-
Liver Cancer Apr 2024Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with...
BACKGROUND
Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking.
OBJECTIVES
This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC.
METHOD
A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments.
RESULTS
Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.
PubMed: 38751554
DOI: 10.1159/000531744 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2024The efficacy and safety of different immunosuppressants combined with chemotherapy in treating patients with small-cell lung cancer (extensive-disease small-cell lung... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The efficacy and safety of different immunosuppressants combined with chemotherapy in treating patients with small-cell lung cancer (extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer, limited-disease small-cell lung cancer and relapsed small-cell lung cancer) are still unknown, and there are no reports directly comparing the efficacy and safety of other immunotherapies.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of first-line immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in patients with small-cell lung cancer.
METHOD
We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases for relevant articles published from inception to November 11, 2020. The risk of bias of the included studies was conducted using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool. Multiple Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed. They conducted data analysis using R Studio and STATA version 15.1. The outcomes comprised overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), stability of response (SOR), duration of response (DOR) and adverse events of grade 3 or higher (AE grade≥3). A 95% confidence interval (CI) was provided for each estimate.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 16 RCT studies with 5898 patients. For OS, relative to chemotherapy (MD=-4.49; 95%CI [-7.97, -1.03]), durvalumab plus tremelimumab (MD=-4.62; 95%CI [-9.08, -0.11]), ipilimumab (MD=-4.26; 95%CI [-8.01, -0.3]) and nivolumab(MD=-5.66; 95%CI [-10.44, -1.11]) and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (MD=-4.56; 95%CI [-8.7, -0.1]), serplulimab can significantly increase the OS of SCLC patients. There was no significant difference between PFS, SOR and DOR. Analysis of AE showed that different immunotherapy combined chemotherapy regimens were similar to single chemotherapy regarding the overall incidence of AE grade≥3. However, after the cumulative ranking of the common symptoms of different adverse reactions, it was found that nivolumab ranked first in the occurrence probability of anemia (99.08%), fatigue (84.78%), and decreased appetite (89.66%). durvalumab was the most likely in nausea (75.4%). Pembrolizumab (76.24%) was most likely to cause pruritus. Chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy caused less diarrhea than chemotherapy alone (80.16%).
CONCLUSIONS
According to our analysis, serplulimab combined with chemotherapy is more likely to show better efficacy with a manageable safety profile for small-cell lung cancer. However, the evidence for this comparison shows some limitations due to the number of literature.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023486053.
Topics: Humans; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Immunotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors
PubMed: 38694505
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1362537 -
Journal of Hematology & Oncology Apr 2024Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health concern worldwide, with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. In recent years, immunotherapies such as immune... (Review)
Review
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major health concern worldwide, with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. In recent years, immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have made great progress in the systemic treatment of HCC. The combination treatments based on ICIs have been the major trend in this area. Recently, dual immune checkpoint blockade with durvalumab plus tremelimumab has also emerged as an effective treatment for advanced HCC. However, the majority of HCC patients obtain limited benefits. Understanding the immunological rationale and exploring novel ways to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy has drawn much attention. In this review, we summarize the latest progress in this area, the ongoing clinical trials of immune-based combination therapies, as well as novel immunotherapy strategies such as chimeric antigen receptor T cells, personalized neoantigen vaccines, oncolytic viruses, and bispecific antibodies.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Hepatocellular; Liver Neoplasms; Tumor Microenvironment; Immunotherapy; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Cancer Vaccines; Animals
PubMed: 38679698
DOI: 10.1186/s13045-024-01549-2 -
Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology 2024Given the superior performance of various therapies over sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the absence of direct comparisons, it is crucial to...
BACKGROUND
Given the superior performance of various therapies over sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and the absence of direct comparisons, it is crucial to explore the efficacy of these treatments in phase III randomized clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES
The goal is to identify which patients are most likely to benefit significantly from these emerging therapies, contributing to more personalized and informed clinical decision-making.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and international conference databases have been searched from 1 January 2010 to 1 December 2023.
RESULTS
After screening, 17 phase III trials encompassing 18 treatments were included. In the whole-population network meta-analysis, the newly first-line tremelimumab plus durvalumab (Tre + Du) was found to be comparable with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (Atezo + Beva) in providing the best overall survival (OS) benefit [hazard ratio (HR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.93-1.92]. Concerning OS benefits, sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar (Sint + Beva), camrelizumab plus rivoceranib (Camre + Rivo), and lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (Lenva + Pemb) appear to exhibit similar effects to Tre + Du and Atezo + Beva. In the context of progression-free survival, Atezo + Beva seemed to outperform Tre + Du (HR: 0.66 CI: 0.49-0.87), while the effects are comparable to Sint + Beva, Camre + Rivo, and Lenva + Pemb. Upon comparison between Asia-Pacific and non-Asia-Pacific cohorts, as well as between hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected and non-HBV-infected populations, immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments seemed to exhibit heightened efficacy in the Asia-Pacific group and among individuals with HBV infection. However, combined ICI-based therapies did not show more effectiveness than molecular-targeted drugs in patients without macrovascular invasion and/or extrahepatic spread. As for grades 3-5 adverse events, combined therapies showed comparable safety to sorafenib and lenvatinib.
CONCLUSION
Compared with sorafenib and lenvatinib, combination therapies based on ICIs significantly improved the prognosis of advanced HCC and demonstrated similar safety. At the same time, the optimal treatment approach should be tailored to individual patient characteristics, such as etiology, tumor staging, and serum alpha-fetoprotein levels. With lower incidence rates of treatment-related adverse events and non-inferior efficacy compared to sorafenib, ICI monotherapies should be prioritized as a first-line treatment approach for patients who are not suitable candidates for ICI-combined therapies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO, CRD42022288172.
PubMed: 38645513
DOI: 10.1177/17562848241237631 -
Medicine Apr 2024Durvalumab plus etoposide-platinum (DEP) showed sustained overall survival improvements in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) compared to...
BACKGROUND
Durvalumab plus etoposide-platinum (DEP) showed sustained overall survival improvements in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) compared to etoposide-platinum (EP), but adding tremelimumab to DEP (DTEP) did not significantly improve outcomes. A third-party payer perspective is taken here to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DTEP, DEP, and EP for ES-SCLC.
METHODS
The cost-effectiveness was evaluated by partitioning survival models into 3 mutually exclusive health states. In this model, clinical characteristics and outcomes were obtained from the CASPIAN. Model robustness was evaluated through 1-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Outcome measurements included costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, life-years, incremental net health benefit, and incremental net monetary benefit. The analysis was conducted with a 10-year lifetime horizon in a United States setting.
RESULTS
Compared with EP, DEP, and DTEP were associated with an increment of 0.480 and 0.313 life-years, and an increment of 0.247 and 0.165 QALYs, as well as a $139,788 and $170,331 increase in cost per patient. The corresponding ICERs were $565,807/QALY and $1033,456/QALY, respectively. The incremental net health benefit and incremental net monetary benefit of DEP or DTEP were -0.685 QALYs and -$102,729, or -0.971 QALYs and -$145,608 at a willingness to pay threshold of $150,000/QALY, respectively. Compared with DTEP, DEP was dominated. DTEP and DEP were 100% unlikely to be cost-effective if the willingness to pay threshold was $150,000/QALY. DEP was cost-effective compared to EP when durvalumab was priced below $0.994/mg. Compared with EP, DEP, and DTEP were unlikely to be considered cost-effective across all subgroups.
CONCLUSION
DEP and DTEP were not cost-effective options in the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC compared with EP, from the third-party payer perspective in the United States. Compared with DTEP, DEP was dominated.
Topics: Humans; United States; Small Cell Lung Carcinoma; Lung Neoplasms; Etoposide; Platinum; Cost-Effectiveness Analysis; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
PubMed: 38640325
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000037836 -
Thoracic Cancer Apr 2024Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have an exceptionally poor prognosis and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with...
Efficacy and safety of novel immune checkpoint inhibitor-based combinations versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have an exceptionally poor prognosis and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with etoposide-platinum is recommended as standard first-line therapy. However, which combination pattern is the best still remains unknown. This network meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of currently available patterns including an antiangiogenic agent containing regimen and probed into the most appropriate therapy for patients.
METHODS
Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) were generated using R software. The outcomes of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events of grade 3 or higher (grade ≥ 3 adverse events [AEs]) were analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 5544 patients were included for analysis. Drug combination patterns included adebrelimab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, durvalumab plus tremelimumab, ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, serplulimab, benmelstobart plus anlotinib, tislelizumab, tiragolumab plus atezolizumab and toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy. The novel antiangiogenic agent containing regimen benmelstobart + anlotinib + chemotherapy showed the highest possibility to present the best PFS and OS versus chemotherapy. Compared with ICI plus chemotherapy, it also achieved significantly better PFS and presented a tendency of OS benefit. As for safety and toxicity, patients treated with benmelstobart + anlotinib + chemotherapy and durvalumab + tremelimumab + chemotherapy suffered a higher likelihood of more grade ≥ 3 AEs without unexpected AEs.
CONCLUSION
PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors-based combinations are associated with significant improvement in both PFS and OS for treatment-naïve ES-SCLC patients. Benmelstobart plus anlotinib with chemotherapy (CT) yielded better survival benefit versus CT alone or other ICIs + CT with caution for more adverse effects along with the addition of an antiangiogenic agent.
PubMed: 38623838
DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.15310 -
Clinical Lung Cancer May 2024
A Brief Report of Durvalumab With or Without Tremelimumab in Combination With Chemotherapy as First-Line Therapy for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Outcomes by Tumor PD-L1 Expression in the Phase 3 POSEIDON Study.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Lung Neoplasms; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Antibodies, Monoclonal; B7-H1 Antigen; Male; Female; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38584069
DOI: 10.1016/j.cllc.2024.03.003 -
Oncotarget Mar 2024A clinical trial was conducted to assess the feasibility of enrolling patients with Stage II or III hormone receptor positive (HR+)/HER2-negative breast cancer to...
A clinical trial was conducted to assess the feasibility of enrolling patients with Stage II or III hormone receptor positive (HR+)/HER2-negative breast cancer to pre-operative dual PD-L1/CTLA-4 checkpoint inhibition administered prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). Eight eligible patients were treated with upfront durvalumab and tremelimumab for two cycles. Patients then received NACT prior to breast surgery. Seven patients had baseline and interval breast ultrasounds after combination immunotherapy and the responses were mixed: 3/7 patients experienced a ≥30% decrease in tumor volume, 3/7 a ≥30% increase, and 1 patient had stable disease. At the time of breast surgery, 1/8 patients had a pathologic complete response (pCR). The trial was stopped early after 3 of 8 patients experienced immunotherapy-related toxicity or suspected disease progression that prompted discontinuation or a delay in the administration of NACT. Two patients experienced grade 3 immune-related adverse events (1 with colitis, 1 with endocrinopathy). Analysis of the tumor microenvironment after combination immunotherapy did not show a significant change in immune cell subsets from baseline. There was limited benefit for dual checkpoint blockade administered prior to NACT in our study of 8 patients with HR+/HER2-negative breast cancer.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Tumor Microenvironment; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized
PubMed: 38502947
DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.28567 -
Translational Lung Cancer Research Feb 2024To date, the role of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) messenger RNA (mRNA) derived from tumor-educated platelets (TEPs) has not been well investigated in patients with...
BACKGROUND
To date, the role of programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) messenger RNA (mRNA) derived from tumor-educated platelets (TEPs) has not been well investigated in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). A few reports have examined whether mRNA in TEPs can predict the clinical responses of patients with advanced NSCLC following immunotherapy. This study aimed to identify novel biomarkers to improve the clinical benefits and outcomes of NSCLC patients.
METHODS
Advanced NSCLC patients receiving a combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy, or immunotherapy alone as a first- or second-line treatment at the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center were enrolled in this study. All the patients had wild-type epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase. The patients were enrolled in clinical trials for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab, tremelimumab, and camrelizumab. Tumoral PD-L1 expression was tested by immunohistochemistry (PD-L1 22C3 pharmDx kit, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) in archived tissue samples, when available, to calculate the tumor proportion scores (TPSs). RNA and exosomal RNA of blood were isolated before immunotherapy using the Yunying RNA extraction kit (Yunying Medicine, Shanghai, China). The concentration and quality of the RNA was determined using a Qubit fluorometer (Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA, USA). Finally, we analyzed the predictive value of TEP-derived PD-L1 mRNA expression and association with the level of the tumoral PD-L1 expression.
RESULTS
In total, 72 patients were enrolled in this study. Most of the patients were male (n=54, 75.0%), had adenocarcinoma (n=49, 68.1%). We found there was no significant correlation between the TEP-derived mRNA of PD-L1 and tumoral PD-L1 expression based on the results of the Pearson Correlation test (r=-0.19, P=0.233). Based on the median of PD-L1 mRNA, 72 patients were divided into a high PD-L1 group and a low PD-L1 group. We found that 19 patients (44.4%) responded to immunotherapy [partial response or progression-free survival (PFS) >6 months] in the high PD-L1 group, but only five patients (13.9%) responded to immunotherapy in the low PD-L1 group (P<0.01). The median PFS of the low PD-L1 group was lower than that of the high PD-L1 group (2.8 8.3 months, P<0.001). For the patients who were treated with immunotherapy alone (n=64), a similar PFS advantage was observed in the high PD-L1 group (2.8 8.0 months, P=0.002).
CONCLUSIONS
This article presented the first data on TEP-derived PD-L1 mRNA in advanced NSCLC patients following immunotherapy and showed the potential advantage of using it as the surrogate biomarker for predicting the PFS and overall survival of patients following immunotherapy.
PubMed: 38496687
DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-24-29 -
Cells Feb 2024Immunotherapy has emerged as a promising new treatment modality for head and neck cancer, offering the potential for targeted and effective cancer management. Squamous... (Review)
Review
Immunotherapy has emerged as a promising new treatment modality for head and neck cancer, offering the potential for targeted and effective cancer management. Squamous cell carcinomas pose significant challenges due to their aggressive nature and limited treatment options. Conventional therapies such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy often have limited success rates and can have significant side effects. Immunotherapy harnesses the power of the immune system to recognize and eliminate cancer cells, and thus represents a novel approach with the potential to improve patient outcomes. In the management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), important contributions are made by immunotherapies, including adaptive cell therapy (ACT) and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. In this review, we are focusing on the latter. Immune checkpoint inhibitors target proteins such as programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) to enhance the immune response against cancer cells. The CTLA-4 inhibitors, such as ipilimumab and tremelimumab, have been approved for early-stage clinical trials and have shown promising outcomes in terms of tumor regression and durable responses in patients with advanced HNSCC. Thus, immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy holds promise in overcoming the limitations of conventional therapies. However, further research is needed to optimize treatment regimens, identify predictive biomarkers, and overcome potential resistance mechanisms. With ongoing advancements in immunotherapy, the future holds great potential for transforming the landscape of oral tumor treatment and providing new hope for patients.
Topics: Humans; Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck; Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Immunotherapy; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell
PubMed: 38474377
DOI: 10.3390/cells13050413