Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Immunotherapy in Combination with Chemotherapy for Patients with Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The prognosis of patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is poor. Adding an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) to chemotherapy may exert a synergistic effect and improve survival outcomes. However, for treatment-naive extensive-stage SCLC patients, the efficacy of immunotherapy in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy remains controversial.

Objective

To evaluate the benefits and risks of the combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy and to assess the comparative effectiveness of different first-line treatment strategies for extensive-stage SCLC.

Methods

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized clinical trials studying different immunotherapeutics for patients with previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC up to Feb 16, 2020. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events.

Results

We identified 141 published records, and 4 studies (comprising 2202 patients) were included in the analysis. Immunotherapy (including ipilimumab, atezolizumab, and durvalumab) plus chemotherapy was associated with better OS (hazard ratio (HR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.93; risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-1.00) and PFS (HR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.99) than placebo plus chemotherapy. The addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy showed similar improvement in ORR, DCR, and adverse events versus placebo plus chemotherapy. On the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) analysis, the anti-PD-L1 agent, atezolizumab, had the highest likelihood of achieving improved OS (93.4%) and PFS (95.0%).

Conclusion

In the first-line setting, combining immunotherapy with chemotherapy is better than standard chemotherapy in terms of OS and PFS. Across the eligible studies, PD-L1 inhibitors might be preferred. Further explorations of more ICIs in the first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC patients should be needed.

SUBMITTER: Wang BC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7542505 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPlatinum-etoposide chemotherapy combined with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has been recommended as the first-line standard treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, the effect of thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) on these patients is still unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TRT for ES-SCLC patients who responded to first-line ICIs and chemotherapy (CHT).MethodsPatients who received 4 to 6 cycles of ICIs and CHT as first-line therapy at three hospitals between 2018 and 2022 were included in the analysis. All patients were divided into two groups based on whether they received TRT as first-line treatment, and propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to ensure that the characteristics of two groups were well-balanced. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoint was toxic effects.ResultsA total of 276 patients were included, and the median follow-up time was 22.3 (range, 4.0-53.73) months. After PSM, 197 patients were further analysed, and 99 of whom received TRT. The baseline characteristics were well-balanced between patients in the TRT and non-TRT groups. There were significant differences in PFS between the TRT and non-TRT groups, with the median PFS of 10.76 and 7.63 months, respectively (P = 0.014). Significantly improved OS was observed in the TRT group (21.67 vs. 16.6 months, P = 0.009). In addition, the use of TRT was an independent prognostic factor for PFS and OS of ES-SCLC patients receiving ICIs plus CHT. In terms of safety, no significant increase of any grades adverse event (AE) (P = 0.874) and G3-4 AE (P = 0.909) was observed for patients receiving TRT. Radiation esophagitis, gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicities were the most common AEs in TRT group, which were tolerable. And high-dose radiotherapy was associated with higher incidence of pneumonitis.ConclusionAddition of TRT showed significant survival benefits and well tolerability in ES-SCLC patients receiving platinum-etoposide CHT and ICIs, which could be a feasible first-line treatment strategy for ES-SCLC patients.

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.

Project description:BackgroundOur goal was to organize the data from randomized controlled trials that evaluated first-line chemotherapy for chemo-naïve extensive disease small-cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC).MethodsThe protocol following PRISMA methodology was submitted as PROSPERO 154049. We included individually randomized trials comparing two or more chemotherapy regimens as the first-line treatment for chemo-naïve ED-SCLC regardless of the age, sex, performance status, co-morbidities, and organ functions written in the English language since 2000. Molecular targeted agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors were considered chemotherapy along with cytotoxic medications. We pooled the logarithm of hazard ratio (HR) and its standard error using the frequentist weighted least squares approach random-model network meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 46 eligible trials that involved 11,987 patients were included. The primary endpoint, HR of overall survival (OS, HRos) of the selected comparisons was as follows: carboplatin+amrubicin (HRos 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-0.96), carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab (HRos 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92), and carboplatin+irinotecan (HRos 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.91) were compared with carboplatin+etoposide. The carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab regimen was compared with carboplatin+irinotecan (HRos 0.97, 95% CI 0.68-1.37) and cisplatin+irinotecan regimen (HRos 0.87, 95% CI 0.58-1.31). "Selective carboplatin or cisplatin (CBDCA/CDDP)"+etoposide+durvalumab was compared with CBDCA/CDDP+etoposide (HRos 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.91). Platinum+etoposide+durvalumab was compared with platinum+irinotecan (HRos 0.88, 95% CI 0.67-1.15). Cumulative meta-analysis suggested that platinum+irinotecan was associated with better OS than platinum+etoposide as of 2010 through 40 out of 46 trials in our review that used platinum+etoposide as a reference regimen.ConclusionPatients treated with carboplatin+amrubicin, carboplatin+etoposide+atezolizumab, CBDCA/CDDP+etoposide+durvalumab, and platinum+irinotecan showed better HRos than those treated with platinum+etoposide, one of the standard regimens.

Project description:Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC) have a very short survival time even if they receive standard cytotoxic chemotherapy with etoposide and platinum (EP). Several randomized controlled trials have shown that patients with ED-SCLC who received a combination of EP plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) had superior survival compared with those who received EP alone. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to provide a ranking of ICIs for our primary endpoints in terms of overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR), as well as our secondary endpoint in terms of adverse events. The fractional polynomial model was used to evaluate the adjusted hazard ratios for the survival indicators (OS and PFS). Treatment rank was estimated using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), as well as the probability of being best (Prbest) reference. EP plus nivolumab, atezolizumab or durvalumab had significant benefits compared with EP alone in terms of OS (Hazard Ratio HR = 0.67, 95% Confidence Interval CI = 0.46-0.98 for nivolumab, HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.91 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.59-0.90 for durvalumab) but no significant differences were observed for pembrolizumab or ipilimumab. The probability of nivolumab being ranked first among all treatment arms was highest (SCURA = 78.7%, Prbest = 46.7%). All EP plus ICI combinations had a longer PFS compared with EP alone (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.46-0.92 for nivolumab, HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.61-0.96 for atezolizumab, HR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.65-0.94 for durvalumab, HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.61-0.92 for pembrolizumab), and nivolumab was ranked first in terms of PFS (SCURA = 85.0%, Prbest = 66.8%). In addition, nivolumab had the highest probability of grade 3-4 adverse events (SUCRA = 84.8%) in our study. We found that nivolumab had the best PFS and OS in all combinations of ICIs and EP, but nivolumab also had the highest probability of grade 3-4 adverse events in our network meta-analysis. Further head-to head large-scale phase III randomized controlled studies are needed to verify our conclusions.

Project description:IntroductionMany randomized controlled trials have indicated that immuno-chemotherapy could generate clinical benefits, though the cost of immuno-chemotherapy was so prohibitive and the options were varied. This investigation aimed at evaluating effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness for immuno-chemotherapy as a first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC patients.MethodsMultiple scientific literature repositories were searched for clinical studies where immuno-chemotherapy was regarded as the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC, which were published in English between Jan 1, 2000, and Nov 30, 2021. This study conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) based upon US-resident payer perspectives. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated through NMA. In addition, costings, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-benefit ratio (ICER) were estimated by CEA.ResultsWe identified 200 relevant search records, of which four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (2,793 patients) were included. NMA demonstrated that the effect of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy was ranked at a more elevated position in comparison to other immuno-chemotherapy options and chemotherapy alone, within the general population. The influence of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and durvalumab plus chemotherapy was ranked higher within populations experiencing non-brain metastases (NBMs) andbrain metastases (BMs), respectively. The CEA revealed that the ICERs of immuno-chemotherapy over chemotherapyalone were higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY in any population. However, treatment with atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and durvalumab plus chemotherapy were more favorable health advantages than other immuno-chemotherapy regimens and chemotherapy alone, and the results were 1.02 QALYs and 0.89 QALYs within overall populations and populations with BMs, respectively.ConclusionThe NMA and cost-effectiveness investigation demonstrated that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy could be an optimal first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC when compared with other immuno-chemotherapy regimens. Durvalumab plus chemotherapy is likely to be the most favorable first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC with BMs.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy has afforded new treatment options for extensive small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, reports on the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy on survival in ES-SCLC patients are inconsistent. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of ICI combined with chemotherapy for ES-SCLC.MethodsWe searched for randomized controlled clinical trials related to first-line treatment of ES-SCLC with ICI combined with chemotherapy in PUBMED, ESMO, ASCO, and WCLC since 2018. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS).ResultsFour studies were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, ICI in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment reduced the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.68-0.86; P < 0.00001) and disease progression (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.68-0.84; P < 0.00001). The objective response rate (ORR) with ICI plus chemotherapy was significantly higher than that with chemotherapy alone (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02-1.19, P = 0.01). The duration of response (DoR) rate at one year was also better with ICI plus chemotherapy (HR: 3.46; 95% CI: 2.24-5.33; P < 0.00001). Security analysis revealed that the incidence of immune-mediated adverse events (imAEs) (HR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.99-7.15, P < 0.0001) and grade 3/4 imAEs (HR: 7.01; 95% CI: 2.48-19.81; P = 0.0002) increased significantly with ICI plus chemotherapy.ConclusionsICI combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment can significantly improve the OS and progression-free survival (PFS) of ES-SCLC patients, but the toxicity caused by immunotherapy should be carefully considered.Key pointsSignificant findings of the studyOur meta-analysis shows that PD-L1/PD-1 plus chemotherapy can significantly improve the OS and PFS of ES-SCLC patients when used as first-line therapy.What this study addsThis study fills gaps regarding the efficacy of immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC, and provides better evidence for the use of PD-L1/PD-1 immunotherapy plus chemotherapy for patients with ES-SCLC.

Project description:BackgroundExtensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) is a highly invasive and fatal disease with limited therapeutic options and poor prognosis. Our study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (ICIs+ChT) vs. chemotherapy alone (ChT) in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC.MethodsA literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) related to "ICIs+ChT" vs. "ChT" in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, and other databases. RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform meta-analyses with hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR). SAS 9.4 software was applied to conduct a mixed-effect model meta-analysis of the survival outcomes and draw survival curves.ResultsA total of 2,638 patients with ES-SCLC from 6 RCTs were included, of which 1,341 patients received "ICIs+ChT" and 1,297 received ChT. Based on the meta-analysis results provided by the mixed-effect model, patients receiving the "ICIs+ChT" regimen had a significantly longer overall survival (OS, HR = 0.800, 95% CI = 0.731-0.876, P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS, HR = 0.815, 95% CI = 0.757-0.878, P <0.001) in comparison to those receiving ChT only. Compared with ChT, "ICIs+ChT" did neither improve the objective response rate (ORR, RR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.00-1.12, P = 0.06) nor did it improve the disease control rate (DCR, RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.92-1.03, P = 0.35). Although the incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) in the "ICIs+ChT" subgroup did not increase (RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 0.97-1.39, P = 0.11), the incidence of grade 3 to 5 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) increased significantly (RR = 4.29, 95% CI = 1.73-10.61, P < 0.00001).ConclusionICIs+ChT regimen could significantly prolong OS and PFS in patients with ES-SCLC compared with ChT alone. Although the incidence of irAEs in "ICIs+ChT" is higher than that in the "ChT" subgroup, the incidence of trAEs is similar within the two subgroups. ICIs combined with chemotherapy demonstrated a good choice as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO, identifier: CRD42022348496.

Project description:AimTo compare the efficacy and safety of radiotherapy in combination with immunotherapy after achieving disease control from the first-line combination therapy of platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy for advanced lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC).MethodsThis study retrospectively evaluated the patients with advanced LUSC treated with the combination of radiotherapy with immunotherapy and chemotherapy (ICRT group, n = 52) or immunotherapy and chemotherapy (ICT group, n = 63) as the first-line treatment from April 2018 to April 2022. Using propensity score matching (PSM), 50 pairs were created, while the confounders and bias were controlled. The objective response rate (ORR), duration of overall response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events were analyzed in the two groups. The PFS and OS were re-analyzed separately for patients treated with thoracic radiotherapy.ResultsAfter PSM, the median PFS (12.23 vs. 7.43 months; P <0.001) and median OS (19.7 vs. 12.9 months; P <0.001) were significantly longer in the ICRT group than those in the ICT group. Both the PFS and OS rates were also significantly higher in the ICRT group than those in the ICT group, except for the OS rates in the 6th and 12th months. The mDOR of the ICRT group patients (17.10 vs. 8.27 months; P <0.001) was significantly higher than that of the ICT group patients. The median PFS, median OS, and local control rate were significantly longer in the thoracic radiotherapy group than in the control group. Radiation pneumonia was the most common adverse effect after radiotherapy; however, no treatment-related deaths occurred. The Cox regression analysis showed that ECOG scores 0-1, presence of necrosis in the tumor, radiotherapy, and optimal efficacy better than the stable disease (SD) were independent factors, affecting the PFS, while the patients with recurrent post-operative, pre-treatment NLR, radiotherapy, and optimal efficacy better than SD were the independent factors, affecting the OS.ConclusionsThe combination of radiotherapy with systematic immunotherapy and chemotherapy for the advanced LUSC was effective with tolerable adverse effects.