Immune-checkpoint inhibitors versus other systemic therapies in advanced head and neck cancer: a network meta-analysis

Immunotherapy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 541-555
Author(s):  
Lingrong Tang ◽  
Tingting Liu ◽  
Jun Chen ◽  
Jun Dang ◽  
Guang Li
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Systemic Therapies

Aim: We assessed the efficiency of immune checkpoint inhibitors relative to other systemic therapies in previously treated recurrent/metastatic head and neck cancer. Materials & methods: Relative treatment effects were assessed from eligible randomized controlled trials using Bayesian network meta-analyses. Results: Among 15 trials evaluating 14 treatments, nivolumab achieved the best overall survival (OS) benefit; zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel provided the best progression-free survival benefit and objective response rate. Buparlisib + paclitaxel and zalutumumab were associated with the best OS rate at 6 and 12 months, respectively; nivolumab yielded the best OS rate at 18–24 months. Conclusion: Nivolumab was the most favorable treatment. Zalutumumab and buparlisib + paclitaxel had better efficiency, and might be a better selection for patients with programmed death-ligand 1-low/negative tumors than other treatments.

Atypical patterns of responses in the era of immune checkpoint inhibitors in head and neck cancer

Oral Oncology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 100 ◽  
pp. 104477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stergios Doumas ◽  
Periklis G. Foukas ◽  
Panagiota Economopoulou ◽  
Ioannis Kotsantis ◽  
Amanda Psyrri
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors

scholarly journals Results from a meta-analysis of immune checkpoint inhibitors in first-line renal cancer patients: does PD-L1 matter?

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 175883591986190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giandomenico Roviello ◽  
Silvia Paola Corona ◽  
Gabriella Nesi ◽  
Enrico Mini
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
First Line

Background: The aim of this study was to perform a literature-based meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of the novel immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in first-line metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), focusing on the predictive role of PD-L1 expression. Methods: The primary outcome was overall survival, and secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response. We planned a subgroup analysis for overall survival according to PD-L1 status. Results: Five studies were included in the analysis for a total of 4063 cases. Overall survival was greater in PD-L1 positive tumours (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.36–0.67; p < 0.001). The pooled analysis of the unselected cases showed a statistically significative improvement in PFS with the use of ICIs (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.72–0.99; p = 0.04) and we found a greater PFS benefit (HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.57–0.74; p < 0.001) in patients with PD-L1 positive tumours. Conclusions: This study supports the efficacy of ICIs and, although a significant clinical benefit has been reported in PD-L1 negative patients, a greater efficacy of ICIs was observed in PD-L1 positive patients. More prospective randomized studies are needed to clarify the role of PDL-1 status in metastatic RCC treated with ICIs.

scholarly journals Clinical outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors for patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer: real-world data in Korea

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
hyera kim ◽  
Binnari Kim ◽  
Hyun-Ae Jung ◽  
Jong-Mu Sun ◽  
Se-Hoon Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Head And Neck Cancer ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Neck Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Phase Iii

Abstract Purpose Anti-PD1 inhibitors have been approved for the treatment of recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer (HNC), as a result of Global Phase III trials. However, the clinical outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients who are not eligible for clinical trials or have various medical conditions have not been fully elucidated. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 46 patients with recurrent or metastatic HNC who received pembrolizumab or nivolumab between June 2016 and June 2019. Results Thirty-five patients had head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) affecting the oropharynx, oral cavity, hypopharynx, larynx, nasal cavity, or paranasal sinuses, and eleven patients had nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.7 months and 6.8 months, respectively, for patients with HNSCC, and 4.3 months and 11.8 months, respectively, for patients with NPC. The overall response rate (ORR) in all patients was 21%. Of 30 patients with HNSCC, 5 patients achieved complete response and 2 achieved partial response (ORR = 23%); 1 of 8 NPC patients achieved partial response (13%). Patients who previously underwent radiotherapy had better OS than those who did not (median OS, 7.6 months vs. 2.3 months, p = 0.006). OS was longer in patients treated with pembrolizumab than in those treated with nivolumab (median OS, 11.8 months vs. 6.8 months, p = 0.017). Conclusion Consistent with previous reports, immune checkpoint inhibitors showed promising efficacy in patients with previously treated recurrent or metastatic HNC in a real-world setting.

scholarly journals Results from a Meta-analysis of Combination of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 Inhibitors in Malignant Cancer Patients: Does PD-L1 Matter?

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuqian Feng ◽  
Huimin Jin ◽  
Kaibo Guo ◽  
Yuying Xiang ◽  
Yiting Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Combination Immunotherapy

Background: Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been widely used for clinical treatment in recent years, which has a better survival benefit. However, not all patients can derive clinical benefit from combination immunotherapy. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the biomarkers of combination immunotherapy.Methods: We retrieved articles from electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane. The statistical analysis was performed using RevMan software. Progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) were the outcome indicators. In the unselect population, we compared combination therapy with other treatments. In addition, we also conducted subgroup analysis on PFS, OS and ORR according to PD-L1 status.Results: Seven studies were included in the analysis for a total of 3,515 cases. In the unselected population, we found that combination therapy has longer PFS, OS, and better ORR than other treatments for cancer patients. The longer PFS was showed in PD-L1 ≥ 5% cases (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56–0.76; p &lt; 0.001) than PD-L1 ≥ 1% cases (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.66–0.79; p &lt; 0.001), while ORR and OS have not related to the status of PD-L1.Conclusion: This study supported the efficacy of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and also showed that PFS in patients with malignant tumors is positively correlated with PD-L1 expression. Due to the limited number of trials included, more high-quality clinical randomized controlled trials should be conducted to confirm the review findings.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document