首页> 外文期刊>Thoracic cancer. >Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparative efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:具有免疫检查点抑制剂的先进非小细胞肺癌一线治疗的比较疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the predominant type of lung cancer, and most clinically curable patients are diagnosed with locally advanced disease. Although the efficacy of standard platinum-based chemotherapy doublets is relatively limited. The effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains controversial, and its role in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC is obscure. Thus, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ICIs for advanced NSCLC. The PubMed, Cochrane Central Register Trial, and American Society of Clinical Oncology databases were searched from inception to 30 April 2018. We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing single-agent programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab) or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 inhibitor (ipilimumab) with chemotherapy in NSCLC patients. Progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, and adverse events were pooled for meta-analysis by Review Manager (RevMan version 5.3) software. After exclusion of ineligible studies, 12 eligible randomized controlled trials were included. Data showed that ICIs significantly improved progression-free survival (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.77, P 0.00001), overall survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64-0.91, P = 0.003), and but not objective response rate (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.25-3.13, P = 0.004) in all unselected NSCLC populations. However, they failed to increase the OS of programmed death-ligand 1 = 1-49% subgroup (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51-1.19, P = 0.25) and PFS of programmed death-ligand 11% subgroup (HR 0.85; 95%CI 0.70 to 1.03, P=0.09) in ICIs+chemotherapy over chemotherapy. Meanwhile, OS of programmed death-ligand =1-49% subgroup (HR 0.92; 95%CI 0.77 to 1.10, P=0.36) and PFS of programmed death-ligand 1≥50% subgroup (HR 0.76; 95%CI 0.52 to 1.11, P=0.15) showed no significant differences in ICIs over chemotherapy. Furthermore, fewer adverse events were observed in the ICIs groups than control groups. ICIs are overall better tolerated than chemotherapy. Our results provide further evidence supporting the favorable risk/benefit ratio for ICIs. ? 2019 The Authors. Thoracic Cancer published by China Lung Oncology Group and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
机译:非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)是肺癌的主要类型,大多数临床固化患者被诊断出患有局部晚期疾病。虽然标准铂的化疗双峰的疗效相对有限。免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIS)的影响仍然存在争议,其在先进NSCLC的一线治疗中的作用是模糊的。因此,我们进行了系统审查和荟萃分析,以比较ICIS为先进的NSCLC的疗效和安全性。从2008年4月30日开始搜查了PubMed,Cochrane中央注册试验和美国临床肿瘤学会和美国临床肿瘤学会。我们搜索了随机对照试验比较单孕中型细胞死亡蛋白1 /编程死亡 - 配体1抑制剂(Nivolumab,Pembrolizumab。或者atezolizumab)或细胞毒性T淋巴细胞相关抗原4抑制剂(IPILIMILAB)在NSCLC患者中化疗。通过审查经理(Revman 5.3版)软件汇总了无进展的存活,整体生存,客观反应率和不良事件进行了Meta分析。排除不合格的研究后,包括12项合格的随机对照试验。数据显示ICIS显着改善了无进展生存率(HR 0.66,95%CI 0.57-0.77,P <0.00001),总存活(HR 0.77,95%CI 0.64-0.91,P = 0.003),但不是客观的反应率(所有未选择的NSCLC人群中的(RR 1.97,95%CI 1.25-3.13,P = 0.004)。然而,他们未能增加编程死亡 - 配体的OS 1 = 1-49%子组(HR 0.78,95%CI 0.51-1.19,P = 0.25)和PRED-Ligand 1 <1%子组的PFS(HR 0.85 icis +化疗在化疗中,95%CI 0.70至1.03,p = 0.09)。同时,编程死亡配体的OS = 1-49%亚组(HR 0.92; 95%CI 0.77至1.10,P = 0.36)和编程死亡配体1≥50%子组的PFS(HR 0.76; 95%CI 0.52 1.11,P = 0.15)显示在化疗中没有显着差异。此外,在ICIS组中观察到比对照组更少的不良事件。 ICIS总体而不是化疗耐受性。我们的结果提供了进一步的证据,支持ICIS的有利风险/益效率。 ? 2019年的作者。中国肺部肿瘤集团和约翰瓦里和儿子澳大利亚发表的胸癌

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