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.

scholarly journals Fatal Adverse Events Associated With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Non–small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaolin Yu ◽  
Xiaomei Zhang ◽  
Ting Yao ◽  
Ye Zhang ◽  
Yanxia Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Fatal Adverse Events

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have previously been reported to have a promising potential in terms of the improvement of outcomes in non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Fatal adverse events (FAEs) of ICIs are relatively uncommon, and the incidence and risk in NSCLC remain unclear. In the present study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of FAEs in NSCLC patients administered with ICIs.Methods: Potentially relevant studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library database from inception to September 16, 2020. The systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials that reported treatment-related FAEs in NSCLC. The pooled incidence and risk ratios (RRs) were calculated to evaluate prospective risk.Results: Twenty clinical trials that included a total of 13,483 patients were selected for the meta-analysis. The overall incidence of FAEs was 0.65% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.31–1.07, I2 = 50.2%] in ICI monotherapy, 1.17% (95% CI = 0.74–1.69, I2 = 56.3%) in chemotherapy, and 2.01% (95% CI = 1.42–2.69, I2 = 5.9%) in the combination therapy (ICI and chemotherapy). ICI monotherapy was associated with lower incidence of FAEs caused by blood system disorders (RR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.07–0.73, P = 0.013, I2 = 0%) and infectious diseases (RR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.13–0.63, P = 0.002, I2 = 0%). The incidence of pneumonitis significantly increased in immunotherapy (RR = 5.72, 95% CI = 1.14–28.80, P = 0.03, I2 = 0%).Conclusions: The results of the present study demonstrate that ICI monotherapy decreases the risk of FAEs, whereas the combined regimens with chemotherapy have the opposite tendency as compared to conventional chemotherapy. While the patients who received chemotherapy suffered the risks of death mainly from myelosuppression and infection, those who received immunotherapy were mainly threatened by immune-related pneumonitis.

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 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document