Comparison of efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapy in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.
The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to an increase in randomized controlled trials exploring various first-line combination treatment regimens. With the introduction of new PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, there are now more clinical options available. For the first time, the AK105 monoclonal antibody Penpulimab, developed in China, was included. The AK105-302 Phase III trial studied the efficacy and safety of Penpulimab combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. To determine the optimal treatment options, we conducted an updated network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of these regimens.
The system retrieves data from Chinese and English electronic databases, Clinical Trials, and the gov Clinical Trial Registration website up to September 6, 2023. The study indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination regimens, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), all-grade adverse events, and above-grade III adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) level, histological type, ECOG score, sex, and smoking history.
Nineteen RCTS were included, with a total of ten thousand eight hundred patients. Penpulimab plus chemotherapy (Pen + CT) provided the best OS (HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81) for PD-L1 patients with non-selective advanced NSCLC. Except Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab (Niv + Ipi), other PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapies significantly extended PFS compared with CT, and Nivolumab plus Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (Niv + Bev + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.26-0.74) provided the best PFS benefit and was comparable to Pen + CT (HR = 1.0) for PFS prolongation. For ORR, except Niv + Ipi, all the other regimens significantly improved ORR compared with CT. In terms of safety, except Tor + CT, the incidence of any-grade AEs or grade ≥ 3 adverse events may be higher than those of chemotherapy. The subgroup analysis revealed that for patients with PD-L1 levels below 1%, treatment with Tor + CT resulted in the best progression-free survival (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.86). For patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% or higher, Sintilimab plus chemotherapy (Sin + CT) (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-0.99) and Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy (Cam + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.64) were associated with the best overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. For patients with SqNSCLC, combined immunotherapy may provide greater survival benefits. For patients with Non-sqNSCLC, Niv + Bev + CT and Tor + CT were associated with optimal PFS and OS, respectively. Cam + CT provided the best PFS in male patients with a history of smoking and an ECOG score of 0. In both female and non-smoking patient subgroups, Pem + CT was associated with the best PFS and OS benefits.
For patients with advanced non-selective PD-L1 NSCLC, two effective regimens are Pen + CT and Niv + Bev + CT, which rank first in OS and PFS among all patients. Cam + CT and Tor + CT have advantages for OS in patients with SqNSCLC and Non-sqNSCLC, respectively. Niv + Ipi + CT provided the best OS benefit for patients with an ECOG score of 0, while Pem + CT may be the most effective treatment for patients with an ECOG score of 1. Pem + CT has a better effect on female patients and non-smokers. Sin + CT was found to be the most effective treatment for male patients and the smoking subgroup, while Cam + CT was found to be the most effective for PFS. In addition, Tor + CT was associated with the best PFS for patients with negative PD-L1 expression. Pem + CT was found to significantly improve both PFS and OS compared to CT alone. For patients with positive PD-L1 expression, Sin + CT and Cam + CT were found to be optimal for OS and PFS, respectively. It is important to note that, with the exception of Tor + CT, the toxicity of the other combinations was higher than that of CT alone.
Yang Y
，Chen W
，Dong L
，Duan L
，Gao P
... -
《-》
Efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel plus carboplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stages III-IV, unresectable ovarian cancer: a single-arm, open-label, phase Ib/II study.
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be considered for patients with ovarian cancer (OC) whose tumors are deemed unlikely to be completely cytoreduced to no gross residual disease (R0) or who are poor surgical candidates. This Ib/II study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) plus carboplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stages III-IV, unresectable OC.
Eligible patients with stage III-IV, unresectable OC were enrolled in this phase Ib/II study. All patients received neoadjuvant nab-paclitaxel (260 mg/m2, day 1, every 3 weeks) plus carboplatin (AUC 5, day 1, every 3 weeks) for 3 cycles before surgery, followed by 3-6 cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. The phase Ib primary endpoint was safety; the phase II primary endpoint was the R0 resection rate. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety (for all populations).
Sixty-two patients were enrolled and were given neoadjuvant therapy treated between October 2019 and December 2020, of whom 9 were in the phase Ib portion and 53 in the phase II portion. A total of 53 patients underwent surgery with an R0 resection rate of 73.6% (95% CI, 59.7-84.7%). With a median follow-up of 17.5 (range 0.7-36.7) months, for all patients, the best ORR was 83.9% (95% CI, 71.7-92.4%) with 47 partial responses, the median PFS was 18.6 (95% CI, 13.8-23.3%) months, and median OS was not reached. During the neoadjuvant chemotherapy, treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 91.9% (57/62) of all patients. The most common hematologic TRAEs were neutropenia (55/62, 88.7%), and non-hematologic toxicity was alopecia (36/62, 58.1%). Forty-nine patients (79.0%) experienced at least one grade 3-4 TRAEs, with the most common was neutropenia (44/62, 71.0%). Besides, delays in neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery due to AEs were observed in 9 (1 in phase Ib; 8 in phase II) and 7 (phase II) patients, respectively.
The study demonstrated an encouraging efficacy and manageable safety profile of neoadjuvant chemotherapy nab-paclitaxel plus carboplatin in stage III-IV, unresectable OC. In addition, AEs resulting in chemotherapy and surgery delays should be cautiously considered in this clinical setting.
ClinicalTrials.gov, ChiCTR1900026893. Registered at 25 October 2019.
Yin L
，Jiang W
，Liu S
，Fu Y
，Zhou L
，Pei X
，Ye S
，Shen W
，Yang H
，Shan B
... -
《BMC Medicine》
Real-world comparison of the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus durvalumab in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.
Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive disease associated with high relapse rates and limited treatment options. Current standard of care treatment for extensive-stage disease includes combination chemotherapy plus immunotherapy. Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are preferred first-line treatments in combination with chemotherapy with both atezolizumab and durvalumab being equivalent options. Although both ICIs are listed as front-line options in clinical guidelines, there have been no head-to-head trials comparing durvalumab to atezolizumab. Therefore, it is unknown if either agent is superior with regards to efficacy or safety.
This retrospective, single-institution study examined patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer presenting to Moffitt Cancer Center between October 1st, 2018 to May 31st, 2023 who received either atezolizumab or durvalumab in combination with a platinum-doublet in the first-line setting. To be included in this analysis patients must have received at least two cycles of induction chemotherapy and ICI and one cycle of maintenance ICI. The primary outcome of this study was overall survival. The secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, immune-related adverse events, hospitalizations due to ICIs, and progression-free survival on second-line therapy (PFS2).
Of the 101 patients included, 55 received durvalumab (54.5 %) and 46 received atezolizumab (45.5 %). The median overall survival in the durvalumab and atezolizumab arms were 14.7 versus 11.6 months, respectively (HR 0.59; 95 % CI, 0.38-0.92; P = 0.020). There was not a statistically significant difference in median progression-free survival between the two arms (6.3 versus 5.9 months, P = 0.344). Atezolizumab was associated with a numerically higher incidence of immune-related adverse events (47.8 % versus 32.7 %, P = 0.157) and hospitalization rates for those with an immune-related adverse event (36.4 % versus 16.7 %, P = 0.204). PFS2 was 2.3 months in the atezolizumab arm and 3.4 months in the durvalumab arm (HR 1.24; 95 % CI, 0.69-2.23; P = 0.466).
In this real-world retrospective study, durvalumab was associated with improved overall survival in patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer consistent with previous findings from a similar study in a Chinese patient population. Although not statistically significant, there was a lower incidence of immune-related adverse events in the durvalumab arm as well as ICI-related hospitalizations. PFS2 was not statistically significant different between arms.
Vince M
，Naqvi SMH
，Pellini B
，Verbosky M
，Melzer D
... -
《-》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
