Dataset Information

Molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare and rank different targeted therapies or immunotherapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma based on efficacy.

Methods

A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted. All systematic treatment regimens that reported comparisons with sorafenib were included in this analysis. The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and other outcome measures included the objective response rate (ORR) and safety analysis according to reported treatment-related adverse events.

Results

A total of 29 RCTs involving 13376 patients were included in the analysis, including 10 single-agent therapies and 17 combination therapies. Compared with sorafenib, sintilimab plus IBI305 (HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.43-0.75), camrelizumab plus rivoceranib (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.49-0.78), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.52-0.83) ranked in the top three in terms of OS.

Conclusions

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF)-targeting drugs have shown better therapeutic effects in the systematic treatment of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, and the combination of targeted and immune therapy modes should be further developed.

SUBMITTER: Zhang YL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10413926 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Zhang Yun-Long YL Cui Xin-Jiang XJ Xing Hui H Ning Hou-Fa HF Dong Peng P Wang Guang-Zhi GZ

Annals of medicine 20230101 2

<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to compare and rank different targeted therapies or immunotherapies for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma based on efficacy.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted. All systematic treatment regimens that reported comparisons with sorafenib were included in this analysis. The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and other outcome measures ...[more]

PMID: 37557186

Similar Datasets

Project description:To date, no studies have compared the new first-line atezolizumab+bevacizumab with transarterial therapies combined with the prior standard-of-care, sorafenib, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We compared and ranked all relevant transarterial and targeted treatments competing with atezolizumab+bevacizumab for such disease, based on direct and indirect evidence. This network meta-analysis was conducted as a systematic review of phase 2 and 3 randomized sorafenib-controlled trials investigating systemic treatment strategies for HCCs unsuitable for or that progressed after surgery or locoregional treatments as first-line option published between 2008 and 2021. We ranked the treatments based on overall survival (OS) as the primary outcome, together with progression-free survival (PFS) and grade 3-4 adverse events. Subgroup analyses were also implemented to estimate intervention efficacies in particular groups. We identified 3451 publications, 15 trials consisting of 7158 patients, using 14 different therapies including combinations of sorafenib with transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), hepatic arterial chemoinfusion, and radioembolization. Regarding OS, atezolizumab+bevacizumab was the only regimen significantly superior to sorafenib (hazard ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.70), and it ranked first. This combination was also the best in the PFS analysis (0.59; 0.47-0.74), followed by lenvatinib (0.66; 0.57-0.76) and TACE+sorafenib (0.73; 0.59-0.91); all had significantly better outcomes than sorafenib alone. TACE+sorafenib (0.52; 0.27-1.00) was ranked first based on OS in a subset with portal invasion, but not in the metastatic series, with atezolizumab+bevacizumab second (0.58; 0.38-0.89). Lenvatinib (odds ratio 1.76; 95% CI 1.35-2.30) and TACE+sorafenib (2.02; 1.23-3.32), but not atezolizumab+bevacizumab (1.38; 0.93-2.05), were significantly less safe than sorafenib monotherapy. Conclusion: Our results indicate that atezolizumab+bevacizumab is the best first-line clinically relevant systemic modality in advanced HCC. TACE+sorafenib may also be considered for the disease with portal invasion. (PROSPERO No. CRD42021250701).

Project description:BackgroundSeveral systemic agents have been approved for use in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, it is unclear which treatment is superior in either the first- or second-line settings due to the paucity of head-to-head comparative trials. Therefore, we have conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis for the indirect comparison of the systemic agents in the first line and second line settings.MethodsRandomized clinical trials evaluating systemic agents in first and second line settings in aHCC from inception to April 2020 were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases and the annual ASCO and ESMO conferences from 2017 to 2020. Studies in English reporting clinical outcomes including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) were included. The primary outcomes of interest were pooled hazard ratios (HR) of OS and pooled odds ratios (OR) of ORR in first line studies and pooled HR of PFS and OR of ORR for second line studies. Additionally, OS for second line agents were reported in the qualitative analysis.ResultsOverall, first line studies comprised 8335 patients (13 studies) and second line studies comprised 4612 patients (11 studies). In the first line setting, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was associated with the highest OS benefit over sorafenib (HR 0.58, 95% CI, 0.42-0.80; P-score 0.993). Additionally, lenvatinib was associated with the greatest ORR benefit (OR 3.34, 95% CI, 2.17-5.14; P-score 0.080) in the first line setting. In the second line setting, cabozantinib was associated with the highest PFS benefit over placebo (HR 0.44, 95% CI, 0.29-0.66; P-score 0.854) as well as the highest ORR benefit (OR 9.40, 95% CI, 1.25-70.83, P-score, 0.266).ConclusionAtezolizumab plus bevacizumab appears to have superior efficacy among first line agents whereas cabozantinib appears to be superior in the second line setting. Further studies are warranted to determine whether the type of prior therapy received affects the efficacy of subsequent second line therapy.

Project description:BackgroundThough previous studies have investigated the efficacy characteristics of several different therapeutic modalities for locally advanced prostate cancer (LAPCa) patients, the available results remained unestablished. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was conducted to clarify such differences.MethodsThe online PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science were comprehensively searched for relevant studies published before September 1st, 2017, and eventually eleven relevant studies met the inclusion criteria. The hazard odds ratios (HRs) with 95% credible interval (CI) were utilized to evaluate the efficacy characteristics of several different therapeutic modalities for LAPCa patients by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.ResultsFive different therapeutic modalities were ultimately enrolled to shed light on the efficacy characteristics for LAPCa patients and seven different clinical outcomes were finally analyzed in this study. The cumulative rank probability of overall survival (OS) or cancer-specific survival (CSS) from best to worst was radiotherapy (RT) + orchiectomy, RT + long-term androgen deprivation therapy (LTADT), RT + short-term androgen deprivation therapy (STADT), LTADT and RT; RT + LTADT, RT + orchiectomy, RT + STADT, LTADT and RT, respectively. Meanwhile, in the terms of progression-free survival (PFS), biochemical failure rate (BFR), disease-free survival (DFS), local progression rate (LPR) and metastasis rate (MR), RT + LTADT as well as RT + STADT had a higher, whereas RT alone or LTADT had a relatively lower treatment effect.ConclusionsAll in all, our results indicated that RT + LTADT or RT + orchiectomy was among the best two therapeutic regimens in the prognostic aspects of the patients with LAPCa. Furthermore, in consideration of reducing invasive treatment of eligible patients, RT + LTADT could yield better survival benefit of LAPCa patients, compared with others. In addition, the results of our analysis might provide a reference in the clinical selection. Larger sample sizes of strictly designed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were wanted to validate our findings.

Dataset Information

Molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets