Effect of immunotherapy on survival outcomes in prostate cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e17030-e17030
Author(s):  
Vinod solipuram ◽  
Kishor Pokharel ◽  
Bhanu Prasad Venkatesulu ◽  
Harideep Samanapally
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Standard Treatment ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grade 3

e17030 Background: Prostate cancer is one of the leading cancers in men with an estimated 191,930 new cases in 2020 in the USA alone. Treatment options for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have evolved in recent years. Immunotherapy involving vaccines like sipuleucel-T, PROSTVAC and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been evaluated in these patients. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing the effect of immunotherapy in mCRPC. Methods: A systematic search was performed using PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library without language limitations from inception to January 3, 2021. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcomes were progression free survival (PFS), prostate specific antigen (PSA) reduction ≥ 50% and incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events. The analysis of OS, PFS was done using random effects hazard ratio (HR) by generic inverse variance method and analysis of PSA reduction ≥ 50% and grade 3-4 adverse events was done using random effects risk ratio (RR) by the Mantel-Haenszel method. Results: 12 RCTs comprising 4109 patients were included in the analysis. There was a statistically significant improvement in OS (HR 0.89; 95% CI (0.81, 0.97)) and PFS (HR 0.83; 95% CI (0.76, 0.92)) in the immunotherapy arm compared to placebo or standard treatment arms with moderate quality of evidence. Patients in the immunotherapy group had significant reduction in PSA ≥ 50% (RR 1.71; 95% CI (1.09, 2.68)) but also had statistically significant increased risk of grade 3-4 adverse events (RR (1.25; 95% CI (1.02, 1.54)) when compared to placebo and the standard treatment group. Subgroup analysis showed that the use of vaccine therapy in prostate cancer leads to significant improvement in OS (HR 0.83; 95% CI (0.74, 0.93)) and PFS (HR 0.80; 95% CI (0.67, 0.95)) compared to placebo and standard treatment. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors was not associated with statistically significant improvement in OS (HR 0.98; 95% CI (0.88, 1.09)) but is associated with improvement in PFS (HR 0.87; 95%CI (0.81, 0.94)). Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that immunotherapy led to significant improvement in OS, PFS and PSA reduction of ≥ 50%. However, there is an increased incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events with the use of immunotherapy when compared to other standard therapies and placebo. The improvement in overall survival is limited to the use of vaccine therapy and not to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Careful use of selective forms of immunotherapy in mCRPC can lead to greater improvement in survival.

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Combination with Chemotherapy as a First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small Cell Carcinoma

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 3629
Author(s):  
Hsiao-Ling Chen ◽  
Yu-Kang Tu ◽  
Hsiu-Mei Chang ◽  
Tai-Huang Lee ◽  
Kuan-Li Wu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Extensive Stage ◽  
Grade 3

Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) have a very short survival time even if they receive standard cytotoxic chemotherapy with etoposide and platinum (EP). Several randomized controlled trials have shown that patients with ED-SCLC who received a combination of EP plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had superior survival compared with those who received EP alone. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide a ranking of ICIs for our primary endpoints in terms of overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR), as well as our secondary endpoint in terms of adverse events. The fractional polynomial model was used to evaluate the adjusted hazard ratios for the survival indicators (OS and PFS). Treatment rank was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), as well as the probability of being best (Prbest) reference. EP plus nivolumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab had significant benefits compared with EP alone in terms of OS (Hazard Ratio HR = 0.67, 95% Confidence Interval CI = 0.46–0.98 for nivolumab, HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54–0.91 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.59–0.90 for durvalumab) but no significant differences were observed for pembrolizumab or ipilimumab. The probability of nivolumab being ranked first among all treatment arms was highest (SCURA = 78.7%, Prbest = 46.7%). All EP plus ICI combinations had a longer PFS compared with EP alone (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.46–0.92 for nivolumab, HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.61–0.96 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.65–0.94 for durvalumab, HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.61–0.92 for pembrolizumab), and nivolumab was ranked first in terms of PFS (SCURA = 85.0%, Prbest = 66.8%). In addition, nivolumab had the highest probability of grade 3–4 adverse events (SUCRA = 84.8%) in our study. We found that nivolumab had the best PFS and OS in all combinations of ICIs and EP, but nivolumab also had the highest probability of grade 3–4 adverse events in our network meta-analysis. Further head-to head large-scale phase III randomized controlled studies are needed to verify our conclusions.

A comprehensive meta-analysis of endocrine immune-related adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitors and outcomes in head and neck cancer and lung cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14096-e14096 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristiane Jeyce Gomes-Lima ◽  
John Kwagyan ◽  
Fred King ◽  
Stephen J Fernandez ◽  
Kenneth D Burman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grade 3

e14096 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPi) have emerged as an effective treatment for a variety of cancers. However, important immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can occur. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of endocrine irAEs in patients with head and neck cancer and lung cancer that have used a ICPi and outcomes. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed within PubMed and EMBASE databases. Search terms included “durvalumab”, “atezolizumab”, “nivolumab”, “pembrolizumab”, “ipilimumab”, “head & neck cancer”, “lung cancer”. Studies published before September 2018 were included. The search was limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) phase III written in English. Data were extracted about patient characteristics, interventions, overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and endocrine irAEs. A summary hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval were calculated using the software Comprehensive Meta-Analysis and a scatter plot was generated. Results: Twelve RCTs comprising 7060 patients were reviewed; 3815 used an ICPi (treatment arm). The mean follow-up time of 12.2 months ± 7.1 SD. The survival rate of the treatment arm was enhanced (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.70-0.80), compared to the alternate arm. Similarly, the PFS of the treatment arm was improved (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.72-0.81) but with a higher incidence of endocrine irAEs. The most common endocrine irAE reported was hypothyroidism;193 patients in the treatment arm vs. 29 in the alternate arm (p < 0.001); grade 3/4 AE was observed in 10 patients vs. 1 patient, respectively. Other endocrine irAEs were reported in 168 patients in the treatment arm vs. 26 patients in the alternate arm (p < 0.001); grade 3/4 AE was observed in 28 patients vs. 3 patients, respectively. A significant positive correlation between endocrine irAEs and OS was observed (p = 0.019). Conclusions: ICPi are a powerful tool in the treatment of cancer. The prevalence of endocrine irAEs in this meta-analysis was 9%. There is evidence of improved overall survival in patients who developed endocrine irAEs. Further studies are needed to correlate the development of irAEs and OS advantage.

The Current Role of Immunotherapy in mCRPC: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalibey H ◽  
◽  
Hansen TF ◽  
Zedan AH ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Specific Antigen ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: The development of immunotherapy has shown promising results in several malignant diseases, including prostate cancer, calling for a systematic review of the current literature. This review aims to evaluate the present data and prospects of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC). Methods: Articles were identified via a systematic search of the electronic database Pubmed, in accordance with the PICO process and following the PRISMA guidelines. Articles in English studying immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with mCRPC published between March 2010 and March 2020 were eligible for inclusion. Endpoints of interest were Overall Survival (OS), Progression-Free Survival (PFS), clinical Overall Response Rate (ORR), and Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) response rate. Results: Ten articles were identified as eligible for inclusion. The studies primarily explored the use of Ipilimumab, a CTLA-4 inhibitor, and Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor. These drugs were both used either as monotherapy or in combination with other treatment modalities. The largest trial included in the review demonstrated no significant difference in overall survival between the intervention and placebo. However, two studies presented promising data combing immunotherapy and immune vaccines. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events ranging from 10.1% to 82.3%, whit diarrhea, rash, and fatigue were the most frequently reported. Forty relevant ongoing trials were identified exploring immunotherapy with or without a parallel treatment modality. Conclusion: Overall, the current data shows that the effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors as monotherapy may have limited impact on mCRPC, and the results from ongoing combinational trials are eagerly awaited.

scholarly journals Comparative risk of serious and fatal treatment-related adverse events caused by 19 immune checkpoint inhibitors used in cancer treatment: a network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592094092 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tingting Liu ◽  
Bo Jin ◽  
Jun Chen ◽  
Hui Wang ◽  
Shuiyu Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Combinatorial Therapy ◽  
Grade 5 ◽  
Comparative Risk ◽  
Grade 3

Background: This network meta-analysis assessed the comparative risk of grade 3–5 and grade 5 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), either alone or in combination with other modalities, for cancer treatment. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and recent predominant oncology congresses were searched for relevant phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs). As outcomes, grade 3–5, and grade 5 TRAE outcomes were reported as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results: In 67 RCTs involving 36,422 patients and 19 ICIs, the incidence of grade 3–5 and grade 5 TRAEs was 17.9% and 0.8% with ICI monotherapy and 46.3% and 1.4%, respectively, with combinatorial therapy. Pneumonitis was the most common cause of grade 5 TRAEs following either monotherapy (16.3%) or combinatorial therapy (11.4%). Regarding grade 3–5 TRAEs, atezolizumab + chemotherapy (CT) and antiangiogenic therapy (AT) (atezolizumab + CAT), pembrolizumab + CT, ipilimumab + CT, and atezolizumab + CT were more toxic than any ICI monotherapy, pembrolizumab or nivolumab + radiotherapy (RT), and ICIs dual therapy (durvalumab + tremelimumab and nivolumab + ipilimumab). Tremelimumab, ipilimumab, durvalumab, and pembrolizumab were, however, associated with higher grade 5 TRAEs than combinatorial treatments. Atezolizumab + CAT was the most toxic and nivolumab + RT was the least toxic of combinatorial treatments; among monotherapies, tremelimumab and avelumab were the most and least toxic, respectively. The toxicity ranking changed with type of grade 3–5 TRAEs. Conclusions: Compared with combinatorial therapy, ICI monotherapy caused lower grade 3–5 TRAEs, but some monotherapies resulted in a higher incidence of fatal TRAEs. Atezolizumab + CAT and nivolumab + RT were the most and least toxic of combinatorial treatments, respectively, and tremelimumab and avelumab were the most and least toxic of the monotherapies, respectively.

scholarly journals Combination of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Radiotherapy for Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Prostate Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Zexi Xu ◽  
Jia Feng ◽  
Yiming Weng ◽  
Yao Jin ◽  
Min Peng
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Grade 3

Objectives. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) combined with radiotherapy (RT) have emerged as a breakthrough therapy in the treatment of various cancers. The combination has a strong rationale, but data on their efficacy and safety are still limited. Hence, we comprehensively searched the database and performed this study to elucidate the clinical manifestations of this combined strategy. Methods. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials that compared ICI plus RT with placebo plus RT or ICI alone for the treatment of advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and prostate cancer. The outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR), and treatment-related adverse events. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was adopted depending on between-study heterogeneity. Results. Three trials involving 1584 patients were included. ICI plus RT was significantly associated with improvement of OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.70–0.94, P = 0.004 ), PFS (HR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.56–0.72, P < 0.00001 ), and DCR (relative risk [RR] = 1.38; 95% CI 1.03–1.84, P = 0.03 ). A significant predictor for PFS with the combination of ICI and RT was age, as a significant improvement in PFS (HR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.37–0.64, P < 0.00001 ) was observed in NSCLC patients aged under 65 years. In safety analyses, patients receiving ICI plus RT had a significantly higher incidence of dyspnea (RR = 2.43; 95% CI 1.16–5.08, P = 0.02 ) and pneumonitis of grade 3 or higher (RR = 2.78; 95% CI 1.32–5.85, P = 0.007 ). Conclusion. The combination of ICI and RT was associated with improved OS, PFS, and DCR. Patients under 65 years will be the dominant beneficiaries. However, the incidence of dyspnea and pneumonia of grade 3 or higher also increased, which deserves our vigilance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document