Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for advanced melanoma: a Bayesian network analysis.

ABSTRACT: We aimed to compare and rank the effects of 9 immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for treating advanced melanoma.We searched Pubmed, Cochrane databases, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials of the immune checkpoint inhibitor-related treatments for advanced melanoma. Analysis was done on a Bayesian framework.Twelve trials including 5413 patients were identified. Ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab were significantly more efficacious for progression-free survival (PFS) than ipilimumab (hazard ratio [HR], 0.38, 0.50, and 0.58, respectively), ipilimumab plus chemotherapy (0.45, 0.60, and 0.70, respectively), or ipilimumab plus sargramostim (0.44, 0.57, and 0.67, respectively). Ipilimumab plus gp100 was significantly less efficacious for PFS than the remaining eight immune checkpoint inhibitor-related strategies. Pembrolizumab was significantly more efficacious than ipilimumab and ipilimumab plus gp100 (HR, 0.66, and 0.64, respectively) in improving overall survival (OS). Nivolumab significantly improved OS over tremelimumab (HR, 0.48). Ipilimumab plus sargramostim was ranked the second most effective strategy in terms of OS and well tolerated. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab showed the best profile of acceptability, with significantly less high-grade adverse events than ipilimumab (odds ratio [OR], 0.49 and 0.50, respectively), tremelimumab (0.21 and 0.21, respectively), ipilimumab plus chemotherapy (0.13 and 0.13, respectively), or ipilimumab plus nivolumab (0.15 and 0.15, respectively).Nivolumab, pembrolizumab and ipilimumab plus sargramostim might be optimum treatments for advanced melanoma because they have the most favorable balance between benefits and acceptability. Ipilimumab plus nivolumab is the most effective in prolonging PFS, but is far more toxic than nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

SUBMITTER: Li X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5663542 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for advanced melanoma: a Bayesian network analysis.

Li Xin X Wang Junpeng J Yao Yun Y Yang Lei L Li Zhiqin Z Yu Cheng C Zhao Peiyan P Yu Yongli Y Wang Liying L

Oncotarget 20170701 48

<h4>Objectives</h4>We aimed to compare and rank the effects of 9 immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for treating advanced melanoma.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched Pubmed, Cochrane databases, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials of the immune checkpoint inhibitor-related treatments for advanced melanoma. Analysis was done on a Bayesian framework.<h4>Results</h4>Twelve trials including 5413 patients were identified. Ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab, an ...[more]

PMID: 29137370

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: Multiple immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies have been widely used as adjuvant treatments for high-risk resected melanoma, with unclear comparative efficacy and safety. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception until 6 June 2023. We included RCTs that assess adjuvant ICIs or targeted therapies in high-risk resected melanoma. Frequentist random-effect network meta-analyses (NMA) were performed. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results: Eleven trials including 10,712 patients and comparing 10 treatments (nivolumab [Nivo], ipilimumab 3 mg/kg [Ipi3], Ipi10, pembrolizumab [Pemb], vemurafenib [Vemu], bevacizumab [Beva], Nivo + Ipi1, Nivo + Ipi3, dabrafenib plus trametinib [Dab + Tram], and placebo/observation [Pla/Obs]) were included. NMA showed that all treatments showed RFS benefit over placebo/observation except Ipi3 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05). Combination therapy of Nivo + Ipi3 was the most effective treatment, which significantly improved RFS compared with other treatments. NMA also showed that all treatments were associated with an increased risk of grade 3-5 adverse events over placebo/observation except Nivo (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80). NMA suggested that Nivo and Pemb were the two safest treatments except for placebo/observation. Although three combination therapies ranked as the top three in terms of RFS, they did not show significant overall survival benefits compared to monotherapies including Pemb, Nivo, Ipi3, and Ipi10. Conclusion: In this NMA, adjuvant Nivo and Pemb are the preferred options in patients with resected melanoma considering the benefits and harms. Combination therapy of Nivo + Ipi3 may be a promising strategy, but more evidence from phase 3 trials is needed. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=438667, PROSPERO (CRD42023438667).

Project description:BackgroundThrombolytic agents and anticoagulants are the two classes of medication used in the treatment of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). There is continuous renewal and iteration of thrombolytic agents, and the efficacy and adverse effects of different agents have different effects on PE due to their different mechanisms of action.ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different thrombolytic agents in the treatment of all types of acute PE: hemodynamically unstable PE (massive PE) and hemodynamically stable PE (submassive PE and low-risk PE), using a network meta-analysis.MethodsA search was conducted of the following databases: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thrombolytic agents with heparin or other thrombolytic agents in patients with acute PE; the clinical outcomes included patient mortality, recurrent PE, pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP) after treatment, and major and minor bleeding. The measurement duration of outcome indicators was the longest follow-up period. Thereafter, a network meta-analysis was performed using a Bayesian network framework.ResultsA total of 29 RCTs (3,067 patients) were included, of which 6 studies (304 patients) were massive PE, 14 studies (2,173 patients) were submassive PE, 1 study (83 patients) included massive and submassive PE, and 8 studies (507 patients) were PE of unknown type. The treatment regimens included thrombolytic therapy (alteplase, reteplase, tenecteplase, streptokinase, and urokinase) and anticoagulant therapy alone. The results showed that the mortality using thrombolytic agents (except tenecteplase) was significantly lower compared with heparin. The recurrence of PE with alteplase was significantly lower compared with heparin (RR = 0.23, 95% CI, 0.04, 0.65). The PASP after using alteplase was significantly lower compared with heparin (mean difference = -11.36, 95% CI, -21.45, -1.56). Compared with heparin, the incidence of minor bleeding associated with tenecteplase was higher (RR = 3.27, 95% CI, 1.36, 7.39); compared with streptokinase, the incidence of minor bleeding associated with tenecteplase was higher (RR = 3.22, 95% CI, 1.01, 11.10).ConclusionFor patients with acute PE, four thrombolytic agents (alteplase, reteplase, streptokinase, and urokinase) appeared to be superior in efficacy compared with anticoagulants alone due to a reduction in mortality and no increase in bleeding risk. Alteplase may be a better choice because it not only reduced mortality but also reduced PE recurrence rate and treated PASP. Tenecteplase did not reduce mortality compared with anticoagulants alone and may not be a good choice of thrombolytic agent due to an increase in minor bleeding compared with streptokinase and anticoagulants alone. Thrombolytic drugs should be rationally selected to optimize the thrombolytic regimen and achieve as good a balance as possible between thrombolysis and bleeding.

Project description:Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combined ICIs are not clear. This meta-analysis (MA) is aimed to update the efficacy and safety of ICIs by comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of advanced MM. Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, EbscoHost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy and safety of ICIs between a single ICI and combined ICIs. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on the study heterogeneity. Results: A total of nine RCTs were included in this MA. Regarding the efficacy, combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy showed statistically significant prolonged OS and PFS with HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.53, 0.79], p <0.0001 and HR 0.48, 95% CI [0.38, 0.60], p<0.0001 respectively. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed statistically significant longer ORR than monotherapy; with RR 2.15, 95% CI [1.63, 2.84], p <0.00001. In terms of safety, the incidence of all AEs which include any AEs, high-grade, haematological, gastrointestinal, dermatological, pulmonary, liver and endocrine AEs were significantly lower with monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) of ICI compared to combination ICI therapy with a p-value <0.00001 to 0.03. Conclusion: Efficacy of the combined nivolumab and ipilimumab was better than a single ICI, especially in the treatment of advanced MM. Although combination therapy showed better efficacy than monotherapy, monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) was safer than combination therapy as it tended to decrease the incidence of most of the treatment-related AEs.

Project description:Context: Several interventions are available for the management of hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), but no studies have compared their relative efficacy in a single analysis. This study aims to compare and determine the effectiveness of available interventions for HIE using direct and indirect data. Methods: Large randomized trials were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, AMED, and Cochrane Library of Clinical Trials database from inception until June 30, 2018. Two independent reviewers extracted study data and performed quality assessment. Direct and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to obtained pooled results comparing the effectiveness of different therapies used in HIE on mortality, neurodevelopmental delay at 18 months, as well as adverse events. Their probability of having the highest efficacy and safety was estimated and ranked. The certainty of evidence for the primary outcomes of mortality and mortality or neurodevelopmental delay at 18 months was evaluated using GRADE criteria. Results: Fifteen studies comparing five interventions were included in the network meta-analysis. Whole body cooling [Odds ratio: 0.62 (95% credible interval: 0.46-0.83); 8 trials, high certainty of evidence] was the most effective treatment in reducing the risk of mortality, followed by selective head cooling (0.73; 0.48-1.11; 2 trials, moderate certainty of evidence) and use of magnesium sulfate (0.79; 0.20-3.06; 2 trials, low certainty of evidence). Whole body hypothermia (0.48; 0.33-0.71; 5 trials), selective head hypothermia (0.54; 0.32-0.89; 2 trials), and erythropoietin (0.36; 0.19-0.66; 2 trials) were more effective for reducing the risk of mortality and neurodevelopmental delay at 18 months (moderate to high certainty). Among neonates treated for HIE, the use of erythropoietin (0.36; 0.18-0.74, 2 trials) and whole body hypothermia (0.61; 0.45-0.83; 7 trials) were associated with lower rates of cerebral palsy. Similarly, there were lower rates of seizures among neonates treated with erythropoietin (0.35; 0.13-0.94; 1 trial) and whole body hypothermia (0.64; 0.46-0.87, 7 trials). Conclusion: The findings support current guidelines using therapeutic hypothermia in neonates with HIE. However, more trials are needed to determine the role of adjuvant therapy to hypothermia in reducing the risk of mortality and/or neurodevelopmental delay.

Dataset Information

Comparative efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for advanced melanoma: a Bayesian network analysis.

Publications

Comparative efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related therapies for advanced melanoma: a Bayesian network analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets