Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of first-line checkpoint inhibitors-based treatments for non-oncogene-addicted non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Frontline immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-based regimens in non-oncogene-addicted non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have been deeply investigated. To rank the available therapeutic options, we carried out a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

Methods

A comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICI regimens, and a pairwise and a network meta-analysis (NMA) with an all-comers and a stratified strategy were conducted. Endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

Results

Nineteen RCTs involving 17 treatment regimens were included. For the all-comers population, pembrolizumab/chemotherapy (CT) and cemiplimab were most likely the best treatments. For programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1% nivolumab/ipilimumab with/without CT, for PD-L1 >1% and 1%-49% pembrolizumab/CT and for PD-L1 >50% cemiplimab ranked first for OS. In non-squamous (NSQ), pembrolizumab with/without CT ranked first for OS; cemiplimab ranked worse than the unselected population. In squamous (SQ), pooled hazard ratio (HR) showed a better chance in improving efficacy for combination strategy, while monotherapy did not, except for cemiplimab that ranked second. Atezolizumab/CT/bevacizumab ranked first in most subgroups for PFS. Direct comparison showed a non-statistically significant benefit of ICI regimens for the liver metastases cohort in OS, with a good ranking for pembrolizumab/CT and atezolizumab/bevacizumab/CT. Regarding brain metastases, all ICI regimens demonstrated an improvement in OS and PFS compared to CT. Nivolumab/ipilimumab/CT ranked better in this subset.

Conclusions

Our meta-analysis updated on the most recent findings demonstrates that different ICI treatments rank differently in specific NSCLC settings (histology, biomarker and clinical presentation) offering a novel challenging scenario for clinical decision making and research planning.

SUBMITTER: Siciliano MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9271478 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved survival for advanced wild-type non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) significantly, but few studies compared single ICI (SICI)-based treatments and double ICIs (DICI)-based treatments. We summarized the general efficacy of ICI-related treatments, compared the efficacy and safety of SICI-based [programmed death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) or cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors ± chemotherapy (CT)] and DICI-based (PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors+CTLA-4 inhibitors ± chemotherapy) treatments vs. CT in the first-line treatment.MethodsWe included phase II/III randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including patients with histologically confirmed stage IIIB-IV driver-gene wild-type NSCLC who received first-line ICI-related therapy in at least one arm. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2020. This network meta-analysis was performed in a Bayesian framework using GEMTC and JAGS package in R.3.6.1. The research was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020184534).ResultsTwenty RCTs were involved, including 13,032 patients and 17 treatment regimens. The results showed that ICI-based therapies could provide a pooled median overall survival (mOS) (POS) of 15.79 (95% CI: 14.85-16.73) months, and there were no significant differences in OS, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and grade 3 or higher adverse events (≥3AEs) between DICI-based treatments (POS: 14.81, 12.11-17.52 months) and SICI-based treatments (POS: 16.17, 14.59-17.74 months) in overall patients. However, DICI-based treatments had significantly prolonged the OS over SICI-based treatments in squamous and PD-L1 <1% subgroups. The ranking of OS benefit by Bayesian surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) spectrum showed that DICI+chemotherapy ranked first for overall population and subgroups including squamous, non-squamous, any level of PD-L1 expression, smoking, male, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) = 0/1, age < 65/≥65 while SICI+CT for low tumor mutation burden (TMB), non-smoking, and female subgroups, and DICI for high TMB subgroups.ConclusionsIn the first-line therapy for advanced wild-type NSCLC, both SICI- and DICI-based treatments could bring significant overall advantages over chemotherapy, with comparable outcomes of efficacy and ≥3AEs. DICI-based treatments were more effective than SICI-based treatments in squamous and PD-L1 <1% subgroups. For most populations, DICI+chemotherapy could be the best choice with a survival benefit, while SICI+chemotherapy has established its position actually.Systematic review registration[PROSPERO], identifier [CRD42020184534].

Project description:Background: Although smoking status has potential as a biomarker for immune checkpoint blockade in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), its clinical significance remains obscure. This meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of the smoking status on the efficacy of first-line immunotherapy and to find better treatment in never-smoker and ever-smoker patients. Methods: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane database for trials comparing immunotherapy with conventional chemotherapy as front-line treatment for advanced NSCLC. Random-effects models were used to pool estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Predefined subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the difference in the efficacy between the single checkpoint blockade and checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy combination in the never-smokers and current/former smokers. Results: Twelve trials involving 6,446 patients were included in the analysis. A statistically significant overall survival benefit over conventional chemotherapy was found for both checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.85) and checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90) in the current/former smoker group. There was no subgroup difference between monotherapy and combination treatment (p=0.67). However, there was an inconsistent survival outcome in the never-smoker group; checkpoint blockade monotherapy did not show significantly better efficacy than chemotherapy alone (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.81-1.37), but combination treatment showed an overall survival benefit (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.94). A significant subgroup difference existed between monotherapy and combination therapy (p=0.04). Similarly, there was a significant difference in efficacy of monotherapy between the current/former smoker and never-smoker group (p=0.01), but the efficacy of the combination treatment was comparable between the two groups (p=0.45). Conclusion: Smoking status, which is easily available information, could be used as a guide in clinical practice to choose better treatment in the front-line setting for advanced NSCLC patients.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of first line treatments for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and several international conference databases, from inception to 20 May 2019.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesPublished and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing two or more treatments in the first line setting for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC were included in a bayesian network meta-analysis. Eligible studies reported at least one of the following clinical outcome measures: progression free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and adverse events of grade 3 or higher.Results18 eligible trials involved 4628 patients and 12 treatments: EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs; osimertinib, dacomitinib, afatinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, and icotinib), pemetrexed based chemotherapy, pemetrexed free chemotherapy, and combination treatments (afatinib plus cetuximab, erlotinib plus bevacizumab, gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed). Consistent with gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.95, 95% credible interval 0.72 to 1.24), osimertinib showed the most favourable progression free survival, with significant differences versus dacomitinib (0.74, 0.55 to 1.00), afatinib (0.52, 0.40 to 0.68), erlotinib (0.48, 0.40 to 0.57), gefitinib (0.44, 0.37 to 0.52), icotinib (0.39, 0.24 to 0.62), pemetrexed based chemotherapy (0.24, 0.17 to 0.33), pemetrexed free chemotherapy (0.16, 0.13 to 0.20), afatinib plus cetuximab (0.44, 0.28 to 0.71), and gefitinib plus pemetrexed (0.65, 0.46 to 0.92). Osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were also consistent (0.94, 0.66 to 1.35) in providing the best overall survival benefit. Combination treatments caused more toxicity in general, especially erlotinib plus bevacizumab, which caused the most adverse events of grade 3 or higher. Different toxicity spectrums were revealed for individual EGFR-TKIs. Subgroup analyses by the two most common EGFR mutation types indicated that osimertinib was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the exon 19 deletion, and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy was associated with the best progression free survival in patients with the Leu858Arg mutation.ConclusionsThese results indicate that osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy were associated with the best progression free survival and overall survival benefits for patients with advanced EGFR mutated NSCLC, compared with other first line treatments. The treatments resulting in the best progression free survival for patients with the exon 19 deletion and Leu858Arg mutations were osimertinib and gefitinib plus pemetrexed based chemotherapy, respectively.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42018111954.