Dataset Information

Atezolizumab Monotherapy or Plus Chemotherapy in First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Atezolizumab plus chemotherapy has been recommended as a first-line treatment option for patients with advanced non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) irrespective of programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Currently, little is known about the efficacy and treatment-related adverse effects (TRAEs) of subtracting chemotherapy from the combination for patients with high PD-L1 expression. Thus, we performed an indirect comparison between atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and atezolizumab alone.

Methods

A total of five eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central controlled trial registries, using keywords including atezolizumab, PD-1, PD-L1, NSCLC, and RCT. The clinical outcomes of objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and TRAEs were extracted and evaluated. Using indirect analysis, the efficacy and TRAEs were compared between arm A (atezolizumab plus chemotherapy) and arm C (atezolizumab), linked by arm B (chemotherapy).

Results

Direct comparison revealed that both atezolizumab plus chemotherapy (HR 0.65, P = 0.003) and atezolizumab alone (HR 0.59, P = 0.010) significantly improved OS compared with chemotherapy. More importantly, the indirect comparison showed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy was not superior to atezolizumab regarding OS (RR 1.10, P =0.695) and ORR (RR 1.11, P = 0.645). However, patients who received atezolizumab combined with chemotherapy experienced more ≥ grade 3 TRAEs (RR 4.23, P<0.001) and TRAEs leading to drug discontinuation (RR 3.60, P<0.001) than those treated with atezolizumab monotherapy.

Conclusions

Atezolizumab monotherapy might be a better treatment option for patients with advanced NSCLC and high PD-L1 expression than atezolizumab plus chemotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Li DN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8212861 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAtezolizumab may provide clinical benefits to patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the price of atezolizumab is relatively high, and its economic outcomes have remained unclear. In this study, we used two models to examine the cost-effectiveness of initial atezolizumab monotherapy versus chemotherapy for patients with PD-L1 high-expressing EGFR and ALK wild-type advanced NSCLC in the context of the Chinese healthcare system.MethodsPartitioned Survival model and Markov model were performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line single-agent atezolizumab versus platinum-based chemotherapy for patients with advanced NSCLC with PD-L1 high-expressing EGFR and ALK wild-type disease. Clinical outcomes and safety information were obtained from the most recent data from the IMpower110 trial, while cost and utility values were obtained from Chinese hospitals and relevant literature. Total costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore model uncertainty. Scenario analyses were also conducted for the Patient Assistance Program (PAP) and various provinces in China.ResultsIn the Partitioned Survival model, the total cost of atezolizumab was $145,038, providing 2.92 LYs and 2.39 QALYs, while the total cost of chemotherapy was $69,803, providing 2.12 LYs and 1.65 QALYs. The ICER for atezolizumab versus chemotherapy was $102,424.83/QALY; in the Markov model, the ICER was $104,806.71/QALY. Atezolizumab was not cost-effective at the WTP threshold of three times China's per capita gross domestic product (GDP). Sensitivity analysis showed that the cost of atezolizumab, the utility of PFS, and the discount rate had a significant impact on ICER; PAP significantly reduced ICER, but atezolizumab was still not cost-effective in China.ConclusionFirst-line monotherapy with atezolizumab for patients with PD-L1 high-expressing EGFR and ALK wild-type advanced NSCLC was estimated to be less cost-effective than chemotherapy in terms of the Chinese healthcare system; offering PAP increased the likelihood that atezolizumab would be cost-effective. In some areas of China with higher levels of economic development, atezolizumab was likely to be cost-effective. To improve the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab, drug prices would need to be reduced.

Project description:ImportanceThis study demonstrates that tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy is associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC).ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety/tolerability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for patients with advanced sq-NSCLC.Design, setting, and participantsThis open-label, randomized phase 3 clinical trial was conducted at 46 sites in China between July 2018 and June 2019 and included patients with treatment-naive, histologically confirmed stage IIIB/IV sq-NSCLC. The data cutoff for these analyses was December 6, 2019; data extraction occurred on January 7, 2020.InterventionsPatients were randomized (1:1:1) to receive 1 of the following regimens intravenously on a 21-day cycle: tislelizumab (200 mg, day 1) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2, day 1) and carboplatin (area under the concentration of 5, day 1) (arm A); tislelizumab plus nab-paclitaxel (100 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15) and carboplatin (arm B); and paclitaxel and carboplatin (arm C). Patients were stratified by disease stage and tumor programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (<1% vs 1%-49% vs ≥50%).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included overall survival, investigator-assessed (INV) PFS, IRC-assessed objective response rate (ORR), and IRC-assessed duration of response, as well as the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs).ResultsOverall, 355 patients (median [range] age, 62 [34-74] years; 330 men [91.7%]) with sq-NSCLC received treatment. After a median study follow-up of 8.6 months (95% CI, 8.1-9.0 months), IRC-assessed PFS was significantly improved with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy (arm A, 7.6 months; arm B, 7.6 months) vs chemotherapy alone (arm C, 5.5 months; hazard ratios were 0.524 (95% CI, 0.370-0.742; P < .001 [A vs C]) and 0.478 (95% CI, 0.336-0.679; P < .001 [B vs C]). Higher IRC-assessed ORR and longer IRC-assessed duration of response were observed in arms A (72.5%; 8.2 months) and B (74.8%; 8.6 months) vs C (49.6%; 4.2 months). No association was observed between PD-L1 expression and IRC-assessed PFS or ORR. Discontinuation of any treatment because of AEs was reported in 15 (12.5%; arm A), 35 (29.7%; arm B), and 18 (15.4%; arm C) patients. In each arm, the most common grade of 3 or greater AE was decreased neutrophil levels, which aligned with known chemotherapy toxic effects. Six treatment-related AEs leading to death occurred; however, no deaths were solely attributed to tislelizumab.Conclusions and relevanceIn this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, adding tislelizumab to chemotherapy was associated with significantly prolonged IRC-assessed PFS, higher IRC-assessed ORRs, and a manageable safety/tolerability profile in patients with advanced sq-NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03594747.