-
Cancers Jul 2022(1) Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored various primary treatments for individuals diagnosed as having later-stage epidermal growth factor... (Review)
Review
Overall Survival Benefits of First-Line Treatments for Asian Patients with Advanced Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated NSCLC Harboring Exon 19 Deletion: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
(1) Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored various primary treatments for individuals diagnosed as having later-stage epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer. Nevertheless, the extent to which such treatments are efficacious, particularly with regard to overall survival (OS) rates of patients from Asia with exon 19 deletion (19del), has yet to be clarified. (2) Methods: A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted by obtaining pertinent studies from PubMed/MEDLINE Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, and trial registries, as well as various other sources. RCTs in which two or multiple treatments in the primary setting for patients from Asia with EGFR 19del were compared were included. This research has been recorded in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 42022320833). (3) Results: A total of 2715 patients from Asia participated in 18 trials in which 12 different treatments were administered, which included: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, pemetrexed-free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (gefitinib plus apatinib, erlotinib plus ramucirumab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy). Such treatments were not significantly beneficial in terms of OS for patients from Asia who had 19del. It was demonstrated that erlotinib plus bevacizumab, ramucirumab plus erlotinib, and osimertinib consistently yielded the greatest benefits regarding progression-free survival benefit (P-scores = 94%, 84%, and 80%, respectively). Combination treatments resulted in increased toxicity, particularly gefitinib plus apatinib and erlotinib plus bevacizumab, causing the highest prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Icotinib and osimertinib had the fewest grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Specific treatments were associated with a wide range of toxicity levels. (4) Conclusions: In patients from Asia with 19del, both EGFR-TKIs and treatments in which therapies were combined exhibited no OS benefits in comparison with standard chemotherapy treatments. Additional research is required to study TKIs' resistance mechanisms and possible combined approaches for individuals harboring this common mutation.
PubMed: 35884423
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14143362 -
PloS One 2022Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy is the standard of care in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The efficacy and tolerability of combining pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib in the first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR: A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) monotherapy is the standard of care in treating advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, whether adding pemetrexed-based chemotherapy to EGFR-TKI targeted therapy furtherly prolongs survival outcomes and improves responses remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this pooled analysis to compare the efficacy and tolerability between gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy and gefitinib alone in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC patients with mutated EGFR.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL on June 23, 2022. Eligible studies were registered randomized clinical trials comparing gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib alone. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and discontinuation rate (DR) were explored as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS
Eight studies within five randomized clinical trials were eligible. Gefitinib combined with pemetrexed-based chemotherapy significantly prolonged OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.89, p = 0.0125) and PFS (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.39-0.70, p < 0.0001) versus gefitinib alone. In subgroup analysis, patients with EGFR exon 19 deletion and exon 21 L858R could benefit from the addition of pemetrexed-based chemotherapy to gefitinib in terms of PFS (EGFR exon 19 deletion: HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.75, p = 0.0008; EGFR exon 21 L858R: HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26-0.82, p = 0.0079) but not OS. In addition, ORR was improved after the administration of gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy against gefitinib (odds ratio [OR] 1.91, 95% CI 1.44-2.55, p < 0.0001). Both strategies showed comparable DCRs (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.94-2.26, p = 0.0952) and DRs (risk ratio [RR] 2.80, 95% CI 0.69-11.44, p = 0.1509).
CONCLUSION
Compared with gefitinib alone, combining pemetrexed-based chemotherapy with gefitinib significantly improved OS and PFS in advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with acceptable tolerability. However, the accurate sub-population who could have OS benefits requires further validation.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; ErbB Receptors; Gefitinib; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Mutation; Pemetrexed; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36215289
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275919 -
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research... 2015During these last years, there have been an increased number of new drugs for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a growing financial effect on patients and... (Review)
Review
During these last years, there have been an increased number of new drugs for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with a growing financial effect on patients and society. The purpose of this article was to review the economics of first-line and maintenance NSCLC treatments. We reviewed economic analyses of NSCLC therapies published between 2004 and 2014. In first-line settings, in unselected patients with advanced NSCLC, the cisplatin gemcitabine doublet appears to be cost-saving compared with other platinum doublets. In patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per life-year gained (LYG) were $83,537, $178,613, and more than $300,000 for cisplatin-pemetrexed compared with, respectively, cisplatin-gemcitabine, cisplatin-carboplatin-paclitaxel, and carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab. For all primary chemotherapy agents, use of carboplatin is associated with slightly higher costs than cisplatin. In all the analysis, bevacizumab had an ICER greater than $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In epidermal growth factor receptor mutated advanced NSCLC, compared with carboplatin-paclitaxel doublet, targeted therapy based on testing available tissue yielded an ICER of $110,644 per QALY, and the rebiopsy strategy yielded an ICER of $122,219 per QALY. Compared with the triplet carboplatin-paclitaxel-bevacizumab, testing and rebiopsy strategies had ICERs of $25,547 and $44,036 per QALY, respectively. In an indirect comparison, ICERs per LYG and QALY of erlotinib versus gefitinib were $39,431 and $62,419, respectively. In anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive nonsquamous advanced NSCLC, the ICER of first-line crizotinib compared with that of chemotherapy was $255,970 per QALY. For maintenance therapy, gefitinib had an ICER of $19,214 per QALY, erlotinib had an ICER of $127,343 per LYG, and pemetrexed had an ICER varying between $183,589 and $205,597 per LYG. Most recent NSCLC strategies are based on apparently no cost-effective strategies if we consider an ICER below $50,000 per QALY an acceptable threshold. We need, probably on a countrywide level, to have a debate involving public health organizations and pharmaceutical companies, as well as clinicians and patients, to challenge the rising costs of managing lung cancer.
PubMed: 25548525
DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S43328 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2018Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimens (pem regimens) are the standard first-line treatment option in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The... (Review)
Review
Efficacy of pemetrexed-based regimens in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with activating epidermal growth factor receptor mutations after tyrosine kinase inhibitor failure: a systematic review.
Pemetrexed-based chemotherapy regimens (pem regimens) are the standard first-line treatment option in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The objective of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of pemetrexed in the context of epidermal growth factor receptor () mutation-positive NSCLC following the failure of -tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. We searched biomedical literature databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library) and conference proceedings for studies evaluating the efficacy of pemetrexed monotherapy or pemetrexed combined with platinum or any other chemotherapeutic agent in -mutation-positive NSCLC after -TKI failure. We extracted data of primary outcomes of interest (progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], and overall response rate [ORR]). The weighted median PFS, OS, and ORR were then calculated. Of 83 potentially relevant studies, eight (three randomized studies and five retrospective studies) were identified (involving 1,193 patients) and included in this systematic review, with 640 patients receiving pem regimens. The weighted median PFS, median OS, and ORR for patients treated with pem regimens were 5.09 months, 15.91 months, and 30.19%, respectively. Our systematic review results showed a favorable efficacy profile of pem regimens in NSCLC patients with mutation after -TKI failure.
PubMed: 29695919
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S157370 -
International Journal of Molecular... Feb 2022Mesothelioma is a rare tumor, frequently associated with asbestos exposure, arising from pleura and peritoneum. Traditionally, diagnosis and treatment have been...
Mesothelioma is a rare tumor, frequently associated with asbestos exposure, arising from pleura and peritoneum. Traditionally, diagnosis and treatment have been difficult in a clinical setting. The treatment is based on a trimodal approach involving surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. The introduction of chemotherapy improved the overall survival. However, the regimen of pemetrexed/cisplatin doublet has not been changed as a standard treatment since 2004. Novel combinations of ipilimumab and nivolumab have only been approved for clinical use in late 2020. The aim of this review was to systematically summarize findings on novel treatment options in mesothelioma. We searched available medical databases online, such as PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov, to systematically review the literature on novel approaches in immunotherapy, vaccines, and Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy in mesothelioma. We manually screened 1127 articles on PubMed and 450 trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, and 24 papers and 12 clinical trials published in the last ten years were included in this review. Immunotherapy that was swiftly introduced to treat other thoracic malignancies was slow to reach desirable survival endpoints in mesothelioma, possibly due to limited patient numbers. Novel treatment approaches, such as CAR-T cell therapy, are being investigated. As the incidence of mesothelioma is still rising globally, novel treatment options based on a better understanding of the tumor microenvironment and the genetic drivers that modulate it are needed to support future precision-based therapies.
Topics: Animals; Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Immunotherapy; Mesothelioma; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; T-Lymphocytes; Tumor Microenvironment
PubMed: 35216091
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23041975 -
BioMed Research International 2018To evaluate the effect of combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of combination maintenance therapy of pemetrexed plus bevacizumab for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
METHODS
We identified relevant studies by electronic search (Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science from 1 January 1960 to 29 October 2016) and manual search. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary end point included overall survival (OS) and toxicities. The data was pooled for quantitative analysis and the final effect size was reported as hazard ratio (HR) for survival outcomes and relative risk (RR) for safety outcomes, both with a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Three randomized controlled trials enrolling 1302 patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were included in this meta-analysis. An evident PFS improvement (HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.63-0.83, < 0.01) was observed in patients with pemetrexed and bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy compared with single-agent maintenance therapy, yet it did not subsequently lead to a significant improvement in OS (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.84-1.10, = 0.66). Our analysis also showed statistically increased risks for provoking grade 3-4 adverse events in patients managed using pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination (RR = 1.59, 95% CI = 1.07-2.36, = 0.022).
CONCLUSIONS
Pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination maintenance therapy leads to significant improvement in PFS but not in OS for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, which also increases the risks of grade 3-4 adverse events. Yet, in view of the limitation of existing studies and this meta-analysis, current evidence is not adequate to support routine use of pemetrexed-bevacizumab maintenance.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Pemetrexed; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 29998136
DOI: 10.1155/2018/5839081 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2018The development of acquired resistance to the first-line epidermal growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is...
Chemotherapy with or without pemetrexed as second-line regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who have progressed after first-line EGFR TKIs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
The development of acquired resistance to the first-line epidermal growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) treatment in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is inevitable, and most of these patients needed second-line chemotherapy. Furthermore, the optimum chemotherapeutic regimen is unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the chemotherapeutic regimens "with-pemetrexed" versus "non-pemetrexed" in advanced NSCLC patients who had progressed after first-line EGFR-TKIs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Web of science for relevant clinical trials. Outcomes analyzed were response rate (RR), disease control rate (DCR), 1-year survival rate (1-year SR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and three retrospective studies were included in this meta-analysis, covering a total of 354 patients. The results showed that there was no significant difference between with-pemetrexed arm and non-pemetrexed arm in RR (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.85-2.41, =0.18), DCR (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.94-2.39, =0.09), and 1-year SR (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.79-2.74, =0.22). But the with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens significantly improved the PFS (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81, =0.0005) and OS (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.90, =0.01).
CONCLUSION
The second-line with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens provided significantly longer PFS and OS than non-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimens. These findings indicate that the with-pemetrexed chemotherapeutic regimen may be an optimal second-line chemotherapeutic regimen for patients with advanced NSCLC following EGFR-TKI failure.
PubMed: 29983578
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S160147 -
Radiation Oncology (London, England) Mar 2019It remains unknown which is the most preferable regimen used concurrently with thoracic radiation for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety for different chemotherapy regimens used concurrently with thoracic radiation for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
It remains unknown which is the most preferable regimen used concurrently with thoracic radiation for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We performed a network meta-analysis to address this important issue.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and major international scientific meetings were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Overall survival (OS) data was the primary outcome of interest, and progression-free survival (PFS), and serious adverse events (SAEs) were the secondary outcomes of interests, reported as hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
14 RCTs with a total of 2975 patients randomized to receive twelve categories of treatments were included in the meta-analysis. Direct comparison meta-analysis showed that etoposide-cisplatin (EP) was more effective than paclitaxel-cisplatin/carboplatin (PC) in terms of OS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.77-0.94) and PFS (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.47-0.95). In network meta-analysis, all regimen comparisons did not produce statistically significant differences in survival. Based on treatment ranking of OS and the benefit-risk ratio, S-1-cisplatin (SP) was likely to be the most preferable regimen for its best efficacy and low risk of causing SAEs. Uracil/tegafur-cisplatin (UP) and pemetrexed-cisplatin/carboplatin (PP) were ranked the second and third respectively. Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) and PC + Cetuximab (PC-Cet) appeared to be the worst and second-worst regimens for their poor efficacy and poor tolerability.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on efficacy and tolerability, SP is likely to be the most preferable regimen used concurrently with thoracic radiation for locally advanced NSCLC, followed by UP and PP. Further direct head-to-head studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Chemoradiotherapy; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Prognosis; Thoracic Neoplasms
PubMed: 30925881
DOI: 10.1186/s13014-019-1239-7 -
Medicine Jul 2020The purpose of the current meta-analysis was to compare the oncological outcomes of pemetrexed versus gefitinib in pre-treated advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The purpose of the current meta-analysis was to compare the oncological outcomes of pemetrexed versus gefitinib in pre-treated advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.
METHODS
Search the online electronic databases on comparison the effectiveness and adverse effects of pemetrexed versus gefitinib in therapy outcomes of pre-treated NSCLC to September 2019. All studies analyzed the summary odds ratios (ORs) of the main outcomes, including survival efficacy and toxicity complications.
RESULTS
In all, 5 trials involving 676 subjects were included, with 332 receiving pemetrexed and 344 using gefitinib. The pooled analysis of overall survival (OS) (OR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.77-1.21, P = .76) and progression-free survival (PFS) (OR = 1.17, 95%CI = 0.60-2.30, P = .65) showed that pemetrexed did not achieve benefit when compared with gefitinib. In the results of subgroup analysis among the EGFR mutation-positive patients, the comparison of gefitinib therapy versus pemetrexed did show PFS benefit 0.35 (95%CI 0.12-1.01; P = .05). In terms of grade 3 or 4 side effects, a similar toxicity profile of both pemetrexed and gefitinib was shown in the incidence rate of rash (P = .045), fatigue (P = .97), thrombocytopenia (P = .68) and anemia (P = .21) between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSION
Pemetrexed was not associated with survival benefit than gefitinib therapy among pre-treated NSCLC patients. While, gefitinib showed superior PFS efficacy than pemetrexed for patients with EGFR mutation-type. Future investigations are required to identify relevant biomarkers in selected patients that would most likely benefit from pemetrexed or gefitinib treatment in pre-treated advanced NSCLC patients.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Female; Gefitinib; Humans; Male; Pemetrexed; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 32702875
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021170 -
JTO Clinical and Research Reports May 2022Randomized controlled trials have investigated different first-line treatments for patients with advanced -mutated NSCLC. Nevertheless, their efficacy, in particular,...
Overall Survival Benefits of First-Line Treatments for Asian Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC Harboring L858R Mutation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Randomized controlled trials have investigated different first-line treatments for patients with advanced -mutated NSCLC. Nevertheless, their efficacy, in particular, the long-term overall survival (OS) benefit in Asian patients with L858R mutation, remains unclear.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis by retrieving relevant literature from PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, trial registries, and other sources. We included randomized controlled trials comparing two or more treatments in the first-line setting for Asian patients with L858R mutation. This study was registered in the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD 42022295897).
RESULTS
There were a total of 18 trials that involved 1852 Asian patients and 12 treatments, including the following: tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, pemetrexed-free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (gefitinib plus apatinib, erlotinib plus ramucirumab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy). Asian patients with L858R mutation had no significant OS benefits from all these treatments. Gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, dacomitinib, osimertinib, and erlotinib plus bevacizumab were found to be consistent in yielding the best progression-free survival benefit ( scores = 93%, 79%, 77%, and 70%). Combination treatments caused more toxicity, especially erlotinib plus bevacizumab and gefitinib plus pemetrexed-based chemotherapy, resulting in the greatest incidence of grade greater than or equal to 3 adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
In Asian patients harboring L858R mutation, TKIs and combination treatments had no OS benefit when compared with conventional chemotherapies. Further studies are warranted to investigate the resistance mechanism with TKIs and potential combination strategies in patients with this common but less favorable mutation.
PubMed: 35516725
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2022.100322