IMpower, CASPIAN, and more: exploring the optimal first-line immunotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Huang C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7275499 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
IMpower, CASPIAN, and more: exploring the optimal first-line immunotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.
Huang Chengliang C Gan Gregory N GN Zhang Jun J
Journal of hematology & oncology 20200605 1
The life expectancy of extensive-stage small cell lung (ES-SCLC) cancer patients has not improved in the last 2-3 decades until two recent trials (CASPIAN and IMpower133) showing the addition of anti-programmed death ligand (PD-L1) therapy to chemotherapy has survival benefit over chemotherapy alone. However, such benefit is relatively small and was not even observed in some other trials using immunotherapy, raising the question of optimal chemoimmunotherapy combination in the 1st-line setting f ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIn the phase 3 CASPIAN study (NCT03043872), first-line durvalumab plus etoposide and cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) significantly improved OS versus EP alone in patients with extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.59-0.91; p = 0.0047]). Here we report results for a preplanned subgroup analysis of patients recruited in Japan.MethodsTreatment-naïve patients with ES-SCLC received either 4 cycles of durvalumab 1500 mg plus EP q3w followed by maintenance durvalumab 1500 mg q4w until disease progression or up to 6 cycles of EP q3w. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), safety, and tolerability.ResultsIn the Japan subgroup, 18 patients were randomized to durvalumab plus EP and 16 patients to EP. At the interim analysis with a median follow-up of 12.5 months in the subgroup, OS numerically favored durvalumab plus EP versus EP (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.26‒2.26]; median not reached vs 15.2 months). PFS was similar for durvalumab plus EP versus EP (HR 0.90 [95% CI 0.43‒1.89]). Confirmed ORR was 89% with durvalumab plus EP versus 69% with EP. Adverse events (AEs) of CTCAE grade 3 or 4 were reported in 78% versus 94% of patients in the durvalumab plus EP versus EP arms. There were no AEs leading to treatment discontinuation or death in the Japan subgroup.ConclusionFirst-line durvalumab plus EP was effective and well tolerated in Japanese patients with ES-SCLC. Despite the small size of the Japan subgroup, results were generally consistent with the global study population.
| S-EPMC8134304 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of two recently approved first-line chemo-immunotherapies [atezolizumab combined with etoposide and platinum (AEP) and durvalumab combined with etoposide and platinum (DEP)] for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in the United States.Material and methodsA Markov model was built to compare the cost and effectiveness of AEP, DEP, and etoposide plus platinum (EP) over a 10-year time horizon. Clinical efficacy and safety data were extracted from the IMpower 133 and CASPIAN trials. Health state utilities were obtained from published literature. Costs were collected from an US payer perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to explore the uncertainty bound to model parameters.ResultsFor the model cohort of adult patients with treatment-naive ES-SCLC, AEP was associated with marginal improved quality adjusted life years (QALYs) by 0.016 and reduced costs by $5,737 compared with DEP. When comparing the two chemo-immunotherapies with EP chemotherapy, AEP and DEP increased the QALYs by 0.162 QALYs and 0.146, respectively. However, both chemo-immunotherapies were associated with substantially health costs than EP, resulting in ICERs of $382,469 per QALY and $464,593 per QALY, respectively.ConclusionIn this cost-effectiveness study, first-line AEP represented a dominant treatment strategy compared with DEP. Despite neither first-line AEP nor first-line DEP was cost-effective compared with EP chemotherapy, AEP was able to provide a more efficient balance between incremental cost and QALY than DEP. When new combination therapies with remarkable effect become pivotal in the first-line treatment, the price reduction of these drugs may be essential to achieving cost-effectiveness.
| S-EPMC8276096 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chemotherapy is known to improve overall survival (OS) in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). ICIs have different response patterns and survival kinetics characteristics from those of the traditional chemotherapy. In first-line treatment for ES-SCLC, there is an urgent need for surrogate endpoints for the early and accurate prediction of OS. This study aimed to assess progression-free survival (PFS), milestone OS rate, milestone restricted mean survival time (RMST), overall response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) as proposed surrogate endpoints for OS in ES-SCLC for first-line immunotherapy trials.MethodsBetween January 1, 2013, and December 2020, published articles on randomized clinical trials of ICIs plus chemotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC as first-line therapy were searched in PubMed. Abstracts from the ESMO, ASCO, and WCLC, reported from 2018 onwards, were also searched. A weighted regression analysis based on the weighted least squares method was performed on log-transformed estimates of treatment effect, and the determination coefficient (R2) was calculated to evaluate the association between treatment effect on the surrogate endpoint and OS.ResultsSeven trials, representing 3,009 patients, were included to make up a total of 16 analyzed arms. The ratio of the 12-month OS milestone rate (r = -0.790, P = 0.011, R2 = 0.717) and 12-month OS milestone RMST (r = 0.798, P = 0.010, R2 = 0.702) was strongly correlated with the hazard ratio (HR) for OS. The strongest association was observed between the ratio of the 24-month OS milestone RMST and the HR for OS (r = 0.922, P = 0.001, R2 = 0.825). No associations were observed between the HR for OS and PFS and the RR for ORR and DCR.ConclusionsThe results suggested a strong correlation among the ratio of OS milestone rates at 12 months, ratios of OS milestone RMSTs at 12 and 24 months, and HR for OS. The results indicate that OS milestone rates and OS milestone RMSTs could be considered surrogate endpoints of OS in future first-line immunotherapy trials for ES-SCLC.
| S-EPMC8316832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the phase III CASPIAN study, first-line durvalumab in combination with etoposide plus either cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus EP alone in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP numerically improved OS versus EP, but did not reach statistical significance. Here we report updated OS in censored patients after median follow-up of >3 years.Patients and methods805 patients with treatment-naïve ES-SCLC were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to durvalumab plus EP, durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP, or EP. The two primary endpoints were OS for durvalumab plus EP versus EP and for durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP versus EP.ResultsAs of 22 March 2021 (median follow-up 39.4 months, 86% maturity), durvalumab plus EP continued to demonstrate improved OS versus EP: hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60-0.86; nominal P = 0.0003]; median OS was 12.9 versus 10.5 months, and 36-month OS rate was 17.6% versus 5.8%. Durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP continued to numerically improve OS versus EP: HR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.67-0.97; nominal P = 0.0200); median OS was 10.4 months, and 36-month OS rate was 15.3%. Twenty-seven and nineteen patients in the durvalumab plus EP and durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP arms, respectively, remained on durvalumab treatment at data cut-off.ConclusionsThree times more patients were estimated to be alive at 3 years when treated with durvalumab plus EP versus EP, with the majority still receiving durvalumab at data cut-off, further establishing durvalumab plus EP as first-line standard of care for ES-SCLC.
| S-EPMC9161394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains a poorly understood disease with aggressive features, high relapse rates, and significant morbidity as well as mortality, yet persistently limited treatment options. For three decades, the treatment algorithm of SCLC has been stagnant despite multiple attempts to find alternative therapeutic options that could improve responses and increase survival rates. On the other hand, immunotherapy has been a thriving concept that revolutionized treatment options in multiple malignancies, rendering previously untreatable diseases potentially curable. In extensive stage SCLC, immunotherapy significantly altered the course of disease and is now part of the treatment algorithm in the first-line setting. Nevertheless, the important questions that arise are how best to implement immunotherapy, who would benefit the most, and finally, how to enhance responses.
| S-EPMC8534845 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSelecting between programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor or programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients urgently needs to be answered.MethodsEligible phase 3 randomized clinical trials evaluating regimens based on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line treatment in ES-SCLC patients were systematically searched on the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and major international conferences from 01/01/2018 to 18/09/2023. The individual patient data (IPD) were recuperated from the Kaplan-Meier curves of the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of the included studies using the IPDfromKM method. The reconstructed data were pooled into unified arms, including the PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy group (PD-L1 group), PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy group (PD-1 group), and PD-1 (L1) inhibitor and chemotherapy plus other (anlotinib group, tiragolumab group, and tremelimumab group). Subsequently, the PD-L1 group was indirectly compared with the other groups. A standard statistical analysis was conducted using the "survival" package for the time-to-event endpoint. The primary outcomes were the OS and PFS of the PD-L1 group and the PD-1 inhibitor group. The secondary outcomes included safety and the 12- and 24-month restricted mean survival time (RMST) of the PD-L1 group and PD-1 group.ResultsA total of 9 studies including 11 immunotherapy cohorts were included. No significant difference in PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86-1.06), OS (HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.84-1.05), and 12-month and 24-month RMST for OS (P = 0.198 and P = 0.216, respectively) was observed between the PD-L1 group and the PD-1 group. In contrast, the anlotinib group showed significantly better OS (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55-0.89), PFS (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.83), and RMST for OS compared to the PD-L1 group. The tiragolumab group showed similar efficacy to the PD-L1 group. However, the tremelimumab group exhibited inferior efficacy than the PD-L1 group. The incidence of ≥grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was significantly higher in the PD-1 group compared to the PD-L1 group (85.4% vs. 69.6%, P <.001), whereas the incidence of irAEs was similar between the two groups.ConclusionThis reconstructed IPD analysis revealed that PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy achieved similar efficacy to PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in ES-SCLC patients, whereas PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy had a better safety profile.
| S-EPMC11254656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab + chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in the United States (US). Methods: The three health states partitioned survival (PS) model was used over the lifetime. Effectiveness and safety data were derived from the IMpower133 trial. The parametric survival model and mixture cure model were used for the atezolizumab + chemotherapy group to explore the long-term uncertainty of the effect of immunotherapy, and the parametric survival model was used for the chemotherapy group. Costs were derived from the pricing files of Medicare and Medicaid Services, and utility values were derived from previous studies. Sensitivity analyses were performed to observe model stability. Results: If the mixture cure model was considered for the intervention group, compared with chemotherapy alone, atezolizumab + chemotherapy yielded an additional 0.11 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), with an incremental cost of US$84,257. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) was US$785,848/QALY. If the parametric survival model was considered for the intervention group, atezolizumab + chemotherapy yielded an additional 0.10 QALYs, with an incremental cost of US$84,257; the ICUR was US$827,610/QALY. In the one-way sensitivity analysis, progression-free (PF) and postprogression (PP) utilities were the main drivers. In the scenario analysis (PF utility = 0.673, PP utility = 0.473), the results showed that the ICUR was US$910,557/QALY and US$965,607/QALY when the mixture cure model and parametric survival model was considered for the intervention group, respectively. In the PSA, the probabilities that atezolizumab + chemotherapy would not be cost-effective were 100% if the willingness-to-pay threshold was US$100,000/QALY. Conclusions: The findings of the present analysis suggest that atezolizumab + chemotherapy is not cost-effective in patients receiving first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC in the US.
| S-EPMC8055835 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis study aimed to compare the failure patterns before and after the introduction of immunotherapy and to determine the role of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treatment.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 294 patients with ES-SCLC, of which 62.2% underwent chemotherapy alone, 13.3% underwent chemotherapy followed by consolidative TRT (TRT group), and 24.5% underwent chemotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI group). We performed propensity-score matching (PSM) to compare each treatment group.ResultsThe median follow-up duration was 10.4 months. At the first relapse, in the cohort showing objective response, the proportion of cases showing intrathoracic progression was significantly lower in the TRT group (37.8%) than in the chemotherapy-alone (77.2%, p < 0.001) and the ICI (60.3%, p=0.03) groups. Furthermore, in the subgroup analysis, TRT showed benefits related to intrathoracic progression-free survival (PFS) in comparison with ICI in patients with less than two involved extrathoracic sites (p=0.008) or without liver metastasis (p=0.02) or pleural metastasis (p=0.005) at diagnosis. After PSM, the TRT group showed significantly better intrathoracic PFS than both chemotherapy-alone and ICI groups (p < 0.001 and p=0.04, respectively), but showed no significant benefit in terms of PFS and overall survival in comparison with the ICI group (p=0.17 and p=0.31, respectively).ConclusionIn ES-SCLC, intrathoracic progression was the most dominant failure pattern after immunotherapy. In the era of chemoimmunotherapy, consolidative TRT can still be considered a useful treatment strategy for locoregional control.
| S-EPMC11016648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy has made significant advances in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), but data in combination with radiotherapy are scarce. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of chemoimmunotherapy combined with thoracic radiotherapy in patients with ES-SCLC.MethodsThis single-center retrospective study analyzed patients with ES-SCLC who received standard platinum-etoposide chemotherapy combined with atezolizumab or durvalumab immunotherapy as induction treatment, followed by consolidative thoracic radiotherapy (CTRT) before disease progression in the first-line setting. Adverse events during radiotherapy with or without maintenance immunotherapy and survival outcomes were assessed.ResultsBetween December 2019 and November 2021, 36 patients with ES-SCLC were identified to have received such treatment modality at one hospital. The number of metastatic sites at diagnosis was 1-4. The biological effective dose of CTRT ranged from 52 to 113 Gy. Only two patients (6%) developed grade 3 toxic effect of thrombocytopenia, but none experienced grade 4 or 5 toxicity. Four patients developed immune-related pneumonitis during the induction treatment period but successfully completed later CTRT. The rate of radiation-related pneumonitis was 8% with grades 1-2 and well tolerated. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.8 months, but the median overall survival (OS) was not determined. The estimated 1-year OS was 80.2% and 1-year PFS was 53.4%.ConclusionsImmunotherapy combined with CTRT for ES-SCLC is safe and has ample survival benefit.
| S-EPMC10080806 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe ASTRUM-005 trial demonstrated that adding serplulimab to chemotherapy significantly prolonged the survival of patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC), but also increased the risk of adverse events. Given the high cost of serplulimab compared to chemotherapy, this study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of serplulimab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC from the perspective of China's healthcare system.MethodsA Markov model was developed to simulate the disease process of extensive-stage SCLC and estimate the health outcomes and direct medical costs of patients. Scenario analyses, univariate sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of different parameters on model uncertainty. The primary model outcomes included costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsCompared to placebo plus chemotherapy, serplulimab plus chemotherapy resulted in an additional 0.25 life-years and 0.15 QALYs, but also increased costs by $26,402, resulting in an ICER of 179,161 USD/QALY. Sensitivity analysis showed that the ICER was most sensitive to the cost of serplulimab, and the probability that serplulimab was cost-effective when added to chemotherapy was only 0 at the willingness-to-pay threshold of 37,423 USD/QALY. Scenario analysis revealed that price discounts on serplulimab could increase its probability of being cost-effective.ConclusionSerplulimab plus chemotherapy is not a cost-effective strategy for first-line treatment of extensive-stage SCLC in China. Price discounts on serplulimab can enhance its cost-effectiveness.
| S-EPMC10501445 | biostudies-literature