Suppr超能文献

免疫检查点抑制剂在癌症中的比较安全性:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Comparative safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, China.

Department of Oncology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

BMJ. 2018 Nov 8;363:k4226. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4226.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To provide a complete toxicity profile, toxicity spectrum, and a safety ranking of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) drugs for treatment of cancer.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) were systematically searched to include relevant studies published in English between January 2007 and February 2018.

REVIEW METHODS

Only head-to-head phase II and III randomised controlled trials comparing any two or three of the following treatments or different doses of the same ICI drug were included: nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, tremelimumab, atezolizumab, conventional therapy (chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and their combinations), two ICI drugs, or one ICI drug with conventional therapy. Eligible studies must have reported site, organ, or system level data on treatment related adverse events. High quality, single arm trials and placebo controlled trials on ICI drugs were selected to establish a validation group.

RESULTS

36 head-to-head phase II and III randomised trials (n=15 370) were included. The general safety of ICI drugs ranked from high to low for all adverse events was as follows: atezolizumab (probability 76%, pooled incidence 66.4%), nivolumab (56%, 71.8%), pembrolizumab (55%, 75.1%), ipilimumab (55%, 86.8%), and tremelimumab (54%, not applicable). The general safety of ICI drugs ranked from high to low for severe or life threatening adverse events was as follows: atezolizumab (49%, 15.1%), nivolumab (46%, 14.1%), pembrolizumab (72%, 19.8%), ipilimumab (51%, 28.6%), and tremelimumab (28%, not applicable). Compared with conventional therapy, treatment-related adverse events for ICI drugs occurred mainly in the skin, endocrine, hepatic, and pulmonary systems. Taking one ICI drug was generally safer than taking two ICI drugs or one ICI drug with conventional therapy. Among the five ICI drugs, atezolizumab had the highest risk of hypothyroidism, nausea, and vomiting. The predominant treatment-related adverse events for pembrolizumab were arthralgia, pneumonitis, and hepatic toxicities. The main treatment-related adverse events for ipilimumab were skin, gastrointestinal, and renal toxicities. Nivolumab had a narrow and mild toxicity spectrum, mainly causing endocrine toxicities. Integrated evidence from the pooled incidences, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses implied that nivolumab is the best option in terms of safety, especially for the treatment of lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with other ICI drugs used to treat cancer, atezolizumab had the best safety profile in general, and nivolumab had the best safety profile in lung cancer when taking an integrated approach. The safety ranking of treatments based on ICI drugs is modulated by specific treatment-related adverse events.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42017082553.

摘要

目的

提供癌症治疗用免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)药物的完整毒性概况、毒性谱和安全性排名。

设计

系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

数据来源

系统检索电子数据库(PubMed、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆和 Web of Science),纳入 2007 年 1 月至 2018 年 2 月期间发表的英文相关研究。

研究方法

仅纳入头对头的 II 期和 III 期随机对照试验,比较以下任何两种或三种治疗方法或相同 ICI 药物的不同剂量:纳武单抗、帕博利珠单抗、伊匹单抗、替西木单抗、阿特珠单抗、常规疗法(化疗、靶向治疗及其组合)、两种 ICI 药物或一种 ICI 药物联合常规疗法。合格研究必须报告与治疗相关不良事件的部位、器官或系统水平数据。选择高质量、单臂试验和 ICI 药物安慰剂对照试验来建立验证组。

结果

共纳入 36 项头对头的 II 期和 III 期随机试验(n=15370)。ICI 药物的总体安全性(所有不良事件)从高到低的排名如下:阿特珠单抗(概率 76%,汇总发生率 66.4%)、纳武单抗(56%,71.8%)、帕博利珠单抗(55%,75.1%)、伊匹单抗(55%,86.8%)和替西木单抗(54%,不适用)。ICI 药物的总体安全性(严重或危及生命的不良事件)从高到低的排名如下:阿特珠单抗(49%,15.1%)、纳武单抗(46%,14.1%)、帕博利珠单抗(72%,19.8%)、伊匹单抗(51%,28.6%)和替西木单抗(28%,不适用)。与常规疗法相比,ICI 药物的治疗相关不良事件主要发生在皮肤、内分泌、肝脏和肺部系统。与使用两种 ICI 药物或一种 ICI 药物联合常规疗法相比,使用一种 ICI 药物通常更安全。在五种 ICI 药物中,阿特珠单抗发生甲状腺功能减退症、恶心和呕吐的风险最高。帕博利珠单抗的主要治疗相关不良事件是关节炎、肺炎和肝毒性。伊匹单抗的主要治疗相关不良事件是皮肤、胃肠道和肾脏毒性。纳武单抗的毒性谱较窄且较温和,主要引起内分泌毒性。汇总发生率、亚组和敏感性分析的综合证据表明,纳武单抗在安全性方面是最佳选择,特别是在治疗肺癌方面。

结论

与用于治疗癌症的其他 ICI 药物相比,阿特珠单抗总体上具有最佳的安全性概况,而纳武单抗在综合治疗肺癌方面具有最佳的安全性概况。基于 ICI 药物的治疗安全性排名受到特定治疗相关不良事件的调节。

系统评价注册

PROSPERO CRD42017082553。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b68e/6222274/1644d406c0cb/xuc045146.f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验