scholarly journals Network meta-analysis of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in the second-line setting for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neehar D Parikh ◽  
Alexander Marshall ◽  
Keith A Betts ◽  
Jinlin Song ◽  
Jing Zhao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Credible Interval ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Second Line

Aims: To compare the efficacy of nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with regorafenib 160 mg, cabozantinib 60 mg and nivolumab 3 mg/kg monotherapy for second-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Materials & methods: Indirect comparison using network meta-analysis and propensity score weighting. Results: Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg had significantly higher objective response rate (median 31.2% [95% credible interval: 19.6–44.5%]) than cabozantinib (4.2% [2.0–6.5%]) and regorafenib (4.8% [1.1–8.3%]), and significantly longer overall survival (cabozantinib: hazard ratio: 0.46 [95% credible interval: 0.27–0.79]; regorafenib: 0.56 [0.32–0.97]). Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg had significantly better objective response rate (difference 21.0% [4.5–37.5%]) and overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.58 [0.35–0.96]) than nivolumab monotherapy. Conclusion: Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg had a superior efficacy versus cabozantinib 60 mg, regorafenib 160 mg and nivolumab 3 mg/kg monotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Efficacy and safety of localized concurrent chemoradiation therapy and sorafenib sequential therapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A prospective phase II trial.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15678-e15678
Author(s):  
Beom Kyung Kim ◽  
Do Young Kim ◽  
Hye Jin Choi ◽  
Seung-Hoon Beom ◽  
Hye Won Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Sorafenib Treatment

e15678 Background: Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have a particularly poor prognosis of the median overall survival of less than 12 months. Even though sorafenib has been approved for treating advanced stage HCC, the unsatisfactory objective response rate still remain unresolved. In the current study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of localized concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) followed by sequential sorafenib treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: This study is an ongoing, phase II trial. Patients with advanced HCC not amenable for curative treatments were eligible. In the course of radiotherapy for 5 weeks, hepatic arterial infusion of 5-fluorouracil (500mg/day) via implanted port was applied during the first 5 days and the last 5 days of radiotherapy. Four weeks after localized CCRT, sorafenib (400mg bid) was maintained. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Results: A total of 47 patients were enrolled. After the completion of localized CCRT, the objective response rate was 31.9%. During the overall treatment course, the objective response rate was 46.8% respectively. Overall, 7 patients (14.9%) underwent curative resection or transplantation after down-staging. The median overall survival was 18.4 months and the progression-free survival was 6.8 months. Adverse events were predictable and manageable with conservative care. Conclusions: Localized CCRT followed by sequential sorafenib treatment in patients with advanced HCC showed significant activity and good tolerability. Furthermore, such a treatment modality, when compared to the use of sorafenib alone, might provide the additional therapeutic benefit through initial tumor reduction, allowing curative treatment after down-staging in 14.9% of patients, Further randomized trial should be required to make the more robust evidence. Clinical trial information: NCT02425605.

Effects of adding necitumumab to first-line chemotherapy in patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer: Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1331-1342
Author(s):  
Irena Ilic ◽  
Sandra Sipetic ◽  
Jovan Grujicic ◽  
Milena Ilic
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

Introduction Almost half of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Our aim was to assess the effects of adding necitumumab to chemotherapy in patients with stage IV NSCLC. Material and methods A comprehensive literature search was performed according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data on overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate and adverse events were extracted. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) for time-to-event data and pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. Results The meta-analysis included four randomized clinical trials with 2074 patients. The pooled results showed significant improvement for overall survival (HR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.79–0.95), p = 0.004) when necitumumab was added to chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No statistically significant improvement was noted for progression-free survival and objective response rate (HR = 0.83 (95% CI 0.69–1.01), p = 0.06 and OR = 1.46 (95% CI 0.90–2.38), p = 0.13, respectively). Subgroup analysis showed that in patients with non-squamous NSCLC, there was no benefit in overall survival and objective response rate. Patients with advanced NSCLC who received necitumumab were at the highest odds of developing a skin rash (OR = 14.50 (95% CI 3.16–66.43), p = 0.0006) and hypomagnesaemia (OR = 2.77 (95% CI 2.23–3.45), p < 0.00001), while the OR for any grade ≥3 adverse event was 1.55 (95% CI 1.28–1.87, p < 0.00001). Conclusions The addition of necitumumab to standard chemotherapy in a first-line setting in patients with stage IV NSCLC results in a statistically significant improvement in overall survival, while the results were not significant for progression-free survival and objective response rate.

scholarly journals A systematic review and network meta-analysis of second-line therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Delos Santos ◽  
S. Udayakumar ◽  
A. Nguyen ◽  
Y.J. Ko ◽  
S. Berry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Clinical Benefits ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Grade 3

Background In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (hcc) following sorafenib failure, it is unclear which treatment is most efficacious, as treatments in the second-line setting have not been directly compared and no standard therapy exists. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (nma) aimed to compare the clinical benefits and toxicities of these treatments. Methods A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (rcts) was conducted to identify phase iii rcts in advanced hcc following sorafenib failure. Baseline characteristics and outcomes of placebo were examined for het­erogeneity. Primary outcomes of interest were extracted for results, including overall survival (os), progression-free survival (pfs), objective response rate (orr), grade 3/4 toxicities, and subgroups. An nma was conducted to compare both drugs through the intermediate placebo. Comparisons were expressed as hazard ratios (hrs) for os and pfs, and as risk difference (rd) for orr and toxicities. Subgroup analyses for os and pfs were also performed. Results Two rcts were identified (1280 patients) and compared through an indirect network; celestial (cabozantinib vs. placebo) and resorce (regorafenib vs. placebo). Baseline characteristics of patients in both trials were similar. Both trials also had similar placebo outcomes. Cabozantinib, compared with regorafenib, showed similar os [hazard ratio (hr): 1.21; 95% confidence interval (ci): 0.90 to 1.62], pfs (hr: 1.02; 95% ci: 0.78 to 1.34) and orr (−3.0%; 95% ci: −7.6% to 1.7%). Both treatments showed similar toxicities, but there were marginally higher risks of grade 3/4 hand–foot syndrome (5%; 95% ci: 0.1% to 9.8%), diarrhea (4.8%; 95% ci: 1.1% to 8.5%), and anorexia (4.4%; 95% ci: 0.8% to 8.0%) for cabozantinib. Subgroup results for os and pfs were consistent with overall results. Conclusions Overall, this nma determined that cabozantinib and regorafenib have similar clinical benefits and toxicities for second-line hcc.

Efficacy of immunotherapy with PD-1 inhibitor in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (18) ◽  
pp. 1285-1292
Author(s):  
Shengqi He ◽  
Dongqing Hu ◽  
Haixia Feng ◽  
Ye Xue ◽  
Jin Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Overall Survival Rate ◽  
Free Survival

Aim: PD-1 inhibitors have a leading role among immunotherapy while its efficacy on colorectal cancer (CRC) patients did not reach consensus and the small sample size remains as a limitation. Therefore, we undertook a meta-analysis on the effects of the monotherapy anti-PD-1 inhibitors in treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Materials & methods: We searched databases to identify studies on efficacy of anti-PD-1 inhibitor on CRC. Objectives were objective response rate, progression-free survival rate, disease control rate and overall survival rate with their 95% CI. Results: The overall survival rate at 1-year was 64.2% (95% CI: 0.46–0.83). Disease control rate was 56.5% (CI: 0.27–0.86) and the objective response rate as 19.7% (CI: 0.08–0.32). The 1-year-progression-free survival rate was 38.4% (CI: 0.12–0.66). Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were also conducted. Conclusion: The monotherapy anti-PD-1 inhibitors are effective in treating mCRC and could be a new option for dMMR mCRC patient in first-line treatment.

Comparison of systemic therapy efficacy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: Systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 293-293
Author(s):  
Robin Park ◽  
Laércio Lopes da Silva ◽  
Voravech Nissaisorakarn ◽  
Ivy Riano ◽  
Anwaar Saeed
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
Systemic Agents

293 Background: Several systemic agents are approved for use in the first line and second line treatment settings for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC). However, choosing among available options in both first and second line settings remain difficult due to the paucity of head-to-head comparative trials. Therefore, we have conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis for the indirect comparison of the systemic agents in the first line and second line settings. Methods: Published clinical trials that have evaluated systemic agents in the first line and second line settings in advanced HCC from inception to April 2020 were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Databases and abstracts presented in the main annual ASCO and ESMO conferences from 2017 to 2020. Studies published in English providing clinical outcomes data including overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes of interest were pooled hazard ratios (HR) of OS and OR of ORR in first line studies and HR of PFS and OR of ORR for second line studies. OS for second line agents were synthesized in a qualitative analysis. Results: Overall, 8,335 patients (13 studies) and 4,612 patients (11 studies) were analyzed in phase II/III trials for first line and second line settings respectively. In the first line setting, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and lenvatinib were ranked highest as the regimens associated with the greatest OS (A+B, HR 0.58, 95% CI, 0.42-0.80; P-score 0.993) and ORR (lenva, OR 3.34, 95% CI, 2.17-5.14; P-score 0.080) respectively. In the second line setting, cabozantinib showed the highest probability of greatest PFS benefit (HR 0.44, 95% CI, 0.29-0.66; P-score 0.854) as well as the highest probability of greatest ORR benefit (cabo, OR 9.40, 95% CI, 1.25-70.83, P-score, 0.266). Conclusions: In the first line setting, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab may be the superior regimen whereas lenvatinib may be considered as the initial option when robust tumor responses are preferred. In the second line setting, cabozantinib may be the preferred option including in cases when robust tumor responses are favored.

scholarly journals Comparative Efficacy of First-Line Immune-Based Combination Therapies in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reza Elaidi ◽  
Letuan Phan ◽  
Delphine Borchiellini ◽  
Philippe Barthelemy ◽  
Alain Ravaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
First Line

Three drug combinations, ipilimumab-nivolumab (Ipi-Nivo), pembrolizumab-axitinib (Pembro-Axi), and avelumab-axitinib (Ave-Axi), have received regulatory approval in the USA and Europe for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma with clear cell component (mRCC). However, no head-to-head comparison data are available to identify the best option. Therefore, we aimed to compare these new treatments in a first-line setting. We conducted a systematic search in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov for any randomized controlled trials of treatment-naïve patients with mRCC, from January 2015 to October 2019. The process was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis with two different approaches, a contrast-based model comparing HRs and ORs between studies and arm-based using parametric modeling. The outcomes for the analysis were overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate. Our search identified 3 published phase 3 randomized clinical trials (2835 patients). In the contrast-based model, Ave-Axi (SUCRA = 83%) and Pembro-Axi (SUCRA = 80%) exhibited the best ranking probabilities for PFS. For overall survival (OS), Pembro-Axi (SUCRA = 96%) was the most preferable option against Ave-Axi and Ipi-Nivo. Objective response rate analysis showed Ave-Axi as the best (SUCRA: 94%) and Pembro-Axi as the second best option. In the parametric models, the risk of progression was comparable for Ave-Axi and Ipi-Nivo, whereas Pembro-Axi exhibited a lower risk during the first 6 months of treatment and a higher risk afterwards. Furthermore, Pembro-Axi exhibited a net advantage in terms of OS over the two other regimens, while Ave-Axi was the least preferable option. Overall evidence suggests that pembrolizumab plus axitinib seems to have a slight advantage over the other two combinations.

scholarly journals Real-world outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with macrovascular tumor thrombosis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong-Ming Tsai ◽  
Meng-Zhi Han ◽  
Yih-Jyh Lin ◽  
Ting-Tsung Chang ◽  
Chiung-Yu Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Similar Response ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Vascular Response ◽  
Tumor Thrombosis ◽  
Tumor Thrombi

AbstractProgrammed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors have shown promising results for treating advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the clinical utility of such inhibitors in HCC patients with vascular tumor thrombosis remains unclear. This study investigated PD-1 inhibitor efficacy in advanced HCC with macrovascular invasion in a clinical setting. Among the 110 patients with unresectable HCC treated with PD-1 inhibitors, 34 patients with vascular metastases in the portal vein and inferior vena cava were retrospectively compared with 34 patients without tumor thrombi. The vascular response and its effect on survival were assessed. Predictors of survival were identified using multivariate analysis. Among patients achieving objective response, those with and without thrombi exhibited similar response to immunotherapy and comparable survival. Among the 34 patients with tumor thrombi, including 13 receiving PD-1 inhibitors alone and 21 receiving it in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, the median overall survival was 8.9 months (95% confidence interval 3.2–12.6). The objective response rate of vascular metastasis was 52.9%, and vascular responders had a significantly longer survival than did non-responders (11.1 vs 3.9 months). Failure to obtain a vascular response correlated significantly with increased post-treatment Child–Pugh score or class. Multivariate analysis showed that vascular response was a significant positive factor for longer overall survival. Treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 3 (8.8%) of the patients with tumor thrombi. Immunotherapy with PD-1 inhibitors may be a feasible treatment option for HCC with tumor thrombi owing to the high response rate of tumor thrombi and favorable survival outcomes.

scholarly journals Selumetinib in Combination With Dacarbazine in Patients With Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: A Phase III, Multicenter, Randomized Trial (SUMIT)

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 1232-1239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard D. Carvajal ◽  
Sophie Piperno-Neumann ◽  
Ellen Kapiteijn ◽  
Paul B. Chapman ◽  
Stephen Frank ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Uveal Melanoma ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Metastatic Setting

Purpose Uveal melanoma is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults with no effective systemic treatment option in the metastatic setting. Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886) is an oral, potent, and selective MEK1/2 inhibitor with a short half-life, which demonstrated single-agent activity in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a randomized phase II trial. Methods The Selumetinib (AZD6244: ARRY-142886) (Hyd-Sulfate) in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma (SUMIT) study was a phase III, double-blind trial ( ClinicalTrial.gov identifier: NCT01974752) in which patients with metastatic uveal melanoma and no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (3:1) to selumetinib (75 mg twice daily) plus dacarbazine (1,000 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of every 21-day cycle) or placebo plus dacarbazine. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central radiologic review. Secondary end points included overall survival and objective response rate. Results A total of 129 patients were randomly assigned to receive selumetinib plus dacarbazine (n = 97) or placebo plus dacarbazine (n = 32). In the selumetinib plus dacarbazine group, 82 patients (85%) experienced a PFS event, compared with 24 (75%) in the placebo plus dacarbazine group (median, 2.8 v 1.8 months); the hazard ratio for PFS was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.48 to 1.27; two-sided P = .32). The objective response rate was 3% with selumetinib plus dacarbazine and 0% with placebo plus dacarbazine (two-sided P = .36). At 37% maturity (n = 48 deaths), analysis of overall survival gave a hazard ratio of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.39 to 1.46; two-sided P = .40). The most frequently reported adverse events (selumetinib plus dacarbazine v placebo plus dacarbazine) were nausea (62% v 19%), rash (57% v 6%), fatigue (44% v 47%), diarrhea (44% v 22%), and peripheral edema (43% v 6%). Conclusion In patients with metastatic uveal melanoma, the combination of selumetinib plus dacarbazine had a tolerable safety profile but did not significantly improve PFS compared with placebo plus dacarbazine.

Efficacy and Safety of Apatinib Combined With S-1 in the Treatment of Advanced Gastric Cancer: a Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xu Zhang ◽  
Xiao-dong He ◽  
You-cheng Zhang ◽  
Ke-hu Yang ◽  
Jin-hui Tian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Gastric Cancer ◽  
Objective Response Rate ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety

Abstract Objective: To study the efficacy and safety of apatinib combined with S – 1 in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, in order to provide more evidence based medical evidence for the clinic.Methods: Randomized controlled trials of apatinib combined with S – 1 (experimental group) versus S - 1 (controlg roup) in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer were collected by computer literature search in Chinese and English databases, for the deadlines of March 21, 2021. Two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the quality of the literature using the Cochrane risk bias assessment tool. And the Meta – analysis was performed using Review Manager 5. 3 software almost.Results: A total of 20 articles were included, totaling 1,150 patients. Meta – analysis showed that the objective response rate [OR = 2.02, 95% CI (1.56, 2.63), P < 0.00001], disease control rate [OR = 3.10, 95% CI (2.30, 4.17), P < 0.00001], median overall survival [MD = 3.99, 95% CI (3.56, 4.43), P < 0.00001] of patients with apatinib combined with S – 1 group were higher than the S – 1 group, then the median progression – free survival had not significant differences [MD = 1.24, 95% CI (-1.19, 3.67), P = 0.32]. In the adverse reactions, only the incidence of hypertension [OR = 6.19, 95% CI (1.89, 20.23), P = 0.003] and the incidence of proteinuria [OR = 4.02, 95% CI (1.11, 14.62), P = 0.03] in the apatinib combined with S – 1 group were higher than the S – 1 group, and there was no significant difference in the other adverse reactions. In addition, the levels of IFN – γ and TNF – α in the apatinib combined with S – 1 group were higher than those in the S – 1 group, and the levels of IL - 10, IL – 4, TSGF, CA199 and CEA were lower than those of the S – 1 group.Conclusion: Current evidence suggests that apatinib combined with S - 1 can achieve higher objective response rate, disease control rate, median overall survival, less adverse reactions, and improve immune function, effectively reduce the level of tumor markers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document