scholarly journals Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapeutic Regimens with PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors for Previously Untreated Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 1094-1113
Author(s):  
Koichi Ando ◽  
Ryo Manabe ◽  
Yasunari Kishino ◽  
Sojiro Kusumoto ◽  
Toshimitsu Yamaoka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Extensive Stage ◽  
Grade 3

Improving therapeutic strategies for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) remains a challenge. To date, no reports have directly compared the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus platinum–etoposide (ICIs+EP) with platinum–irinotecan (IP) or directly compared different ICIs+EP for previously untreated ES-SCLC. This study used a Bayesian approach for network meta-analysis to compare efficacy and safety between ICIs+EP and IP and between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The six treatment arms were: pembrolizumab plus platinum–etoposide (Pem+EP), durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide (Dur+EP), atezolizumab plus platinum–etoposide (Atz+EP), platinum–amrubicin (AP), IP, and platinum–etoposide (EP). No significant differences in overall survival were observed between ICIs+EP and IP and between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The incidence of ≥grade 3 adverse events (G3-AEs) was significantly higher in ICIs+EP than IP, whereas no significant difference was found in G3-AEs between each pair of three ICIs+EP. The incidence of ≥grade 3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia was significantly higher in ICIs+EP than IP, whereas the incidence of ≥grade 3 diarrhea was significantly lower in ICIs+EP than IP. These findings will help clinicians better select treatment strategies for ES-SCLC.

Efficacy and Safety of Antigen-specific Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Patients with Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bing-Di Yan ◽  
Xiao-Feng Cong ◽  
Sha-Sha Zhao ◽  
Meng Ren ◽  
Zi-Ling Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Specific Immunotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Small Cell Lung

Background and Objective: We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of antigen-specific immunotherapy (Belagenpumatucel-L, MAGE-A3, L-BLP25, and TG4010) in the treatment of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). </P><P> Methods: A comprehensive literature search on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted. Eligible studies were clinical trials of patients with NSCLC who received the antigenspecific immunotherapy. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS). Pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for overall response rate (ORR) and the incidence of adverse events. </P><P> Results: In total, six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 4,806 patients were included. Pooled results showed that, antigen-specific immunotherapy did not significantly prolong OS (HR=0.92, 95%CI: 0.83, 1.01; P=0.087) and PFS (HR=0.93, 95%CI: 0.85, 1.01; P=0.088), but improved ORR (RR=1.72, 95%CI: 1.11, 2.68; P=0.016). Subgroup analysis based on treatment agents showed that, tecemotide was associated with a significant improvement in OS (HR=0.85, 95%CI: 0.74, 0.99; P=0.03) and PFS (HR=0.70, 95%CI: 0.49, 0.99, P=0.044); TG4010 was associated with an improvement in PFS (HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.75, 1.00, P=0.058). In addition, NSCLC patients who were treated with antigen-specific immunotherapy exhibited a significantly higher incidence of adverse events than those treated with other treatments (RR=1.11, 95%CI: 1.00, 1.24; P=0.046). </P><P> Conclusion: Our study demonstrated the clinical survival benefits of tecemotide and TG4010 in the treatment of NSCLC. However, these evidence might be limited by potential biases. Therefore, further well-conducted, large-scale RCTs are needed to verify our findings.

scholarly journals A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment-related toxicities of curative and palliative radiation therapy in non-small cell lung cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Or ◽  
B. Liu ◽  
J. Lam ◽  
S. Vinod ◽  
W. Xuan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Grade 3

AbstractTreatment-related toxicity is an important component in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) management decision-making. Our aim was to evaluate and compare the toxicity rates of curative and palliative radiotherapy with and without chemotherapy. This meta-analysis provides better quantitative estimates of the toxicities compared to individual trials. A systematic review of randomised trials with > 50 unresectable NSCLC patients, treated with curative or palliative conventional radiotherapy (RT) with or without chemotherapy. Data was extracted for oesophagitis, pneumonitis, cardiac events, pulmonary fibrosis, myelopathy and neutropenia by any grade, grade ≥ 3 and treatment-related deaths. Mantel–Haenszel fixed-effect method was used to obtain pooled risk ratio. Forty-nine trials with 8609 evaluable patients were included. There was significantly less grade ≥ 3 acute oesophagitis (6.4 vs 22.2%, p < 0.0001) and any grade oesophagitis (70.4 vs 79.0%, p = 0.04) for sequential CRT compared to concurrent CRT, with no difference in pneumonitis (grade ≥ 3 or any grade), neutropenia (grade ≥ 3), cardiac events (grade ≥ 3) or treatment-related deaths. Although the rate of toxicity increased with intensification of treatment with RT, the only significant difference between treatment regimens was the rate of oesophagitis between the use of concurrent and sequential CRT. This can aid clinicians in radiotherapy decision making for NSCLC.

scholarly journals Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with ALK-rearranged: a meta-analysis of clinical trials

BMC Cancer ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao-chuan Ma ◽  
Yi-hong Liu ◽  
Kai-lin Ding ◽  
Yu-feng Liu ◽  
Wen-jie Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
First Line ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Whereas there are many pharmacological interventions prescribed for patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)- rearranged non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), comparative data between novel generation ALK-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) remain scant. Here, we indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of first-line systemic therapeutic options used for the treatment of ALK-rearranged NSCLC. Methods We included all phase 2 and 3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any two or three treatment options. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following outcomes: progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), or adverse events of grade 3 or higher (Grade ≥ 3 AEs). Subgroup analysis was conducted according to central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Results A total of 9 RCTs consisting of 2484 patients with 8 treatment options were included in the systematic review. Our analysis showed that alectinib (300 mg and 600 mg), brigatinib, lorlatinib and ensartinib yielded the most favorable PFS. Whereas there was no significant OS or ORR difference among the ALK-TKIs. According to Bayesian ranking profiles, lorlatinib, alectinib 600 mg and alectinib 300 mg had the best PFS (63.7%), OS (35.9%) and ORR (37%), respectively. On the other hand, ceritinib showed the highest rate of severe adverse events (60%). Conclusion Our analysis indicated that alectinib and lorlatinib might be associated with the best therapeutic efficacy in first-line treatment for major population of advanced NSCLC patients with ALK-rearrangement. However, since there is little comparative evidence on the treatment options, there is need for relative trials to fully determine the best treatment options as well as the rapidly evolving treatment landscape.

scholarly journals Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab versus Existing Immunotherapies in Patients with PD-L1-Positive Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 1905 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Ando ◽  
Yasunari Kishino ◽  
Tetsuya Homma ◽  
Sojiro Kusumoto ◽  
Toshimitsu Yamaoka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Small Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Cell Lung Cancer ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Cell ◽  
Outcome Analysis ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Small Cell Lung ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

No head-to-head trials have compared the efficacy and safety of nivolumab (Niv) plus ipilimumab (Ipi) combination therapy (Niv+Ipi) and existing regimens with immunotherapies approved as first-line treatment in patients with programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive previously untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We conducted a network meta-analysis of four relevant Phase Ⅲ trials to compare the efficacy and safety of Niv+Ipi, pembrolizumab (Pem) plus platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) (Pem+PBC), Pem, Niv, or PBC using Bayesian analysis. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 expression ≥1%. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of Grade 3–5 drug-related adverse events (G3–5AEs). Efficacy and safety were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). With regard to PFS, Niv+Ipi was inferior to Pem+PBC, and superior to Pem, Niv, or PBC alone. SUCRA ranking showed Pem+PBC had the highest efficacy for PFS, followed by Niv+Ipi, Niv, PBC, and Pem. The safety outcome analysis revealed Niv+Ipi was generally well tolerated compared to existing immunotherapy regimens. These results provide clinical information regarding the efficacy and safety of Niv+Ipi and indicate the possibility of the Niv+Ipi combination as a new therapeutic option in PD-L1-positive advanced NSCLC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document