Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of tivantinib in the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Tivantinib was designed to kill cancers by targeting the mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) protein. Although numerous tivantinib clinical trials are ongoing, tivantinib's efficacy and safety are still not clear. This meta-analysis was done to evaluate tivantinib's efficacy and safety in solid tumor treatment.PUBMED, EMBASE, and other databases were searched for eligible tivantinib clinical trials. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively) were pooled and analyzed to evaluate tivantinib's efficacy. Data concerning adverse events (Grade ? 3) were pooled to calculate relative risks (RRs) with 95% CI for tivantinib-treated compared with control arms.Patients (1824) from six randomized control trials (RCTs) were enrolled. Compared with controls, tivantinib produced a significant improvement in PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI 0.65-0.83) but not in OS. In the non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) subgroup, tivantinib combined with erlotinib prolonged patients' PFS when compared with controls (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.86). In the white population, tivantinib also significantly improve PFS between treatment and control arms (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.65-0.87). Tivantinib significantly improved OS in patients with high levels of MET expression. Tivantinib was shown to increase the risk of anemia and neutropenia.Tivantinib was better in prolonging PFS (not OS) in patients with solid tumors. High MET expression cancers may benefit from tivantinib. Tivantinib appeared to be well-tolerated by patients.

SUBMITTER: Zhang H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5762579 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The efficacy and safety of tivantinib in the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhang Hao H Bao Zhengqiang Z Liao Hongwei H Li Wen W Chen Zhihua Z Shen Huahao H Ying Songmin S

Oncotarget 20171103 68

<h4>Background</h4>Tivantinib was designed to kill cancers by targeting the mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) protein. Although numerous tivantinib clinical trials are ongoing, tivantinib's efficacy and safety are still not clear. This meta-analysis was done to evaluate tivantinib's efficacy and safety in solid tumor treatment.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>PUBMED, EMBASE, and other databases were searched for eligible tivantinib clinical trials. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence int ...[more]

PMID: 29348894

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:Vancomycin and teicoplanin are the glycopeptides currently in use for the treatment of infections caused by invasive beta-lactam-resistant gram-positive organisms. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that have compared vancomycin and teicoplanin administered systemically for the treatment of suspected or proven infections. A comprehensive search of trials without year, language, or publication status restrictions was performed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by using the fixed-effect model (RRs of >1 favor vancomycin). Twenty-four trials were included. All-cause mortality was similar overall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.21), and there was no significant heterogeneity. In trials that used adequate allocation concealment, the results favored teicoplanin (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.06), while in trials with unknown methods or inadequate concealment, the results favored vancomycin (RR, 3.61; 95% CI, 1.27 to 10.30). The latter trials might have recruited more severely ill patients. No other variable affected the RRs for mortality, including the assessment of glycopeptides administered empirically or for proven infections, neutropenia, the participant's age, and drug dosing. There were no significant differences between teicoplanin and vancomycin with regard to clinical failure (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.05), microbiological failure (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.65), and other efficacy outcomes. Lower RRs (in favor of teicoplanin) for clinical failure were observed with a lower risk of bias and when treatment was initiated for infections caused by gram-positive organisms rather than empirically. Total adverse events (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.74), nephrotoxicity (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.61), and red man syndrome were significantly less frequent with teicoplanin. Teicoplanin is not inferior to vancomycin with regard to efficacy and is associated with a lower adverse event rate than vancomycin.

Project description:In November 2021, the National Medical Products Administration (China) approved the marketing of envafolimab injection for the treatment of advanced defective mismatch repair (dMMR)/high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) solid tumors. Envafolimab became the first domestic PD-L1 inhibitor approved in China and the first worldwide approved subcutaneously injectable PD-L1 inhibitor. To the best of our knowledge, there are no reports of systematic analyses regarding the use of envafolimab in the treatment of advanced dMMR/MSI-H solid tumors. The present study was a single-arm meta-analysis performed on data systematically searched and retrieved from literature published on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infra-structure and Wan Fang databases on 1 October 2022. Quality assessment using the 20 items developed by the Canadian Institute of Health Economics. Data heterogenicity was evaluated using the I2 statistics. For datasets with I2>50%, the cumulative incidence and 95% CI for the outcomes of interests were calculated using the random effects model, whereas for I2<50% the fixed effects model was used. The current meta-analysis included four studies enrolling 181 patients with advanced dMMR/MSI-H solid tumors. The pooled objective remission rate was 29.53% (95% CI, 8.61-50.45%). The pooled disease control rate was 60.58% (95% CI, 31.79-89.38%). The pooled median progression-free survival was 4.89 months (95% CI, 1.86-7.93 months). The pooled overall survival (OS) rate was 73.38% (95% CI, 65.76-80.99%). The pooled 6-month and 12-month OS rates were 75.80% (95% CI, 57.02-94.58%) and 69.32% (95% CI, 51.92-86.72%), respectively. The combined data on the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of any grade from all the studies was 77.19% (95% CI, 63.15-91.23%). Most of the adverse reactions were mild and the rate of 3/4 grade TEAE was 10.37% (95% CI, 6.14-14.60%). Gevokizumab was effective and safe in the treatment of patients with advanced dMMR/MSI-H solid tumors and its convenience could significantly improve patient compliance; therefore, the clinical application of envafolimab is promising.

Dataset Information

The efficacy and safety of tivantinib in the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

The efficacy and safety of tivantinib in the treatment of solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets