首页> 外文期刊>Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology >Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:恶性黑色素瘤的检查点抑制剂:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Background and objectives: Rates of malignant melanoma are continuing to increase, and until recently effective treatments were lacking. However, since 2011 three immunotherapeutic agents, known as checkpoint inhibitors, have been approved. This review aims to establish whether these three drugs – ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab – offer greater efficacy and tolerability compared to control interventions (placebo, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy) in patients with stage III or IV unresectable cutaneous melanoma. Materials and methods: A search on four major medical and scientific databases yielded 7,553 records, of which seven met the inclusion criteria, with a total study population of 3,628. Only prospective Phase II or III randomized controlled trials on checkpoint inhibitors for patients with unresectable cutaneous melanoma that reported data on survival (overall or progression-free), tumor response, or adverse events were included. Three meta-analyses were carried out. Results: The hazard ratio for progression or death was 0.54 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–0.67), and the odds ratio for best overall response rate was 4.48 (95% CI: 2.77–7.24), both in favor of checkpoint inhibitors. However, control treatments were associated with an insignificantly lower rate of discontinuation of treatment due to adverse effects or treatment-related adverse events (odds ratio =1.63 [95% CI: 0.55–4.88]). Conclusion: This study finds that checkpoint inhibitors are more effective than control interventions, both in terms of survival and tumor response, and yet no less tolerable. PD1 therapies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) appear to offer greater efficacy than CTLA4 therapy (ipilimumab). The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab was, however, the most effective, but significantly less tolerable than monotherapy. The lack of published clinical data does, however, limit this study. Further research is needed in two areas in particular: 1) to determine the optimal use of checkpoint inhibitors, specifically in terms of combination therapy, and 2) to identify reliable biomarkers to predictive responders and guide treatment assignment.
机译:背景与目的:恶性黑色素瘤的发病率持续增加,直到最近缺乏有效的治疗方法。但是,自2011年以来,已批准了三种称为检查点抑制剂的免疫治疗剂。这篇综述的目的是确定与III期或IV期无法切除的皮肤黑色素瘤患者相比,三种药物– ipilimumab,nivolumab和pembrolizumab –与对照干预措施(安慰剂,免疫疗法或化学疗法)相比,是否提供更高的疗效和耐受性。材料和方法:在四个主要医学和科学数据库中进行搜索,获得了7,553条记录,其中七个符合纳入标准,研究总人数为3,628。仅包括前瞻性II期或III期针对无法切除的皮肤黑色素瘤患者的检查点抑制剂进行的随机对照试验,该试验报告了生存(总体或无进展),肿瘤反应或不良事件的数据。进行了三项荟萃分析。结果:进展或死亡的风险比为0.54(95%置信区间[CI]:0.44–0.67),最佳总体缓解率的比值比为4.48(95%CI:2.77–7.24),均支持检查点抑制剂。但是,由于不良反应或与治疗相关的不良事件,对照组的治疗中断率显着降低(几率= 1.63 [95%CI:0.55-4.88])。结论:这项研究发现,就生存率和肿瘤反应而言,检查点抑制剂比对照干预更有效,但耐受性却不容低。 PD1疗法(nivolumab和pembrolizumab)似乎比CTLA4疗法(ipilimumab)提供更高的疗效。但是,nivolumab和ipilimumab的组合是最有效的,但耐受性低于单一疗法。然而,缺乏公开的临床数据确实限制了这项研究。特别是在两个领域,还需要进一步的研究:1)确定检查点抑制剂的最佳用途,特别是在联合治疗方面; 2)为预测反应者确定可靠的生物标志物,并指导治疗分配。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号