-
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer... 2012To compare the efficacy and safety of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy (EFGR-TKIs: gefitinib or erlotinib) with standard... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of EFGR tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy with standard second-line chemotherapy in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To compare the efficacy and safety of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor monotherapy (EFGR-TKIs: gefitinib or erlotinib) with standard second-line chemotherapy (single agent docetaxel or pemetrexed) in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS
We systematically searched for randomized clinical trials that compared EGFR-TKI monotherapy with standard second-line chemotherapy in previously treated advanced NSCLC. The end points were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), 1-year survival rate (1-year SR) and grade 3 or 4 toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated employing fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included trials.
RESULTS
Eight randomized controlled trials (totally 3218 patients) were eligible. Our meta-analysis results showed that EGFR-TKIs were comparable to standard second-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC in terms of overall survival (HR 1.00, 95%CI 0.92-1.10; p=0.943), progression-free survival (HR 0.90, 95%CI 0.75-1.08, P=0.258) and 1-year-survival rate (RR 0.97, 95%CI 0.87-1.08, P=0.619), and the overall response rate was higher in patients who receiving EGFR-TKIs(RR 1.50, 95%CI 1.22-1.83, P=0.000). Sub-group analysis demonstrated that EGFR-TKI monotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.55-0.97, p=0.03) and ORR (RR 1.96, 95%CI: 1.46-2.63, p=0.000) in East Asian patients, but it did not translate into increase in OS and 1-year SR. Furthermore, there were fewer incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and neurotoxicity in EGFR-TKI monotherapy group, excluding grade 3 or 4 rash.
CONCLUSION
Both interventions had comparable efficacy as second-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC, and EGFR-TKI monotherapy was associated with less toxicity and better tolerability. Moreover, our data also demonstrated that EGFR- TKI monotherapy tended to be more effective in East Asian patients in terms of PFS and ORR compared with standard second-line chemotherapy. These results should help inform decisions about patient management and design of future trials.
Topics: Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Case-Control Studies; ErbB Receptors; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Prognosis; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Review Literature as Topic; Salvage Therapy
PubMed: 23244131
DOI: 10.7314/apjcp.2012.13.10.5177 -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... Jul 2006This clinical practice guideline, based on a systematic review, was developed to determine which chemotherapeutic agents (or combinations of agents) show the highest... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This clinical practice guideline, based on a systematic review, was developed to determine which chemotherapeutic agents (or combinations of agents) show the highest response rates, improved survival, quality of life, or symptom control in patients with advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma.
METHODS
A thorough systematic search of the literature was conducted for published articles and conference proceedings for applicable abstracts. Relevant trials, published as articles and abstracts, were selected and assessed. External feedback was obtained from Ontario clinicians, and the guideline was approved by the provincial Lung Cancer Disease Site Group.
RESULTS
One hundred nineteen studies were eligible, including eight randomized trials and 111 phase II trials. The pooled response rates from phase II trials suggest that response rates with combination chemotherapy are higher than with single agents. Data from the largest randomized controlled trial demonstrated that chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed significantly improves response rates (41% versus 17%, p < 0.001), time to progression (5.7 months versus 3.9 months, p = 0.001), and overall survival (median, 12.1 months versus 9.3 months, hazard ratio = 0.77, p = 0.020) in comparison to single-agent cisplatin. A second trial demonstrated cisplatin and raltitrexed significantly improved median survival compared to single-agent cisplatin (11.4 months versus 8.8 months; hazard ratio = 0.76, p = 0.0483). Overall response rate (24% versus 14%, p = 0.056) was greater in the combination treatment arm, but this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS
There is good evidence to recommend chemotherapy with pemetrexed and cisplatin for adult patients with symptomatic advanced malignant pleural mesothelioma. Such treatment should be administered with supplementation of vitamin B12 and folic acid. If pemetrexed is not available, cisplatin plus raltitrexed is a reasonable alternative.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Cisplatin; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Female; Glutamates; Guanine; Humans; Male; Maximum Tolerated Dose; Mesothelioma; Neoplasm Invasiveness; Patient Selection; Pemetrexed; Pleural Neoplasms; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Prognosis; Quinazolines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis; Thiophenes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 17409924
DOI: No ID Found -
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 -
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 -
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 -
OncoTargets and Therapy 2016To assess the efficacy of pemetrexed plus platinum doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through a...
Efficacy of pemetrexed plus platinum doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell-lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
To assess the efficacy of pemetrexed plus platinum doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through a trial-level meta-analysis.
METHODS
Trials published between 1990 and 2015 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library). All clinical studies were independently identified by two authors. Demographic data, treatment regimens, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted and analyzed using comprehensive meta-analysis software (version 2.0).
RESULTS
A total of 2,551 patients with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC from ten trials were included for analysis: 1,565 patients were treated with pemetrexed plus platinum doublet chemotherapy and 986 with platinum plus other first-line chemotherapy. Pooled ORR for pemetrexed plus platinum chemotherapy was 37.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 31.7%-44.3%), with median PFS and OS of 5.7 and 16.05 months, respectively. When compared to other platinum-based doublet chemotherapies, the use of pemetrexed plus platinum chemotherapy significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] =0.86, 95% CI: 0.77-0.97, P=0.01) but not PFS (HR =0.90, 95% CI: 0.80-1.01, P=0.084) in advanced nonsquamous NSCLC patients.
CONCLUSION
Pemetrexed plus platinum doublet regimen is an efficacious treatment for advanced nonsquamous NSCLC patients. Our findings support the use of pemetrexed plus platinum doublet regimen as first-line treatment in advanced nonsquamous NSCLC patients because of its potential survival benefits.
PubMed: 27042115
DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S96160 -
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 -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... Feb 2010Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents at an incurable stage, and a majority of patients will be considered for palliative chemotherapy at some point in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) frequently presents at an incurable stage, and a majority of patients will be considered for palliative chemotherapy at some point in their disease. This article reviews the growing evidence for first-line treatment in NSCLC.
METHODS
Studies of first-line chemotherapy regimens including new agents (docetaxel, gemcitabine, irinotecan, paclitaxel, pemetrexed, and vinorelbine) and targeted agents (bevacizumab, erlotinib, and gefitinib) were identified through Medline, Embase, the Cochrane databases, and web sites of guideline organizations.
RESULTS
Two evidence-based guidelines, 10 systematic reviews, and forty-six randomized trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomized studies suggest that platinum-based doublets (platinum plus new agent) are the standard of care for first-line systemic therapy. No one new agent is clearly superior for use in combination with a platinum agent. The survival advantage of platinum-based doublets over nonplatinum combinations or older combinations is modest. The addition of bevacizumab to carboplatin and paclitaxel has shown improved survival, although multiple exclusion criteria limit the applicability of these data to a subset of patients. In patients at least 70 years of age or with Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status 2, a new single agent is an alternative. Treatment beyond four to six cycles impedes quality of life without prolonging life. Emerging data suggest that the choice of chemotherapy agent may be influenced by histologic subtype.
CONCLUSION
In NSCLC, a combination of a platinum agent plus a new agent continues to be the standard of care. As differences between regimens are small, toxicity and patient preference should help guide regimen choice.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carboplatin; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cisplatin; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 20101151
DOI: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181c6f035 -
Journal of Thoracic Oncology : Official... Nov 2006This clinical practice guideline, based on a systematic review, evaluates second-line or subsequent therapy for patients with recurrent or progressive non-small cell... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This clinical practice guideline, based on a systematic review, evaluates second-line or subsequent therapy for patients with recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer.
METHODS
Relevant randomized trials and meta-analyses were identified through a systematic search of the literature. External feedback was obtained from practitioners in Ontario, and the guideline was approved by the provincial Lung Cancer Disease Site Group.
RESULTS
Twenty-four randomized trials met the eligibility criteria. Two phase III trials demonstrated a significant benefit in overall survival and quality of life (QOL) for single-agent docetaxel. A pooled analysis comparing docetaxel administered weekly versus three-weekly found similar survival between the schedules and a non-significant reduction in febrile neutropenia for the weekly regimen. One phase III trial found that single-agent pemetrexed provided similar survival and QOL, compared to docetaxel. Another phase III trial demonstrated that oral topotecan was non-inferior to docetaxel for one-year survival rate, although QOL significantly favored docetaxel over topotecan. Docetaxel-based and other combination chemotherapy regimens have not been shown to be superior to single-agent docetaxel. One phase III trial revealed a statistically significant survival and QOL benefit for erlotinib over placebo for patients who were not eligible for further chemotherapy. Modest tumor response rates and symptom control have been demonstrated for gefitinib; however, a statistically significant survival benefit has not been established for gefitinib over placebo.
CONCLUSION
Second-line or subsequent therapy with single-agent docetaxel, pemetrexed, or erlotinib offers patients a significant survival and QOL advantage.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Docetaxel; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Maximum Tolerated Dose; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasm Staging; Ontario; Palliative Care; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Assessment; Survival Analysis; Taxoids; Time Factors
PubMed: 17409993
DOI: No ID Found