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.

Real-world effectiveness of nivolumab in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (27) ◽  
pp. 2045-2058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong-Jin Kim ◽  
Mark Oremus ◽  
Helen H Chen ◽  
Thomas McFarlane ◽  
Devanshi Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival

Background: The effectiveness of immunotherapies for non-small-cell lung cancer under real-world clinical settings remains uncertain. Materials & methods: Systematic searches of PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were conducted. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled median overall survival and progression-free survival estimates. Results: 36 studies of nivolumab were included for narrative synthesis and 11 of these studies were included for meta-analysis. Age, sex, histology and prior lines of treatment did not affect survival outcomes, while Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status and brain metastasis were inversely associated with survival. In the meta-analysis, nivolumab was associated with 9.6 months (95% CI: 8.4–10.9) of overall survival and 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.6–3.6) of progression-free survival. Conclusion: Very-low-certainty evidence suggested the real-world effectiveness of nivolumab was consistent with those observed in the clinical trials.

scholarly journals Effect of COPD on Inflammation, Lymphoid Functions and Progression-Free Survival during First-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 1117-1128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Márton Szentkereszty ◽  
Zsolt István Komlósi ◽  
Gergő Szűcs ◽  
Gábor Barna ◽  
Lilla Tamási ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Randomized Phase II Study of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin or Carboplatin, With or Without Cetuximab, As First-Line Therapy for Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (36) ◽  
pp. 5777-5784 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles A. Butts ◽  
David Bodkin ◽  
Edward L. Middleman ◽  
Craig W. Englund ◽  
David Ellison ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

PurposeTo evaluate the efficacy of cetuximab added to first-line gemcitabine/platinum in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Patients and MethodsIn this noncomparative, randomized trial, chemotherapy-naïve patients with recurrent/metastatic NSCLC (stage IV or stage IIIB with malignant pleural effusion) were eligible. Patients received cisplatin (75 mg/m2IV, every 3 weeks) or carboplatin (area under the concentration-versus-time curve of 5 intravenously [IV], every 3 weeks), and gemcitabine (1,250 or 1,000 mg/m2IV, days 1 and 8) plus cetuximab (400 mg/m2IV day 1, followed by 250 mg/m2weekly), in arm A, or chemotherapy alone, in arm B. Response rate was the primary end point; safety, progression-free survival, and overall survival were secondary end points.ResultsSixty-five patients were randomly assigned to arm A and 66 to arm B. Partial responses were observed in 18 patients (27.7%; 95% CI, 17.3 to 40.2) in arm A and 12 (18.2%; 95% CI, 9.8 to 29.6) in arm B. Median progression-free survival was 5.09 months for arm A (95% CI, 4.17 to 5.98) and 4.21 months (95% CI, 3.81 to 5.49) in arm B. Median overall survival was 11.99 months (95% CI, 8.80 to 15.18) and 9.26 months (95% CI, 7.43 to 11.79) in arms A and B, respectively. Overall toxicity was acceptable and consistent with the profiles of the individual agents.ConclusionFirst-line treatment with cetuximab plus gemcitabine/platinum is well tolerated and can be administered safely in patients with advanced NSCLC. Differences in response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival suggest that the addition of cetuximab to platinum/gemcitabine may improve clinical outcomes. Larger studies are in progress to address this hypothesis.

scholarly journals Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Alectinib Versus Crizotinib in ALK-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Tang ◽  
Longyu Jin ◽  
Zhang Zhang ◽  
Zhibin Jiang ◽  
Zeeshan Malik
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival

ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of alectinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small-cell lung cancer.MethodsStudies about the efficacy of alectinib versus crizotinib in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Embase and the Cocharane Library from inception to February 15, 2020. Two reviewers independently screened these studies, extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias in the included studies by using the Cochrane risk assessment tool, and then used review manager 5.3 software for meta-analysis.ResultsThree studies comprising a total of 697 patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer were included, 380 in the alectinib group and 317 in the crizotinib group. The dose of alectinib (300 mg) in J-ALEX were lower than the approved dose (600 mg), however the crizotinib group in all three studies received the recommended dose (250 mg). Performance bias was high in all three studies whereas, and the attrition bias was high in two studies (Toyoaki Hida 2017 and Solange peters 2017). The results of meta-analysis showed that: the overall response rate [OR = 2.07, 95% CI (1.41, 3.06), P = 0.0002], the progression free survival [HR = 0.34, 95% CI (0.21, 0.55), P <0.0001], the partial response [OR = 1.71, 95% CI (1.19, 2.46), P = 0.003], P = 0.001], in alectinib group were higher than that of crizotinib group. Though the total number of events in complete response and the disease control rate were more in alectinib group than that of crizotinib group, the meta-analysis results shows no significant differences between two drugs in the disease control rate [OR = 2.24, 95% CI (0.56, 8.88), P = 0.25], the complete response [OR = 1.82, 95% CI (0.75, 4.45), P = 0.19]. In addition, the number of events in the stable disease [OR = 0.45, 95% CI (0.28, O.74), P = 0.001], and the adverse events [OR = 0.50, 95% CI (0.23, 0.81), P = <0.0001] in alectinib group were lower than that of crizotinib group.ConclusionAlectinib in terms of overall response rate, progression-free survival and partial response is superior to crizotinib in the treatment of ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer and is well tolerated. Compared with crizotinib, alectinib is more effective than crizotinib and has a lower incidence of total adverse reactions. Meta-analysis results confirm the strong base for alectinib as a first-line treatment for ALK-positive NSCLC.

scholarly journals Updated Analysis From KEYNOTE-189: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Pemetrexed and Platinum for Previously Untreated Metastatic Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (14) ◽  
pp. 1505-1517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirish Gadgeel ◽  
Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu ◽  
Giovanna Speranza ◽  
Emilio Esteban ◽  
Enriqueta Felip ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

PURPOSE In KEYNOTE-189, first-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum significantly improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo plus pemetrexed-platinum in patients with metastatic nonsquamous non‒small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), irrespective of tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We report an updated analysis from KEYNOTE-189 (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02578680 ). METHODS Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive pemetrexed and platinum plus pembrolizumab (n = 410) or placebo (n = 206) every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, then pemetrexed maintenance plus pembrolizumab or placebo for up to a total of 35 cycles. Eligible patients with disease progression in the placebo-combination group could cross over to pembrolizumab monotherapy. Response was assessed per RECIST (version 1.1) by central review. No alpha was assigned to this updated analysis. RESULTS As of September 21, 2018 (median follow-up, 23.1 months), the updated median (95% CI) OS was 22.0 (19.5 to 25.2) months in the pembrolizumab-combination group versus 10.7 (8.7 to 13.6) months in the placebo-combination group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.70]). Median (95% CI) PFS was 9.0 (8.1 to 9.9) months and 4.9 (4.7 to 5.5) months, respectively (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.58). Median (95% CI) time from randomization to objective tumor progression on next-line treatment or death from any cause, whichever occurred first (progression-free-survival-2; PFS-2) was 17.0 (15.1 to 19.4) months and 9.0 (7.6 to 10.4) months, respectively (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.59). OS and PFS benefits with pembrolizumab were observed regardless of PD-L1 expression or presence of liver/brain metastases. Incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events was similar in the pembrolizumab-combination (71.9%) and placebo-combination (66.8%) groups. CONCLUSION First-line pembrolizumab plus pemetrexed-platinum continued to demonstrate substantially improved OS and PFS in metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression or liver/brain metastases, with manageable safety and tolerability.

scholarly journals Five-Year Outcomes With Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy for Metastatic Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer With PD-L1 Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 50%

2021 ◽  
pp. JCO.21.00174
Author(s):  
Martin Reck ◽  
Delvys Rodríguez-Abreu ◽  
Andrew G. Robinson ◽  
Rina Hui ◽  
Tibor Csőszi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Chemotherapy Group ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

PURPOSE We report the first 5-year follow-up of any first-line phase III immunotherapy trial for non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). KEYNOTE-024 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02142738 ) is an open-label, randomized controlled trial of pembrolizumab compared with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated NSCLC with a programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score of at least 50% and no sensitizing EGFR or ALK alterations. Previous analyses showed pembrolizumab significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). METHODS Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab (200 mg once every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles) or platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients in the chemotherapy group with progressive disease could cross over to pembrolizumab. The primary end point was progression-free survival; OS was a secondary end point. RESULTS Three hundred five patients were randomly assigned: 154 to pembrolizumab and 151 to chemotherapy. Median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff (June 1, 2020) was 59.9 (55.1-68.4) months. Among patients initially assigned to chemotherapy, 99 received subsequent anti–PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy, representing a 66.0% effective crossover rate. Median OS was 26.3 months (95% CI, 18.3-40.4) for pembrolizumab and 13.4 months (9.4-18.3) for chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.81). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the 5-year OS rate were 31.9% for the pembrolizumab group and 16.3% for the chemotherapy group. Thirty-nine patients received 35 cycles (ie, approximately 2 years) of pembrolizumab, 82.1% of whom were still alive at data cutoff (approximately 5 years). Toxicity did not increase with longer treatment exposure. CONCLUSION Pembrolizumab provides a durable, clinically meaningful long-term OS benefit versus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic NSCLC with PD-L1 tumor proportion score of at least 50%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document