Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Immunotherapy is a novel treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Immunotherapy includes two main broad classes of therapeutic vaccines and immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as cytokines, biological response modifiers and cellular therapy. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different classes of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. Literature search was done on Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and grade ?3 adverse events. Twenty randomized controlled trials were finally identified in our study. Efficacy analysis indicated an improvement of OS in advanced NSCLC patients after treating by therapeutic vaccines and immune checkpoint inhibitors, but not for other immunomodulators. Safety analysis showed that immunotherapy was well-tolerated. All kinds of grade ?3 adverse events were similar between experimental group and control group except that neutropenia and thrombocytopenia had a higher incidence in patients received vaccines. In conclusion, immunotherapy is a promising treatment for advanced NSCLC patients. Our findings will be further confirmed and supplemented by several phase II and phase III RCTs which are going to complete in near future.

SUBMITTER: Zhou L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4997317 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhou Liang L Wang Xi-Ling XL Deng Qing-Long QL Du Yan-Qiu YQ Zhao Nai-Qing NQ

Scientific reports 20160825

Immunotherapy is a novel treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Immunotherapy includes two main broad classes of therapeutic vaccines and immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as cytokines, biological response modifiers and cellular therapy. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different classes of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. Literature search was done on Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library. T ...[more]

PMID: 27558285

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with resectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).BackgroundSeveral studies have reported the outcomes of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with ESCC. However, phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with long-term outcomes and the comparison of different therapeutic strategies are lacking.MethodsStudies involving patients with advanced ESCC treated with preoperative neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were searched through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library up to July 1, 2022. The outcomes were presented as proportions and pooled respectively by fixed or random effect model depending on the heterogeneity between studies. All analyses were performed using the R packages meta 5.5-0 and meta-for 3.4-0.ResultsThirty trials involving 1406 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled pathological complete response (pCR) rate for neoadjuvant immunotherapy was 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-0.33). The pCR rate of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemoradiotherapy (nICRT) was significantly higher than that of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (nICT) (nICRT: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.31-0.65; nICT: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.26-0.33; p=0.03). No significant difference in efficacy was observed between the different chemotherapy agents and treatment cycles. The incidences of grade 1-2 and 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were 0.71 (95% CI: 0.56-0.84) and 0.16 (95% CI: 0.09-0.25), respectively. Patients treated with nICRT and carboplatin had a higher incidence of grade 3-4 TRAEs compared with those treated with nICT (nICRT: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.17-0.77; nICT: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.07-0.22; p=0.03) and cisplatin (carboplatin: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.15-0.53; cisplatin: 0.04, 95% CI: 0.01-0.09; p<0.01).ConclusionNeoadjuvant immunotherapy has good efficacy and safety profiles in patients with locally advanced ESCC. Additional RCTs with long-term survival data are warranted.

Project description:BackgroundPatients with advanced breast cancer usually have poor prognosis. Apatinib is a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, and the reports regarding the efficacy and safety of apatinib monotherapy for advanced breast cancer in the current literature are controversial. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to collect and pool efficacy and safety data of apatinib monotherapy for advanced breast cancer with the aim of providing up-to-date evidence to aid clinical practice.MethodsThis study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020190049). Three literature databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, were searched. For evaluating efficacy, the objective response rate and disease control rate were extracted or calculated. Safety was evaluated in terms of the proportions of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events. The pooled proportions of the outcomes and their 95% confidence interval were shown. The Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival and progression-free survival were pooled from the extracted data of the included studies. Furthermore, pooled medians for overall survival and progression-free survival were calculated. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsSix studies were included and deemed eligible for further quality evaluation and analysis. The pooled objective response rate and disease control rate were 20.4% and 71.6%, respectively. The pooled proportions of four hematologic adverse events ranged from 2.6% to 6.9%. The pooled proportions of hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, transaminase increased, and proteinuria ranged from 4.1% to 24.3%, and other non-hematologic adverse events were <1%. The pooled median progression-free survival and overall survival were 4.00 and 10.43 months, respectively, in cases of advanced breast cancer treated with apatinib.ConclusionsThis study confirms the reliable efficacy of apatinib monotherapy for advanced breast cancer. However, non-hematologic grade 3-4 adverse events, especially hypertension, are more frequently observed during apatinib treatment than during treatment with other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as sunitinib or sorafenib.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42020190049.

Project description:BackgroundBrain metastases (BMs) indicate poor outcomes and are commonly excluded in immunotherapy clinical trials in advanced lung cancer; moreover, the effect of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy is inconsistent and inconclusive. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the influence of BM status on immunotherapy efficacy in advanced lung cancer.MethodsElectronic databases and all major conference proceedings were searched without language restrictions according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. We extracted randomized clinical trials on lung cancer immunotherapy that had available overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) data based on the BM status. All analyses were performed using random effects models.ResultsFourteen randomized clinical trials with 9,089 patients were identified. Immunotherapy conferred a survival advantage to BM patients [OS-hazard ratio (HR), 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.58-0.90; P = 0.004; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87, P = 0.003]. Non-BM patients could also derive a survival benefit from immunotherapy (OS-HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.80; P <0.001; and PFS-HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.82, P <0.001). The pooled ratios of OS-HRs and PFS-HRs reported in BM patients versus non-BM patients were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.78-1.18; P = 0.72) and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.79-1.20; P = 0.78), respectively, indicating no statistically significant difference between them. Subsequent sensitivity analyses did not alter the results. Subgroup analyses according to tumor type, line of therapy, immunotherapy type, study design, and representation of BM patients reconfirmed these findings.ConclusionWe demonstrated that BM status did not significantly influence the immunotherapy efficacy in lung cancer, suggesting that both BM and non-BM patients could obtain comparable benefits.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier (CRD42020207446).

Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets