Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis based on mixed-effect models.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is a highly invasive and fatal disease with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. Our study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (ICIs+ChT) vs. chemotherapy alone (ChT) in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC.

Methods

A literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to "ICIs+ChT" vs. "ChT" in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and other databases. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform meta-analyses with hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR). SAS 9.4 software was applied to conduct a mixed-effect model meta-analysis of the survival outcomes and draw survival curves.

Results

A total of 2,638 patients with ES-SCLC from 6 RCTs were included, of which 1,341 patients received "ICIs+ChT" and 1,297 received ChT. Based on the meta-analysis results provided by the mixed-effect model, patients receiving the "ICIs+ChT" regimen had a significantly longer overall survival (OS, HR = 0.800, 95% CI = 0.731-0.876, P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS, HR = 0.815, 95% CI = 0.757-0.878, P <0.001) in comparison to those receiving ChT only. Compared with ChT, "ICIs+ChT" did neither improve the objective response rate (ORR, RR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.00-1.12, P = 0.06) nor did it improve the disease control rate (DCR, RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.92-1.03, P = 0.35). Although the incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) in the "ICIs+ChT" subgroup did not increase (RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.97-1.39, P = 0.11), the incidence of grade 3 to 5 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) increased significantly (RR = 4.29, 95% CI = 1.73-10.61, P < 0.00001).

Conclusion

ICIs+ChT regimen could significantly prolong OS and PFS in patients with ES-SCLC compared with ChT alone. Although the incidence of irAEs in "ICIs+ChT" is higher than that in the "ChT" subgroup, the incidence of trAEs is similar within the two subgroups. ICIs combined with chemotherapy demonstrated a good choice as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022348496.

SUBMITTER: Zheng J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10424447 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis based on mixed-effect models.

Zheng Jianqing J Deng Yujie Y Huang Bifen B Chen Xiaohui X

Frontiers in medicine 20230731

<h4>Background</h4>Extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is a highly invasive and fatal disease with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. Our study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (ICIs+ChT) vs. chemotherapy alone (ChT) in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC.<h4>Methods</h4>A literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to "ICIs+ChT" vs. "ChT" in the first-l ...[more]

PMID: 37583422

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the cost-effectiveness of imported immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) such as atezolizumab and durvalumab, and domestic ICIs like serplulimab and adebrelimab, in combination with chemotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in China.MethodsUsing a 21-day cycle length and a 20-year time horizon, a Markov model was established to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of five first-line ICIs plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, as well as against each other, from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system. Transition probabilities were estimated by combining the results of the CAPSTONE-1 trial and a published network meta-analysis. Cost and health state utilities were collected from multiple sources. Both cost and effectiveness outcomes were discounted at a rate of 5% annually. The primary model output was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). A series of sensitivity analyses were preformed to assess the robustness of the model.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, the addition of first-line ICIs to chemotherapy resulted in the ICERs ranged from $80,425.31/QALY to $812,415.46/QALY, which exceeded the willing-to-pay threshold set for the model. When comparing these first-line immunochemotherapy strategies, serplulimab plus chemotherapy had the highest QALYs of 1.51286 and the second lowest costs of $60,519.52, making it is the most cost-effective strategy. Our subgroup-level analysis yielded results that are consistent with the base-case analysis. The sensitivity analysis results confirmed the validity and reliability of the model.ConclusionIn China, the combination of fist-line ICIs plus chemotherapy were not considered cost-effective when compared to chemotherapy alone. However, when these fist-line immunochemotherapy strategies were compared with each other, first-line serplulimab plus chemotherapy consistently demonstrated superiority in terms of cost-effectiveness. Reducing the cost of serplulimab per 4.5 mg/kg would be a realistic step towards making first-line serplulimab plus chemotherapy more accessible and cost-effective.

Project description:BackgroundFor patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), serplulimab plus chemotherapy is beneficial as the first-line treatment. It is uncertain whether serplulimab plus chemotherapy will be more cost-effective. The aim of this study was to evaluate from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system to assess the cost-effectiveness of serplulimab plus chemotherapy for patients with ES-SCLC.Materials and methodsThis study employed a partitioned survival model. Patients in the model were selected from ASTRUM-005 for their clinical characteristics and outcomes. In order to assess the robustness of the model, we conducted deterministic one-way sensitivity analyzes as well as probabilistic sensitivity analyzes. Subgroup analyzes were also conducted. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefits (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefits (INMB) were analyzed.ResultsBased on the base-case analysis, serplulimab plus chemotherapy contributed to an increase in 0.826 life-years and 0.436 QALYs; an incremental cost of $52,331, yielded ICER of $120,149/QALY. Based on the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $37,669/QALY and $86,569/QALY, the INHB was -0.954 QALYs and - 0.169 QALYs and the INMB was -$35,924 and -$14,626, respectively. Based on the probabilistic sensitivity analysis results, serplulimab plus chemotherapy was unlikely to be cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $37,669/QALY and $86,569/QALY. One-way sensitivity analysis indicated that cost of serplulimab and body weight had the greatest impact on the model. Serplulimab plus chemotherapy could be cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $86,569/QALY when the cost of serplulimab was less than $5.24/mg or when the weight of the patient was less than 40.96 kg. Regardless of the WTP threshold at $37,669/QALY or $86,569. Serplulimab plus chemotherapy was not cost-effective in all subgroups.ConclusionSerplulimab plus chemotherapy was not cost-effective, despite having a prior clinical benefical and a relative safety profile compared with chemotherapy. With the reduction in the price of serplulimab, ES-SCLC patients treated with serplulimab plus chemotherapy may be able to achieve a favorable cost-effectiveness rate.

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus chemotherapy were unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in China due to its high costs. However, the cost-effectiveness of the comparison between the regimens of ICIs plus chemotherapy were remained unclear yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ICIs plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsA network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to indirect compare the clinical benefits between the ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens. A decision-analytic model was established to evaluate the cost-effectiveness from the Chinese healthcare system, the clinical efficacy and safety data were obtained from the clinical trials and the results of NMA. Cost and utility values were gathered from the local charges and previously studies. Key outputs of the NMA were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the robustness of the model outcomes.ResultsFive clinical trials (IMpower133, CASPIAN, KEYNOTE-604, CA184-156, and EA5161) of 1,255 patients received first-line ICIs plus chemotherapy strategies were analyzed in the NMA. NMA showed that nivolumab plus chemotherapy was ranked higher than other strategies. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy achieved relatively higher health benefits and lower costs. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost of ICIs had the substantial impact on model outcomes. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that the probability of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy could be considered cost-effective was more than 50% at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $31,313/QALY in China. In scenario analyses, when the price of nivolumab reduced 80%, the probability of nivolumab plus chemotherapy being cost-effective was more than 50%.ConclusionsThe NMA and cost-effectiveness revealed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy is the most favorable first-line treatment for previously untreated ES-SCLC patients compared other ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens in China. The price reduction of nivolumab would make nivolumab plus chemotherapy be the most cost-effective option in future possible context.

Project description:Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) have a very short survival time even if they receive standard cytotoxic chemotherapy with etoposide and platinum (EP). Several randomized controlled trials have shown that patients with ED-SCLC who received a combination of EP plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had superior survival compared with those who received EP alone. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide a ranking of ICIs for our primary endpoints in terms of overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR), as well as our secondary endpoint in terms of adverse events. The fractional polynomial model was used to evaluate the adjusted hazard ratios for the survival indicators (OS and PFS). Treatment rank was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), as well as the probability of being best (Prbest) reference. EP plus nivolumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab had significant benefits compared with EP alone in terms of OS (Hazard Ratio HR = 0.67, 95% Confidence Interval CI = 0.46-0.98 for nivolumab, HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.91 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.59-0.90 for durvalumab) but no significant differences were observed for pembrolizumab or ipilimumab. The probability of nivolumab being ranked first among all treatment arms was highest (SCURA = 78.7%, Prbest = 46.7%). All EP plus ICI combinations had a longer PFS compared with EP alone (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.46-0.92 for nivolumab, HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.61-0.96 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.65-0.94 for durvalumab, HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.61-0.92 for pembrolizumab), and nivolumab was ranked first in terms of PFS (SCURA = 85.0%, Prbest = 66.8%). In addition, nivolumab had the highest probability of grade 3-4 adverse events (SUCRA = 84.8%) in our study. We found that nivolumab had the best PFS and OS in all combinations of ICIs and EP, but nivolumab also had the highest probability of grade 3-4 adverse events in our network meta-analysis. Further head-to head large-scale phase III randomized controlled studies are needed to verify our conclusions.

Project description:ObjectiveIn recent years, the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung carcinoma (ES-SCLC), but the optimal combination of ICI and standard chemotherapy strategy is yet to be established. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to identify which first-line combination strategy is optimal for patients with ES-SCLC.MethodsPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the proceedings of international conferences, including American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published through October 31, 2022. The collected primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).ResultsOur NMA study included six phase 3 and three phase 2 RCTs including 4037 patients and 10 first-line regimens. Regarding effectiveness, the addition of programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) or programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors to standard chemotherapy provided greater efficacy than chemotherapy alone. However, cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 inhibitors were not associated with satisfactory prognoses. Serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide (vs. standard chemotherapy, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.49-0.82) and nivolumab plus platinum-etoposide (HR = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.46-0.91) displayed the greatest benefit regarding OS. In terms of PFS, serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide yielded the best benefit of all treatments (HR = 0.48; 95% CI = 0.39-0.6). The combination of ICIs and chemotherapy caused more toxicity in general, but durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide (odds ratio [OR] = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.68-1.4), atezolizumab plus carboplatin-etoposide (OR = 1.04; 95% CI = 0.68-1.6), and adebrelimab plus platinum-etoposide (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.52-2) displayed similar safety as standard chemotherapy. Subgroup analysis by race illustrated that serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide was associated with the best OS in Asian patients. And in non-Asian patients, the combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors and chemotherapy (pembrolizumab plus platinum-etoposide, durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide, and durvalumab and tremelimumab plus platinum-etoposide) displayed superiority to standard chemotherapy.ConclusionsThe results of our NMA study suggested that serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide and nivolumab plus platinum-etoposide are associated with the best OS as first-line treatments for patients with ES-SCLC. Serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide was associated with the best PFS. In Asian patients, serplulimab plus carboplatin-etoposide had the best OS.Systematic review registrationThis study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42022345850.

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are increasingly used as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring no actionable mutations; however, data on their efficacy among patients presenting with intracranial lesions are limited. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of ICIs combined with chemotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients with measurable brain metastasis at initial diagnosis.MethodsOur study retrospectively analyzed clinical data of a total of 211 patients diagnosed with driver gene mutation-negative advanced NSCLC with measurable, asymptomatic brain metastasis at baseline from Hunan Cancer Hospital between January 1, 2019 and September 30, 2021. The patients were stratified into two groups according to the first-line treatment regimen received: ICI combined with chemotherapy ( n = 102) or chemotherapy ( n = 109). Systemic and intracranial objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed. Adverse events were also compared between the groups.ResultsCompared with the chemotherapy-based regimen, the ICI-containing regimen was associated with a significantly higher intracranial (44.1% [45/102] vs . 28.4% [31/109], χ2 = 5.620, P = 0.013) and systemic (49.0% [50/102] vs . 33.9% [37/109], χ2 = 4.942, P = 0.019) ORRs and longer intracranial (11.0 months vs . 7.0 months, P <0.001) and systemic (9.0 months vs . 5.0 months, P <0.001) PFS. Multivariable analysis consistently revealed an independent association between receiving ICI plus platinum-based chemotherapy as a first-line regimen and prolonged intracranial PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.73, P <0.001) and systemic PFS (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.35-0.66, P <0.001). No unexpected serious adverse effects were observed.ConclusionOur study provides real-world clinical evidence that ICI combined with chemotherapy is a promising first-line treatment option for driver gene mutation-negative advanced NSCLC patients who present with brain metastasis at initial diagnosis.Clinical trial registrationhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , OMESIA, NCT05129202.

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis based on mixed-effect models.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Systematic review registration

Publications

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis based on mixed-effect models.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets