Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.
School of Pharmacy (ISPB) / UMR CNRS 5510 MATEIS / Lyon University Hospitals, Edouard Herriot hospital, Pharmacy Department, University of Lyon, 8 avenue Rockefeller, 69008, Lyon, France.
BMC Cancer. 2019 Apr 25;19(1):392. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5507-6.
BACKGROUND: A review of therapies for advanced cancers licenced by the EMA between 2009 and 2013 concluded that for more than half of these drugs there was little evidence of overall survival or quality of life benefit. Recent years have witnessed a growing number of licensed second-line pharmacotherapies for advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With the aim of gauging patient survival benefit, we conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and compared survival outcomes from available licensed treatments for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC. METHODS: RCTs of second/third line treatments in participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and negative/low expression of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) and of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) were included. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web of Science) from January, 2000 up to July, 2017. Two or more independent reviewers screened bibliographic records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of studies. Published Kaplan Meier plots for OS and PFS along with restricted-mean-survival methods and parametric modelling were used to estimate the survival outcomes as mean number of months of survival. Network meta-analysis was undertaken to rank interventions and to make indirect comparisons. RESULTS: We included 11 RCTs with data for 7581 participants that compared nine different drugs. In studies of patients regardless of histology groups, targeted drugs (ramucirumab and nintedanib) yielded small overall survival gains of < 2.5 months over docetaxel, erlotinib provided no benefit, while immunotherapies (atezolizumab and pembrolizumab) delivered 5 to 6 months gain. Studies with patients stratified by histology confirmed the apparent superiority of immunotherapy (nivolumab and atezolizumab) over targeted treatments (ramucirumab, nintedanib, afatinib) providing between about 4 to 8 months OS gain over docetaxel. In network analysis immunotherapies consistently ranked higher than alternatives irrespective of population histology and outcome measure. CONCLUSION: Our review indicates that nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab provide superior survival benefits compared to other licensed drugs for late stage NSCLC. Patient gains from these immunotherapies are substantial compared to the expected average survival with chemotherapy (docetaxel) of < 1 year for people with squamous histology and about 1.25 year for those with non-squamous histology.
背景:对 2009 年至 2013 年间欧洲药品管理局批准的晚期癌症治疗方法进行的综述得出结论,对于超过一半的这些药物,几乎没有证据表明整体生存或生活质量有获益。近年来,越来越多的二线治疗药物获批用于晚期/转移性非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)。为了评估患者的生存获益,我们对随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价,并比较了晚期/转移性 NSCLC 患者可用的已批准治疗方法的生存结局。
方法:纳入了参与者为晚期/转移性 NSCLC 且间变性淋巴瘤激酶(ALK)和表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)阴性/低表达的二线/三线治疗的 RCT。我们从 2000 年 1 月至 2017 年 7 月在电子数据库(MEDLINE;EMBASE;Web of Science)中进行了搜索。两名或更多独立审查员筛选了文献记录、提取了数据并评估了研究的偏倚风险。使用已发表的 OS 和 PFS 的 Kaplan-Meier 图以及限制平均生存方法和参数模型来估计生存结局,即生存的平均月数。进行了网络荟萃分析以对干预措施进行排名并进行间接比较。
结果:我们纳入了 11 项 RCT,共有 7581 名参与者的数据,这些 RCT 比较了 9 种不同的药物。在不论组织学组别的患者研究中,靶向药物(ramucirumab 和 nintedanib)使总生存获益增加了不到 2.5 个月,而厄洛替尼没有获益,而免疫疗法(atezolizumab 和 pembrolizumab)使生存获益增加了 5 至 6 个月。对按组织学分层的患者进行的研究证实了免疫疗法(nivolumab 和 atezolizumab)明显优于靶向治疗(ramucirumab、nintedanib、afatinib),为 docetaxel 提供了约 4 至 8 个月的 OS 获益。在网络分析中,免疫疗法无论人群组织学和结局测量如何,都始终排名高于其他替代方法。
结论:我们的综述表明,nivolumab、pembrolizumab 和 atezolizumab 与晚期 NSCLC 的其他已批准药物相比,提供了更好的生存获益。与化疗(docetaxel)的预期平均生存时间相比,这些免疫疗法为患者带来了实质性获益,对于鳞状组织学的患者小于 1 年,对于非鳞状组织学的患者约为 1.25 年。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-5-25
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016-6
N Engl J Med. 2015-10-22