Specific immunotherapy in hepatocellular cancer: A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Baradaran Noveiry B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6377153 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Specific immunotherapy in hepatocellular cancer: A systematic review.
Baradaran Noveiry Behnoud B Hirbod-Mobarakeh Armin A Khalili Nastaran N Hourshad Niloufar N Greten Tim F TF Abou-Alfa Ghassan K GK Rezaei Nima N
Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology 20170201 2
<h4>Background and aim</h4>In recent years, several novel immunotherapeutic approaches were developed and investigated in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We designed this systematic review, to evaluate clinical efficacy of specific immunotherapy in patients with HCC, according to the guidelines of Border of Immune Tolerance Education and Research Network (BITERN) and Cochrane collaboration.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched Medline, Scopus, CENTRAL, TRIP, DART, OpenGrey, and ProQuest thro ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundRenal cell cancer (RCC) is the tenth most common malignancy in adults. In recent years, several approaches of active and passive immunotherapy have been studied extensively in clinical trials of patients with RCC. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the clinical efficacy of various approaches of specific immunotherapy in patients with RCC.MethodsWe searched Medline, Scopus, CENTRAL, TRIP, DART, OpenGrey and ProQuest without any language filter through to 9 October 2015. One author reviewed search results for irrelevant and duplicate studies and two other authors independently extracted data from the studies. We collated study findings and calculated a weighted treatment effect across studies using Review Manager (version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration).ResultsWe identified 14 controlled studies with 4013 RCC patients after excluding irrelevant and duplicate studies from 11,319 references retrieved from a literature search. Overall, five autologous tumor cell vaccines, one peptide-based vaccine, one virus-based vaccine and one dendritic cell (DC)-based vaccine were studied in nine controlled studies of active specific immunotherapies. A total of three passive immunotherapies including autologous cytokine-induced killer (CIK) cells, auto lymphocyte therapy (ALT) and autologous lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells were studied in four controlled studies. The clinical efficacy of tumor lysate-pulsed DCs, with CIK cells was studied in one controlled trial concurrently. The overall quality of studies was fair. Meta-analysis of seven studies showed that patients undergoing specific immunotherapy had significantly higher overall survival (OS) than those in the control group [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.58-0.89, p = 0.003]. In addition, a meta-analysis of four studies showed that there was a significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between patients undergoing specific immunotherapy and patients in control groups (HR = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.73-1, p = 0.05).ConclusionsResults of this systematic review suggest that some specific immunotherapies such as Reniale, ACHN-IL-2, Newcastle disease virus (NDV) virus-infected autologous tumor cells, ALT and CIK treatment could be beneficiary for the treatment of patients with RCC.
| S-EPMC5298411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Specific immunotherapies, including vaccines with autologous tumor cells and tumor antigen-specific monoclonal antibodies, are important treatments for PC patients. To evaluate the clinical outcomes of PC-specific immunotherapy, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relevant published clinical trials. The effects of specific immunotherapy were compared with those of nonspecific immunotherapy and the meta-analysis was executed with results regarding the overall survival (OS), immune responses data, and serum cancer markers data. The pooled analysis was performed by using the random-effects model. We found that significantly improved OS was noted for PC patients utilizing specific immunotherapy and an improved immune response was also observed. In conclusion, specific immunotherapy was superior in prolonging the survival time and enhancing immunological responses in PC patients.
| S-EPMC5318641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveSubcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) is approved in the United States for the treatment of pediatric asthma and rhinitis; sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) does not have regulatory approval but is used in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of pediatric asthma and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.MethodsTwo independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion, extracted data, and graded the strength of evidence for each clinical outcome. All studies were randomized controlled trials of children with allergic asthma or rhinoconjunctivitis treated with SCIT or an aqueous formulation of SLIT. Data sources were Medline, Embase, LILACS, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through May 2012.ResultsIn 13 trials, 920 children received SCIT or usual care; in 18 studies, 1583 children received SLIT or usual care. Three studies compared SCIT with SLIT head-to-head in 135 children. The strength of evidence is moderate that SCIT improves asthma and rhinitis symptoms and low that SCIT improves conjunctivitis symptoms and asthma medication scores. Strength of evidence is high that SLIT improves asthma symptoms and moderate that SLIT improves rhinitis and conjunctivitis symptoms and decreases medication usage. The evidence is low to support SCIT over SLIT for improving asthma or rhinitis symptoms or medication usage. Local reactions were frequent with SCIT and SLIT. There was 1 report of anaphylaxis with SCIT.ConclusionsEvidence supports the efficacy of both SCIT and SLIT for the treatment of asthma and rhinitis in children.
| S-EPMC4074663 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been widely used in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), while only a subset of patients experience clinical benefit. We aimed to investigate the effects of viral etiology on response to ICIs in HCC and depict the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) of virally infected and uninfected HCC.MethodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials up to August 2021. Clinical trials reporting the efficacy of ICIs in HCC were eligible. Baseline characteristics including first author, year of publication, National Clinical Trials (NCT) registry number, study region, sample sizes, interventions, line of treatment, and viral status were extracted. Meta-analysis was conducted to generate combined odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on random or fixed effect model, depending on heterogeneity. Tumor immune microenvironment was depicted using ESTIMATE and CIBERSORT algorithm.ResultsEight studies involving 1,520 patients were included. Combined data suggested that there was no significant difference of objective response rate (ORR) between virally infected HCC and non-viral HCC patients [OR = 1.03 (95% CI, 0.77-1.37; I2 = 30.9%, pH = 0.152)]. Similarly, difference was not observed on ORR between HBV-HCC and HCV-HCC patients [OR = 0.74 (95% CI, 0.52-1.06; I2 = 7.4%, pH = 0.374)]. The infiltration of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment did not differ by etiology except for M0 macrophages, M2 macrophages, regulatory T cells, naive B cells, follicular helper T cells, activated dendritic cells, activated mast cells, and plasma cells. Despite differences in infiltration observed in specific cell types, the immune score and stromal score were generally comparable among etiology groups.ConclusionViral etiology may not be considered as the selection criteria for patients receiving ICIs in HCC, and viral status has little impact on TIME remodeling during HCC tumorigenesis.
| S-EPMC8511422 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoints inhibitors (ICIs) have emerged as a treatment option for several malignancies. Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab have been approved for the management of advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We aimed to systematically review the literature and summarize the characteristics and outcomes of patients with HCC treated with ICIs.MethodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed according to the PRISMA statement (end of search date: November 7, 2020). Quality of evidence assessment was also performed.ResultsSixty-three articles including 2,402 patients were analyzed, 2,376 of whom received ICIs for unresectable HCC. Response to ICIs could be evaluated in 2,116 patients; the overall objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 22.7% and 60.7%, respectively, and the mean overall survival (OS) was 15.8 months. The ORR, DCR, and OS for nivolumab (n = 846) were 19.7%, 51.1%, and 18.7 months, respectively; for pembrolizumab (n = 435) they were 20.7%, 64.6% and 13.3 months, respectively. The combination of atezolizumab/bevacizumab (n = 460) demonstrated an ORR and DCR of 30% and 77%, respectively. The overall rate of treatment discontinuation because of adverse events was 14.9%. Fifteen patients received ICIs in the liver transplant (LT) setting (one pre-LT for bridging, 14 for post-LT recurrence); fatal graft rejection was reported in 40.0% (n = 6/15) and mortality in 80.0% (n = 12/15).ConclusionICIs are safe and effective against unresectable HCC, but caution is warranted regarding their use in the LT setting because of the high graft rejection rate.Implications for practiceThis systematic review pooled the outcomes from studies reporting on the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the management of 2,402 patients with advanced-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), 2,376 of whom had unresectable HCC. The objective response rate and disease control rate were 22.7% and 60.7%, respectively, and the mean overall survival was 15.8 months. The overall rate of treatment discontinuation because of adverse events was 14.9%. Fifteen patients received ICIs in the liver transplant (LT) setting (one pre-LT for bridging, 14 for post-LT recurrence). Six of these patients experienced graft rejection (40.0%).
| S-EPMC8176986 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cancer immunotherapy is a rapidly growing field in oncology. One attractive feature of cancer immunotherapy is the purported combination of minimal toxicity and durable responses. However such treatments are often very expensive. Given the wide-spread concern over rising health care costs, it is important for all stakeholders to be well-informed on the cost and cost-effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies. We performed a comprehensive literature review of cost and cost-effectiveness research on therapeutic cancer vaccines and monoclonal antibodies, to better understand the economic impacts of these treatments. We summarized our literature searches into three tables by types of papers: systematic review of economic studies of a specific agent, cost and cost-effectiveness analysis. Our review showed that out of the sixteen immunotherapy agents approved, nine had relevant published economic studies. Five out of the nine studied immunotherapy agents had been covered in systematic reviews. Among those, only one (rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma) was found to be cost-effective. Of the four immunotherapy drugs not covered in systematic reviews (alemtuzumab, ipilimumab, sipuleucel-T, ofatumumab), high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was reported for each. Many immunotherapies have not had economic evaluations, and those that have been studied show high ICERs or frank lack of cost-effectiveness. One major hurdle in improving the cost-effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies is to identify predictive biomarkers for selecting appropriate patients as recipients of these expensive therapies. We discuss the implications surrounding the economic factors involved in cancer immunotherapies and suggest that further research on cost and cost-effectiveness of newer cancer vaccines and immunotherapies are warranted as this is a rapidly growing field with many new drugs on the horizon.
| S-EPMC4514043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prostate cancer treatment is currently based on surgical removal, radiotherapy, and hormone therapy. In recent years, another therapeutic method has emerged-immunological treatment. Immunotherapy modulates and strengthens one's immune responses against cancer. Neoplastic cells naturally escape from the control of the immune system, and the main goal of immune therapy is to bring the control back. Satisfying outcomes after treatment of advanced melanoma and lung cancer suggest a great potential of immunotherapy as an approach for other tumors' treatment, especially in patients primarily introduced to palliative care. After initial clinical trials, immunotherapy seems to have different side effects than chemotherapy. Prostate cancer was the first neoplasm in which a specific vaccine significantly improved survival. There is a tremendous potential for synergistic combinations of immunotherapy with conventional cancer treatments. A combination of several drugs or methods can be a key in radical treatment of metastatic prostate cancer as demonstrated by preliminary studies.
| S-EPMC5646317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:?? T cells contribute to the front line of lymphoid antitumor surveillance and bridge the gap between innate and adaptive immunity. They can be readily expanded to high numbers in vivo and in vitro, starting from the blood of cancer patients, and a number of Phase I trials have demonstrated that these cells can be employed in cancer immunotherapy. Sufficient patients have received ?? T cell-based immunotherapies in the context of clinical trials to evaluate their utility, and to inform the direction of new trials. A systematic approach was used to identify Phase I, Phase II, and feasibility studies testing ?? T cell-based immunotherapy in cancer patients. Studies were excluded from further analysis if they did not provide patient-specific data. Data were compiled to evaluate efficacy, with stratification by treatment approach. When possible, comparisons were made with the efficacy of second-line conventional therapeutic approaches for the same malignancy. Twelve eligible studies were identified, providing information on 157 patients who had received ?? T cell-based immunotherapy. The comparison of objective response data suggests that ?? T cell-based immunotherapy is superior to current second-line therapies for advanced renal cell carcinoma and prostate cancer, but not for non-small cell lung carcinoma. An evaluation of pooled data from 132 published in vitro experiments shows a consistent improvement in the cytotoxicity of ?? T cells in the presence of antitumor antibodies. Immunotherapy using ?? T cells alone shows promising clinical activity, but there is a strong preclinical rationale for combining this treatment modality with cancer-targeting antibodies to augment its efficacy.
| S-EPMC3984269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignancies, with an increasing incidence. With advances in surgical techniques and instrumentation and the development of molecular-target drugs, a number of potentially curative treatments have become available. Management of HCC patients depends on the stage of their tumor. Liver resection remains the first choice for very early-stage HCC, but it is being challenged by local ablative therapy. For early-stage HCC that meet the Milan criteria, liver transplantation still offers a better outcome; however, local ablative therapy can be a substitute when transplantation is not feasible. Local ablation is also used as a bridging therapy toward liver transplantation. HCC recurrence is the main obstacle to successful treatment, and there is currently no effective means of preventing or treating HCC recurrence. Transarterial therapy is considered suitable for intermediate-stage HCC, while sorafenib is recommended for advanced-stage HCC. This stage-based approach to therapy not only provides acceptable outcomes but also improves the quality of life of HCC patients. Because of the complexity of HCC, therapeutic approaches must be adapted according to the characteristics of each individual patient. This review discusses the current standards and trends in the treatment of HCC.
| S-EPMC3760458 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundEndometrial cancer (EC) represents the sixth most common female tumor. In the advanced setting, the prognosis is dismal with limited treatment options. Platinum-based chemotherapy represents the actual standard of care in first-line chemotherapy, but no standard second-line chemotherapy is approved, with less than 1/4 of patients responding to second-line chemotherapy. In the last 10 years, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed the treatment landscape of many solid tumors.MethodsThe review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database, and conference abstracts from international societies, up to November 2021. Clinical trials employing ICIs in advanced EC, written in English, were included. Reviews, letters, and commentaries were excluded. The overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety (number and grade of treatment-related adverse events [TRAEs]) were evaluated.Results15 studies, for a total of 1,627 patients, were included: 14 non-randomized phase I/II trials and 1 randomized phase III trial. Anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, dostarlimab) and anti-PD-L1 agents (avelumab, atezolizumab, durvalumab) were administered as single agents; pembrolizumab and nivolumab were combined with the tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKI) lenvatinib and cabozantinib, respectively; and durvalumab was associated with anti-CTLA4 tremelimumab. 4 studies selected only MSI patients. Single agents determined an ORR from 26.7% to 58% among MSI patients, from 3% to 26.7% among MSS patients. DCR ranged from 53.5% to 88.9% in MSI, 31.4% to 35.2% in MSS patients. The combination of TKI and ICIs determined 32% to 63.6% of ORR in all-comers, 32%-36.2% in MSS patients. 54.2% to 76% of patients developed TRAEs. The combination of ICIs and TKI achieved a higher toxicity rate than single agents (≥G3 TRAEs 88.9%).ConclusionICIs represent an effective option for pretreated advanced EC patients with a tolerable profile. Given the encouraging results in MSI patients, every woman diagnosed with EC should be investigated for MS status. In MSS women, the combination of ICIs and TKI is more effective than monotherapy, notwithstanding safety concerns. PD-L1 cannot predict ICI response, whereas other biomarkers such as MSI and tumor mutational burden seem more accurate. Ongoing randomized trials will further clarify the role of these therapeutic options.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, CRD42021293538.
| S-EPMC9047829 | biostudies-literature