Activity and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Neuroendocrine Neoplasms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bongiovanni A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8155858 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the treatment efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced/metastatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs). MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched to identify studies that provide data on treatment response and/or survival outcomes of advanced/metastatic NEN patients treated with ICIs. The overall response rate (ORR) was pooled using a random-effects model. Meta-regression was performed to explore factors influencing the ORR. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of survival was performed using stratified Cox regression. Ten studies (464 patients) were included. The overall pooled ORR was 15.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), 9.5-24.3%), and it varied according to the primary site (thoracic, 24.7%; gastro-entero-pancreatic, 9.5%), tumor differentiation (poorly differentiated, 22.7%; well-differentiated, 10.4%), and drug regimen (combination, 25.3%; monotherapy, 10.1%). All these variables significantly influenced the ORR. Tumor differentiation was associated with both overall survival and progression-free survival (hazard ratio of poorly differentiated tumors, 4.2 (95% CI, 2.0-8.7) and 2.6 (95% CI, 1.6-4.4), respectively). Thus, the treatment efficacy of ICIs for advanced/metastatic NENs varied according to primary site, tumor differentiation, and drug regimen. Poorly differentiated NENs showed a better ORR than well-differentiated NENs but had a negative impact on survival.
| S-EPMC8833825 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo provide a complete toxicity profile, toxicity spectrum, and a safety ranking of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) drugs for treatment of cancer.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesElectronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to include relevant studies published in English between January 2007 and February 2018.Review methodsOnly head-to-head phase II and III randomised controlled trials comparing any two or three of the following treatments or different doses of the same ICI drug were included: nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, tremelimumab, atezolizumab, conventional therapy (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and their combinations), two ICI drugs, or one ICI drug with conventional therapy. Eligible studies must have reported site, organ, or system level data on treatment related adverse events. High quality, single arm trials and placebo controlled trials on ICI drugs were selected to establish a validation group.Results36 head-to-head phase II and III randomised trials (n=15?370) were included. The general safety of ICI drugs ranked from high to low for all adverse events was as follows: atezolizumab (probability 76%, pooled incidence 66.4%), nivolumab (56%, 71.8%), pembrolizumab (55%, 75.1%), ipilimumab (55%, 86.8%), and tremelimumab (54%, not applicable). The general safety of ICI drugs ranked from high to low for severe or life threatening adverse events was as follows: atezolizumab (49%, 15.1%), nivolumab (46%, 14.1%), pembrolizumab (72%, 19.8%), ipilimumab (51%, 28.6%), and tremelimumab (28%, not applicable). Compared with conventional therapy, treatment-related adverse events for ICI drugs occurred mainly in the skin, endocrine, hepatic, and pulmonary systems. Taking one ICI drug was generally safer than taking two ICI drugs or one ICI drug with conventional therapy. Among the five ICI drugs, atezolizumab had the highest risk of hypothyroidism, nausea, and vomiting. The predominant treatment-related adverse events for pembrolizumab were arthralgia, pneumonitis, and hepatic toxicities. The main treatment-related adverse events for ipilimumab were skin, gastrointestinal, and renal toxicities. Nivolumab had a narrow and mild toxicity spectrum, mainly causing endocrine toxicities. Integrated evidence from the pooled incidences, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses implied that nivolumab is the best option in terms of safety, especially for the treatment of lung cancer.ConclusionsCompared with other ICI drugs used to treat cancer, atezolizumab had the best safety profile in general, and nivolumab had the best safety profile in lung cancer when taking an integrated approach. The safety ranking of treatments based on ICI drugs is modulated by specific treatment-related adverse events.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017082553.
| S-EPMC6222274 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of different malignancies. However, their efficacy in advanced adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) remains uncertain. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the efficacy and tolerability of ICIs in patients with advanced ACC. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and CENTRAL for studies that used ICIs in ACC. Studies with more than five patients were included in the meta-analysis of the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and grade 3/4 adverse events. Twenty studies with 23 treatment arms and 250 patients were included. Single-agent anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 treatment was utilized in 13 treatment arms, whereas an anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTLA4 combination was used in 4 treatment arms. Other anti-PD1- or anti-PD-L1-based combinations were used in five treatment arms. The ORR was 14% (95% CI = 10-19%, I2 = 0%), and the DCR was 43% (95% CI = 37-50%, I2 = 13%). The combination anti-PD1- or anti-PD-L1-based treatment strategies did not correlate with higher responses compared with monotherapy. The median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI = 7.85-23.05), and the median PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI = 1.8-5.4). ICIs have a modest efficacy in advanced ACC but a good OS. Further studies are needed to investigate predictive biomarkers for ICI response and to compare ICI-based strategies with the current standard of care.
| S-EPMC10931182 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The potential increased risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) post-influenza vaccine is a concern in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies reporting the effects of influenza vaccination in patients with cancer during ICI treatment. We searched five electronic databases until 01/2022. Two authors independently selected studies, appraised their quality, and collected data. The primary outcome was the determination of pooled irAE rates. Secondary outcomes included determination of immunogenicity and influenza infection rates and cancer-related outcomes. Nineteen studies (26 publications, n = 4705) were included; 89.5% were observational. Vaccinated patients reported slighter lower rates of irAEs compared to unvaccinated patients (32% versus 41%, respectively). Seroprotection for influenza type A was 78%-79%, and for type B was 75%. Influenza and irAE-related death rates were similar between groups. The pooled proportion of participants reporting a laboratory-confirmed infection was 2% (95% CI 0% to 6%), and influenza-like illness was 14% (95% CI 2% to 32%). No differences were reported on the rates of laboratory-confirmed infection between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. Longer progression-free and overall survival was also observed in vaccinated compared with unvaccinated patients. Current evidence suggests that influenza vaccination is safe in patients receiving ICIs, does not increase the risk of irAEs, and may improve survival.
| S-EPMC9412390 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment paradigm of many cancers, however, its effectiveness in prostate cancer patients is still under question. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we sought for assessing the efficacy and safety of Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with prostate cancer. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases were searched on Aguste 19, 2022. Thirty five studies met the eligibility criteria. The median overall survival (mOS) of all treatments was 14.1 months, with the longest and shortest mOS was seen among patients who received anti-CTLA-4 monotherapy and anti-PD-1/PD-L1+anti-CTLA-4 regimen at 24.9 and 9.2 months, respectively. Noteworthy, all types of adverse events had the lowest incidence in the anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy group. Considering the ICI monotherapy regimens, we found that fatigue, diarrhea, and infusion reaction had the highest incidence rates. Future studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of novel combination therapies with ICIs are warranted.
| S-EPMC10644317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used immune checkpoint inhibitors. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy in cancer treatment.MethodsWe examined data from PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library. Eleven articles fulfilled our criteria, which we divided into 3 groups: nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab (the dose used for monotherapy is 3 mg/kg), nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab (the dose used for monotherapy is 3 mg/kg), and nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (N1I3) versus nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (N3I1). We measured the complete response (CR), partial response (PR), objective response rate (ORR), and TRAEs in any grade and grade 3 or higher.ResultsThe overall effect estimate favored the combined immunotherapy group in terms of the ORR (RR: 1.40, p < 0.001) and PR (RR: 1.50, p < 0.001) than nivolumab alone. Compared with ipilimumab alone, the combined immunotherapy group had better CR (RR: 4.89, p < 0.001), PR (RR: 2.75, p < 0.001), and ORR (RR: 3.31, p < 0.001). Finally, N1I3 showed better PR (RR: 1.35, p = 0.006) and ORR (RR: 1.21, p = 0.03) than N3I1. The incidence of any TRAEs was similar between both groups (RR: 1.05, p = 0.06). However, the incidence of serious adverse events (grade 3 or higher) was lower in group N3I1 than group N1I3 (RR: 1.51, p < 0.001).ConclusionThis meta-analysis showed that the curative effect of nivolumab plus ipilimumab was better than that of nivolumab or ipilimumab monotherapy. In the combined immunotherapy group, N1I3 was more effective than N3I1. Although the side effects were slightly increased in N1I3 group, overall safety was acceptable.
| S-EPMC7334852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionKidney transplant (Ktx) recipients are excluded from clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors among Ktx patients.MethodsA literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database from inception through April 2019. We included studies that reported outcomes of Ktx recipients who received immune checkpoint inhibitors for cancer treatment. Outcomes of interest were allograft rejection and/or allograft failure.ResultsTwenty-seven articles with a total of 44 Ktx patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor were identified. Of 44 Ktx patients, 18 were reported to have acute rejection. Median time from immune checkpoint inhibitors to acute rejection diagnosis was 24 (interquartile range, 10-60) days. Reported types of acute allograft rejection were cellular rejection (33%), mixed cellular and antibody-mediated rejection (17%), and unspecified type (50%). Fifteen (83%) had allograft failure and 8 (44%) died. Three patients had a partial remission (17%), 1 patient achieved cancer response (6%), and 5 patients had stable disease (28%).ConclusionThe findings of our study raise awareness of the increased risk for acute allograft rejection/failure following immune checkpoint inhibitors for cancer treatment among Ktx patients, in particular with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors. Future large-scale clinical studies are required to appraise the pathogenesis and plan optimal balanced therapy that helps sustain graft tolerance.
| S-EPMC7000848 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Pancreatic injury (pancreatitis, amylase/lipase elevation) is a rare adverse event of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). With the high number of clinical studies on ICIs, the incidence and characteristics of associated pancreatic injury (PI) need to be reevaluated. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the incidence of PI in cancer patients who received ICIs in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PubMed, Embase, the ASCO, ESMO, and AACR conference proceedings before 1 April 2022, were investigated for relevant research. Results: 50 RCTs involving 35,223 patients were included. The incidence of ICIs-PI was 2.22% (95% CI = 1.94%-2.53%). The incidence of PI was 3.76% (95% CI = 1.84-7.67%) when combining two ICIs, which was higher than single ICIs [2.25% (95% CI = 1.91-2.65%)]. The ICIs were ranked from high to low based on PI incidence: PD-L1 inhibitors 3.01% (95% CI = 1.86-4.87%), CTLA-4 inhibitors 2.92% (95% CI = 0.99-8.65%) and PD-1 Inhibitor 2% (95% CI = 1.67-2.39%). The ICI with the highest rate of PI was pembrolizumab 7.23.% (95% CI = 1.69-30.89%). In addition, the incidence of severe ICIs-PI was 2.08% (95% CI = 1.76-2.46%); and the incidence of severe PI was 2.32% (95% CI = 1.76-3.06%) when combining two ICIs, which was higher than single ICI [1.95% (95% CI = 1.58-2.41%)]. The ICIs were ranked from high to low according to the incidence of severe PI: PD-L1 inhibitors 3.1% (95% CI = 1.7-5.64%), CTLA-4 inhibitors 2.69% (95% CI = 0.76-9.49%), PD-1 inhibitors 1.80% (95% CI = 1.41-2.29%). Conclusion: Treatment with multiple ICIs result in a higher incidence of PI compared to single ICIs, irrespective of the grade of pancreatic injury. The incidence of PI caused by PD-L1 inhibitors is higher than that of CTLA-4 inhibitors and PD-1 Inhibitor, and Pembrolizumab has the highest rate of ICIs-PI. Although the incidence of ICIs-PI is not high, they are usually severe (≥ grade 3 events).
| S-EPMC9483178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (L-LCNEC) is a rare and highly aggressive neuroendocrine tumor. There is currently no standard therapeutic regimen, and systemic chemotherapy results in poor prognosis. Due to the rarity of L-LCNEC, the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remain unclear.MethodsThis study included 34 L-LCNEC patients administered ICIs at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, from February 6, 2018 to February 6, 2023. The treatment responses were evaluated. Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analyses. Cox regression was used for multivariate analysis.ResultsThe objective response rate (ORR) of 34 patients was 29.4%, the disease control rate (DCR) was 82.4%, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.30 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 14.77 months. The ORRs of combined LCNEC (n=7) and pure LCNEC (n=27) were 14.3% and 33.3%; the DCRs were 100% and 77.8%; the median PFSs were 12.48 and 5.6 months (P=0.032); and the median OSs were 21.27 and 14.73 months, respectively (P=0.233). The observed incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) was 61.8%, primarily occurring in grades 1/2 (58.8%) and grade 3 (5.9%). Elevated aminotransferases (14.7%), pneumonia (8.8%), and fatigue (8.8%) were the most common irAEs.ConclusionsICIs treatment showed efficacy and safety in advanced L-LCNEC, with the potential for greater benefits in the combined LCNEC subtype.
| S-EPMC10482626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWhile the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is increasingly recognized in advanced gastric cancer (aGC), overall survival (OS) has not been consistently improved across the different randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This meta-analysis aimed to quantify the efficacy and safety of ICI and explore potential predictive tumor tissue biomarkers in aGC.MethodsA random-effect pairwise meta-analysis was used to evaluate the primary outcome of OS. Sensitivity analysis was performed to investigate the effects of ICIs on PD-L1 status, TMB, MSI-H, and the Asian patient population. We extracted the OS Kaplan-Meier curves from the included trials to compare the effect of PD-L1 status on response to ICIs using DigitizeIt 2.5 and Guyot's algorithm.ResultsA pairwise meta-analysis of seven RCTs included in this study showed that ICIs were more effective than the comparator in improving OS (pooled HR: 0.84). We demonstrated that PD-1 ICIs were additive when combined with the comparator arm (pooled HR: 0.79). A sensitivity analysis showed that PD-1 ICIs were associated with better OS outcomes in the Asian patient population as monotherapy (pooled HR: 0.66) or in combination with chemotherapy (pooled HR: 0.83). We demonstrated that tumors with PD-L1 ≥1 (P = 0.02) and PD-L1 ≥10 (P = 0.006) derived OS benefit from ICI monotherapy. Equally, MSI-H (P <0.00001) and TMB-high (P <0.0001) tumors derived favorable survival benefits from ICIs.Conclusions and relevanceThe results of this meta-analysis suggest that ICIs result in improved OS outcomes in aGC. The benefits varied with different ethnicities, class of ICI, PD-L1 expression, MSI status, and TMB.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, identifier (CRD42019137829).
| S-EPMC9660259 | biostudies-literature