Dual immunotherapy in advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Yang Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10923855 | biostudies-literature | 2024 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionRecent clinical trials have confirmed that anti-programmed cell death-1/ligand 1 (anti-PD-1/L1) combined with either anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (anti-CTLA-4) or anti-T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains (TIGIT) antibodies (dual immunotherapy) produced significant benefits as first-line therapies for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, it also increased the incidence of adverse reactions, which cannot be ignored. Our study aims to explore the efficacy and safety of dual immunotherapies in advanced NSCLC.MethodsThis meta-analysis ultimately included nine first-line randomized controlled trials collected from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases until 13 August 2022. Efficacy was measured as the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and risk ratio (RR) for the objective response rates (ORRs). Treatment safety was assessed by RR of any grade of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and grade ≥ 3 TRAEs.ResultsOur results demonstrated that, compared to chemotherapy, dual immunotherapy shows durable benefits in OS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.69-0.82) and PFS (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.67-0.83) across all levels of PD-L1 expression. Subgroup analysis also presented that dual immunotherapy resulted in improved long-term survival compared with chemotherapy in patients with a high tumor mutational burden (TMB) (OS: HR = 0.76, p = 0.0009; PFS: HR = 0.72, p < 0.0001) and squamous cell histology (OS: HR = 0.64, p < 0.00001; PFS: HR = 0.66, p < 0.001). However, compared with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy, dual immunotherapy shows some advantages in terms of OS and ORR and only improved PFS (HR = 0.77, p = 0.005) in PD-L1 < 25%. With regard to safety, there was no significant difference in any grade TRAEs (p = 0.05) and grade ≥ 3 TRAEs (p = 0.31) between the dual immunotherapy and chemotherapy groups. However, compared with ICI monotherapy, dual immunotherapy significantly increased the incidence of any grade TRAEs (p = 0.03) and grade ≥ 3 TRAEs (p < 0.0001).ConclusionsAs for the efficacy and safety outcome, compared with standard chemotherapy, dual immunotherapy remains an effective first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC, especially for patients with high TMB levels and squamous cell histology. Furthermore, compared to single-agent immunotherapy, dual immunotherapy is only considered for use in patients with low PD-L1 expression in order to reduce the emergence of resistance to immunotherapy.Systematic Review Registation: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022336614.
| S-EPMC10311062 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: In the absence of head-to-head trials comparing immunotherapies for advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NsqNSCLC), a network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the relative efficacy of these treatments. Materials & methods: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials evaluating first-line-to-progression and second-line treatments for advanced NsqNSCLC informed Bayesian NMAs for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) end points. Results: Among first-line-to-progression treatments, pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the greatest OS benefit versus other regimens and a PFS benefit versus all but three regimens. Among second-line treatments, an OS benefit was seen for atezolizumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab versus docetaxel. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab + pemetrexed + platinum showed the maximum OS benefit in the first-line setting. In the second-line setting, anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 monotherapies were better than docetaxel.
| S-EPMC10288959 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeveral head-to-head meta-analyses have compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line treatments in patients with EGFR mutation-positive (M+) advanced or metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (nsq-NSCLC). However, there is a lack of comprehensive evaluation encompassing multiple treatment strategies. Our objective is to conduct a network meta-analysis that includes various treatment modalities, enabling both direct and indirect comparisons for a more thorough assessment.MethodsWe conducted a search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception until May 8, 2024, to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes included objective response rate (ORR) and grade 3 or higher adverse events (≥3AEs). Stata 15.0 and R 4.3.2 software were utilized for the network meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 30 RCTs, comprising 8654 participants, were included. The study encompassed the following 19 treatments: Chemotherapy; Afatinib; Afatinib + Cetuximab; Apatinib + Gefitinib; Befotertinib; Cetuximab + Chemotherapy; Erlotinib; Erlotinib + Bevacizumab; Erlotinib + Chemotherapy; Gefitinib; Gefitinib + Chemotherapy; Gefitinib + Olaparib; Icotinib; Icotinib + Chemotherapy; Lazertinib; Naquotinib; Osimertinib; Osimertinib + Bevacizumab; Osimertinib + Chemotherapy. The network meta-analysis results indicated that, in terms of PFS, Osimertinib + Chemotherapy (SUCRAs: 93.4%) and Osimertinib (SUCRAs: 84.61%) were the most effective. Regarding OS, Lazertinib (SUCRAs: 89.72%), Gefitinib (SUCRAs: 72.07%), and Osimertinib + Chemotherapy (SUCRAs: 70.74%) emerged as the top three options. Afatinib (SUCRAs: 92.27%) was associated with the best ORR improvement. For ≥3AEs, Afatinib (SUCRAs: 74.93%) and Osimertinib (SUCRAs: 69.42%) were likely the best choices.ConclusionCurrent evidence suggests that, considering both survival and safety, Osimertinib stands out as the preferred first-line treatment for untreated EGFR M + advanced or metastatic nsq-NSCLC. Notably, the combination of Osimertinib with chemotherapy demonstrated superior survival benefits. However, due to the limitations in the number and quality of included studies, these conclusions await further validation through more high-quality research.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024562981, identifier CRD42024562981.
| S-EPMC11774708 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) comprises approximately 85% of lung cancers and, unfortunately, more than half of these patients are diagnosed with metastatic disease. Platinum-based chemotherapy has for long been the standard frontline therapy for advanced disease. Despite remarkable advances in targeted therapy for a subset of patients harboring a driver mutation, the prognosis in the majority of the lung cancer population have not changed significantly. More recently, immunotherapy has drastically changed the treatment of NSCLC and have established a new treatment paradigm for these patients. Pembrolizumab is now the new mainstay first-line treatment for those with high-PD-L1 expression. However, many questions remain regarding how to sequence and combine these agents in the frontline setting. The optimal patient selection strategies are also unclear. High PD-L1 expression is associated with higher response rates, but even patients with low or absent PD-L1 expression benefit from these drugs. More recently, tumor mutational burden is been proposed as a potential predictive marker for response. This article will review the data regarding the usage of immunotherapy in treatment naive advanced NSCLC.
| S-EPMC5861272 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe objectives of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the survival, toxicity, and quality of life of patients treated with necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin. These agents were investigated in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the first-line setting.MethodsThe systematic review was executed on January 27, 2015, and updated on August 21, 2016, using a pre-specified search strategy. Searches were conducted using PubMed, Medline, and EMBASE, with supplemental searches using the Evidence Based Medicine Reviews and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify RCTs published in English from 1995-2016 and reporting at least one of the primary outcomes [overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, or quality of life] in patients who received first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool, respectively. A Baysian network meta-analysis was performed on the primary outcomes. Hazard ratios (HRs) were evaluated for the primary analysis; secondary analyses were conducted using median OS data. Planned sensitivity analyses were conducted including reanalysis using a Frequentist approach and limiting analyses to subsets based on clinical and demographic covariates.ResultsThe systematic literature review resulted in identification of 4,016 unique publications; 40 publications (35 unique trials) were eligible for inclusion. Eight studies connected to a common network for the OS analysis using HR data. The majority of studies were not limited to squamous NSCLC, thus analyzable data were limited to a subset of data within the published trials. Carboplatin + S-1 and necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin were associated with lower HRs for OS versus all other comparators. Nine studies connected to the network for the PFS analysis in which necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin was associated with the lowest HR. Data were not available to analyze toxicity or quality of life.ConclusionsAlthough the results suggest that carboplatin + S-1 and necitumumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin may have value in terms of OS versus other comparators, the results should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies (with few focused exclusively on squamous NSCLC) and wide credible intervals.
| S-EPMC6344765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitor has become one of the important treatment options for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, only a small subset of patients with NSCLC can currently receive single-agent PD-1 inhibitors as first-line therapy, for the limitations of population selection exclude most patients from immuno-oncology (IO) monotherapy. In order to expand the candidate population for IO first-line treatment and make more newly diagnosed patients benefit from IO treatment, a series of studies are focusing on the combination of IO and other drugs in NSCLC. We reviewed the latest clinical data of IO first-line combination therapy in recent years, suggesting that on the basis of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, combined with other IO, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic drugs, targeted therapy or radiotherapy may produce synergistic anti-tumor effects. It is expected to benefit more newly diagnosed patients.?.
| S-EPMC6318566 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immuno checkpoint inhibitors have ushered in a new era with respect to the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Many patients are not suitable for treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (eg, gefitinib, erlotinib, and afatinib) or with anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (eg, crizotinib and ceritinib). As a result, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors may play a novel role in the improvement of outcomes in a metastatic setting. The regulation of immune surveillance, immunoediting, and immunoescape mechanisms may play an interesting role in this regard either alone or in combination with current drugs. Here, we discuss advances in immunotherapy for the treatment of metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer as well as future perspectives within this framework.
| S-EPMC5179204 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. Approximately 18% of all deaths related to cancer are associated with lung cancer. Management of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been changing rapidly in last few years. For patients with unresectable non-metastatic disease, maintenance durvalumab is now given after offering chemo-radiation concurrently based on the result from the PACIFIC trial. Management of metastatic disease greatly depends on the status of sensitizing driver mutation and PD-L1 level of the tumor cells. In this review article, we will summarize the outcome of various clinical trials and will provide the most up-to-date information on the management of patients with advanced and metastatic NSCLC.
| S-EPMC7711369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represent a great breakthrough in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC). However, whether immunotherapy beyond progression (IBP) is effective for aNSCLC has yet to be established. Therefore, a retrospective clinical study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of IBP in patients with aNSCLC under real-world conditions.MethodsA total of 125 Chinese patients with aNSCLC who experienced progressive disease (PD) after receiving monotherapy or combination therapy (combined with chemotherapy or/and antiangiogenic therapy) with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibitors between January 2015 and March 2019 were enrolled. Patients who were treated with ICIs for more than 6 weeks after PD were defined as IBP (n=39), while those who received ICI treatment for less than 6 weeks or discontinued it due to PD were defined as non-IBP (n=86). Patient clinical characteristics were evaluated. An optimization-based method was applied to balance the clinical baseline characteristics between the two groups.ResultsIn total population, the IBP group had longer overall survival (median OS, 26.6 vs. 9.5 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.23-0.69; P<0.001) and progression-free survival (median PFS, 8.9 vs. 4.1 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI: 0.26-0.65; P<0.001), compared with the non-IBP group. Despite no significant difference in objective response rate (ORR, 15.4% vs. 11.6%, P=0.560), disease control rate (DCR) was significantly higher in the IBP group (89.7% vs. 61.6%, P<0.001). After balancing baseline covariates, the IBP group also had longer OS (median: 26.6 vs. 10.7 months; HR, 0.40; 95% CI: 0.19-0.84; P=0.015) and PFS (median: 9.7 vs. 4.3 months; HR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.15-0.51; P<0.001), with a benefit in either of patients previously treated with ICI monotherapy or in combination therapy and with non-response to the previously ICI.ConclusionsIBP is associated with longer OS and PFS in patients with aNSCLC. Our findings may suggest new therapeutic options for patients with aNSCLC who experienced disease progression after initial immunotherapy.
| S-EPMC7815351 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11822537 | biostudies-literature