Project description:A comprehensive search regarding programmed cell death protein 1 (PD‑1)/programmed death‑ligand 1 (PD‑L1) inhibitor monotherapy or combination therapy in neoadjuvant settings of 11 types of solid cancer was performed using the PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases, and the abstracts of various conferences were screened. Data presented in 99 clinical trials indicated that preoperative treatment with PD‑1/PD‑L1 combined therapy, particularly immunotherapy plus chemotherapy, could achieve a higher objective response rate, a higher major pathologic response rate and a higher pathologic complete response rate, as well as a lower number of immune‑related adverse events compared with PD‑1/PD‑L1 monotherapy or dual immunotherapy. Although PD‑1/PD‑L1 inhibitor combination caused more treatment‑related adverse events (TRAEs) in patients, most of the TRAEs were acceptable and did not cause marked delays in operation. The data suggest that patients with pathological remission after neoadjuvant immunotherapy exhibit improved postoperative disease‑free survival compared with those without pathological remission. Further studies are still required to evaluate the long‑term survival benefit of neoadjuvant immunotherapy.
Project description:BackgroundSystematic assessment of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-related neurological toxicities is important for guiding anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to reveal the relationship between PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and neurological toxicities among cancer patients.MethodsClinical trials investigating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in cancer patients were identified by a systematic search of PubMed. The random-effect model was used to synthesize individual studies. Neurological toxicities, including all-grades and grades 3-5, were taken into account for the final comprehensive meta-analysis. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of included trials.ResultsThirty-one clinical trials containing data of neurological toxicities were included. Compared with chemotherapy, the risk of all-grade neurological toxicities caused by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors was much lower in terms of peripheral neuropathy [OR = 0.07, 95%CI:(0.04, 0.13)], peripheral sensory neuropathy [OR = 0.07, 95%CI(0.04, 0.12)], dysgeusia [OR = 0.26, 95%CI:(0.19, 0.35)], paraesthesia [OR = 0.23, 95%CI:(0.14, 0.36)], and polyneuropathy [OR = 0.12, 95%CI:(0.01, 0.94)]. However, for grades 3-5, the statistically significant results were only seen in peripheral neuropathy [OR = 0.15, 95%CI:(0.07, 0.34)] and peripheral sensory neuropathy [OR = 0.13, 95%CI:(0.04, 0.40)]. No statistically significant difference regarding the risk of headache, dizziness, and Guillain-Barré syndrome was found between PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and chemotherapy. For PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy, the risk trends of the above-mentioned neurological toxicities, especially grades 3-5 peripheral neuropathy [OR = 1.76, 95%CI:(1.10, 2.82)] was increased compared to chemotherapy alone.ConclusionOur comprehensive analysis showed that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors alone exhibited lower neurological toxicities than chemotherapy. However, the risk of headache, dizziness, and Guillain-Barré syndrome was similar between PD-1/PD-L1 and chemotherapy. For PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy, the incidence trend of neurological toxicities would be increased, especially for peripheral neuropathy of grades 3-5.
Project description:Background: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of immune-related colitis associated with PD1/PD-L1 inhibitors as compared to chemotherapy in solid tumor patients. Methods: Eligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search of multiple databases and included solid tumor patients in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. The data was analyzed by Stata version 12.0 software. Results: After exclusion of ineligible studies, 11 clinical trials were considered eligible for the meta-analysis, including 5751 patients. Compared with chemotherapy, the risk ratios (RRs) of all-grade colitis were significant for the PD-1 inhibitor subgroup (RR 2.69, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-6.29, p=0.023), and for pembrolizumab subgroup (RR 3.17, 95% CI: 1.08-9.37, p=0.037), but not for nivolumab treatment and PD-L1 inhibitor (atezolizumab) treatment (RR 2.05, 95% CI: 0.52-8.13, p=0.305; RR 4.75,95% CI: 0.56-40.50, p=0.154, respectively). The RR of all-grade colitis was significant for PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor in NSCLC (RR 4.34, 95% CI: 1.37-13.82, p=0.013), and not significant in melanoma (RR 2.11, 95% CI: 0.54-8.34, p=0.285). Moreover, the RRs of all-grade diarrhea were significant for the PD-1 inhibitor subgroup (RR 0.61, 95% CI: 0.44-0.83, p=0.002), for the nivolumab subgroup (RR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.87, p=0.012), and for atezolizumab subgroup (RR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25-0.89, p=0.021). The RR of high-grade diarrhea was significant for atezolizumab subgroup (RR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.12-0.94, p=0.037). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrates that compared with chemotherapy, pembrolizumab may result in a higher risk of all-grade immune-mediated colitis. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor treatment in NSCLC patients, but not in melanoma patients, increases the risk of all-grade colitis incidence.
Project description:BackgroundThis meta-analysis examined the risk of hepatotoxicity in patients with solid tumors who received a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor alone, a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy alone.MethodsPotentially eligible studies were identified by searches of Embase and PubMed. All included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined patients with solid tumors who received a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor and/or chemotherapy.ResultsWe included 20 clinical trials (11,634 patients). Thirteen trials compared PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy with chemotherapy. These two groups had similar risk for elevated markers of hepatotoxicity (based on analysis of all marker grades and high marker grades), although the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor group had an elevated relative risk (RR) of elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST; RR = 2.13, 95% CI = 1.04 to 4.36, P = 0.04) when considering high grades alone; however, this disparity was not significant for comparisons of the pembrolizumab and nivolumab subgroups with the chemotherapy group. Compared with chemotherapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increased the risk of all-grade hepatitis (RR = 5.85, 95% CI = 1.85 to 18.46, P < 0.01), and high-grade hepatitis (RR = 5.66, 95% CI = 1.58 to 20.27, P < 0.01). Seven other studies compared PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone. The combined treatment led to a higher risk for all-grade hepatitis (RR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.29 to 3.55, P < 0.01) and high-grade hepatitis (RR = 5.24, 95%CI = 1.89 to 14.52, P < 0.01), but these groups had similar risk for all-grade and high-grade elevated markers of hepatotoxicity.ConclusionsRelative to chemotherapy alone, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with or without chemotherapy increased the risk of all-grade and high-grade hepatitis, but generally did not increase the risk of elevated blood markers of hepatotoxicity.
Project description:BackgroundNumerous agents targeting PD-L1/PD-1 check-point are in clinical development. However, the correlation between PD-L1 expression and prognosis of solid tumor is still in controversial. Here, we elicit a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the potential value of PD-L1 in the prognostic prediction in human solid tumors.MethodsElectronic databases were searched for studies evaluating the expression of PD-L1 and overall survival (OS) of patients with solid tumors. Odds ratios (ORs) from individual studies were calculated and pooled by using a random-effect model, and heterogeneity and publication bias analyses were also performed.ResultsA total of 3107 patients with solid tumor from 28 published studies were included in the meta-analysis. The median percentage of solid tumors with PD-L1 overexpression was 52.5%. PD-L1 overexpression was associated with worse OS at both 3 years (OR = 2.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.60 to 3.70, P < 0.0001) and 5 years (OR = 2.23, 95% CI = 1.40 to 3.55, P = 0.0008) of solid tumors. Among the tumor types, PD-L1 was associated with worse 3 year-OS of esophageal cancer, gastric cancer, hepatocellular carcinoma, and urothelial cancer, and 5 year-OS of esophageal cancer, gastric cancer and colorectal cancer.ConclusionsThese results suggest that expression of PD-L1 is associated with worse survival in solid tumors. However, the correlations between PD-L1 and prognosis are variant among different tumor types. More studies are needed to investigate the clinical value of PD-L1 expression in prognostic prediction and treatment option.
Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of studies have examined the ability of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) to function as a marker for tumor prognosis. However, whether PD-L1 expression is a prognostic factor for the poor outcomes in many human cancers remains controversial. This study aims to investigate the prognostic role of PD-L1 expression through a meta-analysis update of 60 studies.MethodsThe studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library, and were assessed by further quality evaluation. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for total and stratified analyses were calculated to investigate the association between the PD-L1 expression and the overall (OS) and disease-free (DFS) or progression-free survivals (PFS) of cancer patients. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also investigated.ResultsThe results indicated that PD-L1 overexpression can predict a poor OS (HR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.38-1.81, P <.000) and DFS/PFS (HR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.26-2.33, P = .001). Subgroup analyses showed that PD-L1 overexpression was significantly related to the poor OS in patients with breast (HR = 1.98, 95% CI = 1.15-3.41, P = .014), urothelial (HR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.61-3.12, P <.000), renal (HR = 3.30, 95% CI = 2.23-4.86, P <.000), and gastric cancers (HR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.02-2.37, P = .040). Furthermore, PD-L1 overexpresion was significantly associated with poor DFS/PFS in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (HR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.21-2.46, P = .003), melanoma (HR = 3.39, 95% CI = 2.02-5.69, P <.000), and renal carcinoma, (HR = 5.04, 95% CI = 2.87-8.86, P <.000). The adverse prognostic impact of PD-L1 was observed in patients of different ethnicities.ConclusionsThe findings of this meta-analysis suggest the correlation of PD-L1 overexpression with worse OS in patients with solid tumors. However, the correlations differed according to tumor types.
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of immuno-oncology combinational therapy (IOCT) versus monotherapy with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or PD-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors or conventional therapies, i.e., non-IOCT, in patients with advanced solid tumors.MethodsWe systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2015 to October 2018 for eligible studies. We included randomized trials of IOCT with available hazard ratios (HR) for death. The random effects model was used to calculate pooled HR for death; heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 statistics. The main outcome measure was overall survival (OS).ResultsAfter screening 483 relevant articles, we identified twelve trials comprising 5388 patients for quantitative analysis. IOCT-treated patients had significantly higher tumor response rate (relative risk (RR): 2.51, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.82-3.47), prolonged progression-free survival (HR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.53-0.74), and OS (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.61-0.78), compared with non-IOCT-treated patients. Sensitivity analyses also demonstrated the OS advantage of IOCT across different combination modalities, intervention agents, malignancy types, and PD-L1 expression (all P < 0.05). Notably, there were higher odds of high-grade (grade ≥ 3) adverse events with IOCT (RR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.13-2.90), but the risk of treatment-related death (RR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.84-1.60) was not increased compared with non-IOCT.ConclusionsIOCT is a preferable treatment option over PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy and conventional therapy for patients with advanced solid tumors. However, we should note the increased incidence rate of high-grade AEs in IOCT.
Project description:Purpose: The meta-analysis was put into practice in evaluating the risk ratio of immune-related digestive system inflammation in patients with solid tumors caused by PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Method: The process of the meta-analysis was performed by us according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: After screening and eligibility assessment, a total of 26 clinical trials involving 16,409 patients were selected for the final quantitative synthesis. Immune-related digestive system inflammations, including colitis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, were evaluated separately. Compared with chemotherapy, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors led to an increase in the incidence risk of all grade colitis (RR = 2.43, 95% CI: [1.23, 4.82], P = 0.01). Similar incidence trend could also be seen when PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were combined with chemotherapy (RR = 2.62, 95% CI: [1.25, 5.48], P = 0.01). Whether compared with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab or Ipilimumab alone, the incidence risk of colitis in the Nivolumab group was significantly lower than that of the control group. Similar analysis results could also be seen in the incidence risk of hepatitis. We did not find a statistically significant effect on the incidence of immune-related pancreatitis after the use of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. Conclusion: The use of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increased the incidence risk of immune-related colitis and hepatitis, but this potential to increase the incidence risk of the disease was weaker than Ipilimumab.
Project description:Lack of effective immune infiltration represents a significant barrier to immunotherapy in solid tumors. Thus, solid tumor-enriched death receptor-5 (DR5) activating antibodies, which generates tumor debulking by extrinsic apoptotic cytotoxicity remains a crucial alternate therapeutic strategy. Over past few decades, many DR5 antibodies moved to clinical trials after successfully controlling tumors in immunodeficient tumor xenografts. However, DR5 antibodies failed to significantly improve survival in phase-II trials, leading in efforts to generate second generation of DR5 agonists to supersize apoptotic cytotoxicity in tumors. Here we have discovered that clinical DR5 antibodies activate an unexpected immunosuppressive PD-L1 stabilization pathway, which potentially had contributed to their limited success in clinics. The DR5 agonist stimulated caspase-8 signaling not only activates ROCK1 but also undermines proteasome function, both of which contributes to increased PD-L1 stability on tumor cell surface. Targeting DR5-ROCK1-PD-L1 axis markedly increases immune effector T-cells function, promotes tumor regression and improves overall survival in animal models. These insights have identified a potential clinically viable combinatorial strategy to revive solid cancer immunotherapy using death receptor agonism.
Project description:Purpose: The clinical use of immunotherapies targeting programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) is rapid expanding, but the equivalency of these inhibitors remains unclear. We aimed to comprehensively compare the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Knowledge, related reviews and abstracts for randomized controlled trials of five PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for patients with solid tumors before November 30th, 2018. We estimated summary hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and odds ratios (ORs) for grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (TrAEs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random-effects. This study was registered with PROSPERO (#CRD42018116624). Results: Totally, 43 reports of 35 trials comprising 21261 patients were eligible for the analysis. Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and durvalumab were more effective than control treatment, and no significant differences were identified in OS and PFS between any two inhibitors. Avelumab was associated with significantly inferior OS to nivolumab (HR 1.37, 95%CrI 1.05-1.78) and pembrolizumab (HR 1.33, 95%CrI 1.02-1.73), and with inferior PFS to nivolumab (HR 1.60, 95%CrI 1.03-2.51). Compared with placebo, nivolumab had increased risk of grade 3-5 TrAEs (OR 2.35, 95%CrI 1.35-4.17). Compared with standard-of-care, nivolumab (OR 0.39, 95%CrI 0.28-0.54), pembrolizumab (OR 0.43, 95%CrI 0.30-0.60), atezolizumab (OR 0.37, 95%CrI 0.21-0.64) and avelumab (OR 0.24, 95%CrI 0.12-0.48) significantly reduced grade 3-5 TrAEs. There were not significant differences in grade 3-5 TrAEs between any two inhibitors. Conclusion: This Bayesian network meta-analysis revealed that nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab and durvalumab yielded equivalent survival, while avelumab was associated with unfavorable survival. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were comparable in the risk of TrAEs, and safer than conventional therapies.