wilner ◽  
Rickard Sandin
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

Here, we compare the relative clinical efficacy of EGFR-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors ( EGFR TKIs) for EGFR-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The authors systematically searched 11 electronic databases from January 2004 to August 2018 for randomized controlled trials measuring clinical efficacy of first-line TKI therapies. Clinical efficacy outcomes included overall survival and progression-free survival. Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to assess the relative efficacy of first-line EGFR TKIs for overall survival and progression-free survival. This network meta-analysis showed that dacomitinib and osimertinib resulted in improved efficacy outcomes compared with afatinib, erlotinib and gefitinib. Both osimertinib and dacomitinib should be considered as standard first-line treatment options for patients diagnosed with advanced EGFR-positive non-small-cell lung cancer.

scholarly journals Network Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety of Chemotherapy and Target Therapy in the First-Line Setting of Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kun-I Lin ◽  
Jia-Lian Yang ◽  
Yu-Chao Lin ◽  
Che-Yi Chou ◽  
Jin-Hua Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
P Value ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

Both gemcitabine and fluoropyrimidine are recommended backbones in the first-line treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). To compare the efficacy and safety of these two therapeutic backbones, and to investigate the optimal therapies, we conducted a network meta-analysis. By retrospective analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT), the most preferred therapeutic regimen may be predicted. The eligible RCTs of the gemcitabine-based therapies and fluoropyrimidine-based therapies were searched up to 31 August 2019. In a frequentist network meta-analysis, treatments were compared and ranked according to overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Thirty-two trials with 10,729 patients were included. The network meta-analyses results for overall survival and progression-free survival showed that fluoropyrimidine-based therapy seems to be the most effective treatment choice. Compared to gemcitabine combined with taxanes or immunotherapy, fluoropyrimidine-based therapy had comparable treatment effects (PFS: 0.67, p-Value = 0.11; 0.76, p-Value = 0.32; OS: 0.80, p-Value = 0.16; 0.77, p-Value = 0.21). Moreover, the combination of immunotherapy and gemcitabine had tolerable toxicities. Based on current evidence, fluoropyrimidine-based therapies and the combination of gemcitabine and taxanes were the most effective therapies in the advanced pancreatic cancer, and the combination of immunotherapy and gemcitabine can be developed into a new form of therapy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document