scholarly journals The efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in advanced squamous-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of 3112 patients

Immunotherapy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (17) ◽  
pp. 1481-1490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui-Lian Chen ◽  
Jing-Xu Zhou ◽  
Yang Cao ◽  
Sui-Hui Li ◽  
Yong-Hao Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
Significant Superiority

Aim: We performed a meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of immunotherapy for patients with squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Materials & methods: Randomized clinical trials comparing immunotherapy with chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients were included. Results: A total of 11 trials (3112 patients) were included. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors demonstrated significant superiority to chemotherapy in overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.74; p < 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR: 0.66; p < 0.001) for squamous NSCLC. The OS and PFS benefits of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for squamous NSCLC were similar in subgroup analyses of line settings, PD-L1 expression and different study methodologies. No advantage in OS was found in advanced squamous NSCLC patients treated with atezolizumab (HR: 0.87; p = 0.087). Conclusion: PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors significantly improved OS and PFS in advanced squamous NSCLC patients when compared with chemotherapy.

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.

Efficacy of afatinib in the clinical practice: Final results of the GIDEON study in EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in Germany.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e21636-e21636
Author(s):  
Wolfgang M. Brueckl ◽  
Martin Reck ◽  
Harald Schäfer ◽  
Cornelius Kortsik ◽  
Tobias Gaska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Clinical Routine ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
Egfr Mutated

e21636 Background: Afatinib is an irreversible ErbB family blocker, which is approved for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with activating EGFR mutations. Here we report the final results of the prospective non-interventional study (NIS) GIDEON, which was initiated to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of afatinib in the daily clinical routine in Germany. Methods: EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients were treated with afatinib according to label until progression, death or discontinuation. Efficacy (progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 12 months, objective response rate, ORR; disease control rate, DCR; progression-free survival, PFS and overall survival, OS) was prospectively assessed by investigators. Data about tolerability were collected during routine treatment. Results: In total, 161 patients were enrolled at 41 sites in Germany, 152 patients received at least one dose of afatinib (treated set; TS) and 146 patients were treated according to the protocol (PPS). The majority of patients for the entire TS had exon 19 deletions (64.5%), followed by L858R point mut. (22.4%) and uncommon mut. (exon 18-21 point mut.; 13.1%). The primary objective was PFS-rate at 12 months, which was 50.2% in the PPS. Median PFS amounted to 12.2 months. ORR and DCR were 74.6% and 91.5% in the PPS, respectively. Median OS was 30.4 months with 1- and 2-year survival rates of 79.1% and 57.7%, respectively. Among pat. with uncommon EGFR-mut., the 12-months PFS rate was 40.2% with a mPFS of 10.7 months. ORR and DCR were 83.3% and 91.7%, respectively. The most frequent documented adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were diarrhea and rash/acne with 13.8% and 7.2% of grade 3 but no grade 4 or higher. Conclusions: Afatinib is a standard therapy for patients with activating EGFR mut. in Germany. The final results of this prospective NIS confirm the robust clinical data for afatinib in the clinical routine setting, including patients with uncommon exon 18-21 point mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT02047903.

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 &lt;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 = &lt;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.

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 PD-(L)1 Inhibitors as Monotherapy for the First-Line Treatment of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients with High PD-L1 Expression: A Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1365
Author(s):  
Margarita Majem ◽  
Manuel Cobo ◽  
Dolores Isla ◽  
Diego Marquez-Medina ◽  
Delvys Rodriguez-Abreu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Potential Biomarker ◽  
Nsclc Patients

Programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) has emerged as a potential biomarker for selection of patients more likely to respond to immunotherapy and as a prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this network meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of first-line anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients with high PD-L1 expression (≥50%) compared to platinum-based chemotherapy. We also evaluated efficacy outcomes according to tumor mutational burden (TMB). To that end, we conducted a systematic review. Six clinical trials with 2111 patients were included. In head-to-head comparisons, immunotherapy showed a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS: HRpooled = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52–0.90, p = 0.007), overall survival (OS: HRpooled = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.61–0.78; p < 0.001) and overall response rate (ORR) (Risk ratio (RR)pooled = 1.354, 95% CI: 1.04–1.762, p = 0.024). In the assessment of relative efficacy for PFS through indirect comparisons, pembrolizumab (results from KEYNOTE-024) ranked highest followed by cemiplimab and atezolizumab, with statistical significance determined for some of the drugs. In terms of OS, cemiplimab ranked highest followed by atezolizumab and pembrolizumab, although non-significant OS was determined for these drugs. In conclusion, PD-(L)1 inhibitor monotherapy improves efficacy outcomes in the first line setting of advanced NSCLC patients with high PD-L1 expression. Evaluations with longer follow up are still needed to determine the superiority of any specific drug.

scholarly journals Postoperative Radiotherapy for Patients With Resectable Stage III-N2 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tianyu Lei ◽  
Jing Li ◽  
Hao Zhong ◽  
Huibo Zhang ◽  
Yan Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Postoperative Radiotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Nsclc Patients

PurposeFor resectable cases of stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the best treatment after surgery is still uncertain. The effect of postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) is controversial. Thus, we performed this updated meta-analysis to reassess the data of PORT in stage III-N2 NSCLC patients, to figure out whether these patients can benefit from PORT.MethodsWe conducted searches of the published literature in EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library for relevant randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing PORT group with the non-PORT group in NSCLC patients at stage III-N2. These studies allowed the prior chemotherapy in the treatment. We extracted the data from these articles and used the hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as summary statistics for estimating the effect of PORT on overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local-regional recurrence-free survival (LRFS).ResultThe analyses of seven randomized controlled trials (1,318 participants) show no benefit of PORT on survival (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.07; p = 0.18) but a significantly different effect of PORT on DFS (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.97; p = 0.02) and LRFS (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.81; p = 0.0003). There is not enough evidence of a difference in the effect on survival by the utility of chemotherapy along with PORT though subgroup analysis of no chemotherapy group, concurrent chemoradiotherapy and sequential chemoradiotherapy group. Even in trials with 3D-CRT radiation technique, the pooled analysis shows no benefit of PORT on survival in patients with stage III-N2 NSCLC (data is not shown).ConclusionOur findings illustrate that in the postoperative treatment for patients with stage III-N2 NSCLC, PORT contributes to a significantly increased DFS and LR and may not associate with an improved OS, indicating a cautious selection.

Hypofractionated Radiotherapy for Locally or Systemically Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiajia Zhang ◽  
Zi'ning Qi ◽  
Dong Han ◽  
Siying Chen ◽  
Jifeng Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Hypofractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Local Progression

Abstract Background: Palliative thoracic radiotherapy (RT) can improve local control and survival in patients with unresectable locally or systemically advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but the optimal RT dose has not been well-defined. We investigated the survival outcomes of patients with NSCLC who underwent hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT).Methods: We retrospectively investigated survival and adverse effects among 74 patients with locally or systemically advanced NSCLC who received HFRT (45 Gy/15 fractions) at our institution.Results: The median overall survival (OS) was 18.7 months, with 1- and 2-year OS rates of 65.9% and 33.9%, respectively. The median local progression-free survival (LPFS) was 7.2 months, with 1- and 2-year LPFS rates of 27.9% and 9.4%, respectively. Sixteen patients (21.6%) developed grade ≤2 pneumonitis and 14 (19%) developed grade ≤2 esophagitis; no grades ≥3 pneumonitis or esophagitis occurred.Conclusions: HFRT is safe, tolerable, and effective for patients with unresectable locally or systemically advanced NSCLC exhibiting poor prognostic factors.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document