Dataset Information

Determining the optimal PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for the first-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer with high-level PD-L1 expression in China.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objective

The programmed death 1 and ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors have significantly altered therapeutic perspectives on non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, their efficacy and safety are unknown since direct clinical trials have not yet been performed on them. It is also necessary to determine the economics of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors due to their high cost. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients in China with high PD-L1 expression as first-line treatment.

Methods

From the PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases, we retrieved survival, progression, and safety data on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy for advanced NSCLC patients. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to consider PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in efficacy and safety. A Markov model with a full-lifetime horizon was adopted. Clinical and utility data were collected through the trial. The cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

This study included five phase III clinical trials using four drugs: nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, and durvalumab. The NMA demonstrated that the four drugs had similar efficacy and safety, while pembrolizumab and atezolizumab were better for than for nivolumab (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.66, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.46-0.95 and HR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.37-0.94) in progression-free survival (PFS), and the risk of a severe adverse event was higher for atezolizumab than for nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Compared with nivolumab, durvalumab, pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab had QALY of 0.19, 0.38, and 0.53, respectively, which induced ICERs of $ 197,028.8/QALY, $ 111,859.0/QALY, and $ 76,182.3/QALY, respectively.

Conclusion

The efficacy and safety are similar among types of PD-1/PD-L1-inhibitor monotherapy. The cost-effectiveness of nivolumab appears optimal, but the other PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors are not as cost-effective for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC in China.

SUBMITTER: Teng MM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8446572 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe prognosis of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients is poor, and the standard first-line treatment for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) is still chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy. The primary objectives of our study were to confirm the superior efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus etoposide and platinum (EP) for LS-SCLC and find crucial biomarkers.MethodsWe analyzed LS-SCLC patients from three medical centers, employing propensity score matching for group comparability. Survival outcomes were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Additionally, we conducted univariate and multivariate analyses to investigate potential predictive factors.ResultsAmong 150 patients in our study, we successfully matched 41 pairs. The median overall survival (OS) was 29.5 months in the EP + ICIs group and 20.0 months in the EP group {hazard ratio (HR) =0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.41-1.02], P=0.059}. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly extended in the EP + ICIs group (14.6 months), compared to the EP group (8.6 months) [HR =0.42 (95% CI: 0.28-0.63), P<0.001]. After matching, patients receiving chemo-immunotherapy had a median OS of 36.1 months, significantly surpassing those receiving chemotherapy alone (19.0 months) [HR =0.51 (95% CI: 0.28-0.93), P=0.02]. And the patients in the EP + ICIs group also had longer PFS after matching [HR =0.42 (95% CI: 0.25-0.71), P=0.001]. No significant difference in the objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) between the two groups was found (ORR: EP: 81.0%, EP + ICIs: 90.0%, P=0.14; trAEs: EP: grade 1-2, 49.3%; grade 3-4, 42.5%; EP + ICIs: grade 1-2, 40.0%; grade 3-4, 49.1%, P=0.62). The multivariate analysis presented that the history of immunotherapy [EP + PD-1 inhibitors: HR =0.33 (95% CI: 0.17-0.62), P=0.001; EP + PD-L1 inhibitors: HR =0.18 (95% CI: 0.06-0.60), P=0.005] and baseline lung immune prognostic index (LIPI) [intermediate: HR =2.22 (95% CI: 1.20-4.13), P=0.01; poor: HR =2.03 (95% CI: 0.71-5.77), P=0.18] were independent prognostic factors for PFS among all LS-SCLC cases. However, no independent prognostic factor was identified for OS.ConclusionsOur real-world data showed promising clinical efficacy and tolerable safety of first-line programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors or programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors in cases with LS-SCLC. Additionally, LIPI may serve as a valuable prognostic factor.

Project description:This network meta-analysis (NMA), based on one phase II and nine phase III studies, involving 6,124 patients with metastatic NSCLC, indirectly compares Atezolizumab + Bevacizumab + chemotherapy (ABC), Atezolizumab + chemotherapy (AC), Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy (PC), Pembrolizumab alone, Bevacizumab + chemotherapy (BC) and chemotherapy alone. Each of these is recommended as front-line interventions, according to the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for advanced NSCLC without EGFR mutation or ALK rearrangement. Studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Medline, and abstracts found in oncology articles. Primary endpoints, i.e., progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with corresponding hazard ratios (HR), objective response rates (ORR) and adverse event (AEs) with odds risk (OR) were pooled according to frequentist network meta-analytical techniques. PD-L1 expression thresholds, as well as non-squamous/squamous were used to determine subgroups. Immunotherapy plus chemotherapy appeared superior to Pembrolizumab alone for PD-L1-high (i.e., TPS≥50%) NSCLC patients. BC might also be specifically recommended as an initial first-line treatment for PD-L1-high, non-squamous NSCLC patients, since BC was not inferior to Pembrolizumab alone. PC and ABC might be preferred for NSCLC patients with intermediate PD-L1 (1% ≤PD-L1, TPS<50%) expression. BC can also be tentatively recommended specifically for PD-L1-intermediate, non-squamous NSCLC patients. Combined immunotherapies can all be recommended for PD-L1-negative (i.e., TPS<1%) NSCLC patients, although especially the ABC combination for non-squamous NSCLC patients, which was superior to PC in regards of PFS. However, PC performed comparable to ABC in the whole population and in all subgroup save this one. More predictive biomarkers could be factored into further analyses to help identifying the most effective treatment regimens for specific patient groups.

Project description:BackgroundImmunotherapy in combination with platinum-etoposide (EP) chemotherapy has been approved as a first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). However, real-world (RW) data regarding the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in ES-SCLC are lacking. We aimed to assess the differences between programmed death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors and programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors, both in conjunction with EP chemotherapy, as first-line treatment for ES SCLC.MethodsWe conducted a real-world, multicenter, retrospective cohort, controlled study to compare the prognosis, efficacy, and safety of PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in ES-SCLC patients when used along with chemotherapy. Each patient received up to six cycles of etoposide, carboplatin, or cisplatin combined with ICI drugs, including PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors. The primary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were the investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1).ResultsBetween January 2017 and December 2021, 194 patients with ES-SCLC from three clinical centers in a PLA general hospital were included in our study, including 93 patients in the PD-1 group and 101 patients in the PD-L1 group. At the time of data cutoff, progression-free survival in the PD-1 group (median PFS, 6.8 months; 95% CI, 5.3-8.1) was similar to that in the PD-L1 group (median PFS, 6.4 months; 95% CI, 5.5-7.5); the stratified hazard ratio for PFS was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.83-1.53; P = 0.452). The median OS was similar in the PD-1 and PD-L1 groups (15.8 m vs. 17.7 m, P = 0.566); the hazard ratio was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.62-1.30, P = 0.566). The two groups had comparable investigator-assessed confirmed objective response rates (ORR) (76.3% vs. 76.2%). Adverse effect (AE)-related discontinuation occurred in 4 (4.3%) patients in the PD-1 group and 2 (2.0%) patients in the PD-L1 group. Deaths due to AEs of any cause occurred in 2 (2.2%) patients in the PD-1 inhibitor group and 1 (1.0%) patient in the PD-L1 inhibitor group.ConclusionsOur research revealed that there were no significant differences in efficacy or prognosis between PD-1 inhibitor + EP chemotherapy and PD-L1 inhibitor + EP chemotherapy. The two groups seemed to have comparable safety profiles, but the number of discontinuation or death events was too small to draw a firm conclusion.