Department of Urology, Henan Provincial People's Hospital; Zhengzhou University People's Hospital, Zhengzhou 450003, China.
Department of Pathophysiology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, China.
EBioMedicine. 2019 Sep;47:78-88. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.08.006. Epub 2019 Aug 19.
Several novel immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based treatments exhibited promising survival benefits for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), yet there is no current guidance regarding the optimum first-line regimen. We performed this network analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of all available treatments for mRCC.
A systematic search of literature was conducted up to April 30, 2019, and the analysis was done on a Bayesian fixed-effect model.
Twenty-five randomized clinical trials (RCTs) involving 13,010 patients were included in this study. The results showed that for overall survival, pembrolizumab plus axitinib (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.38-0.73) and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR: 0.63; 95% CrI: 0.50-0.79) were significantly more effective than sunitinib, and pembrolizumab plus axitinib was probably (68%) to be the best choice. For progression-free survival, cabozantinib (HR: 0.66; 95% CrI: 0.46-0.94), pembrolizumab plus axitinib (HR: 0.69; 95% CrI: 0.57-0.84), avelumab plus axitinib (HR: 0.69; 95% CrI: 0.56-0.85), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR: 0.82; 95% CrI: 0.68-0.99), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (HR: 0.86; 95% CrI: 0.74-0.99) were statistically superior to sunitinib, and cabozantinib was likely (43%) to be the preferred options. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (OR: 0.50; 95% CrI: 0.28-0.84), and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (OR: 0.56; 95% CrI: 0.36-0.83) were associated with significantly lower rate of high-grade adverse events than sunitinib.
Our findings demonstrate that pembrolizumab plus axitinib might be the best treatment for mRCC, while nivolumab plus ipilimumab has the most favorable balance between efficacy and acceptability, and may provide new guidance to make treatment decisions. FUND: This research was supported by the Henan Provincial Scientific and Technological Research Project (Grant No. 192102310036).
几种新型免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)治疗方案为转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)患者带来了有希望的生存获益,但目前尚无关于最佳一线治疗方案的指南。我们进行了这项网络分析,以比较 mRCC 所有可用治疗方法的疗效和安全性。
对截至 2019 年 4 月 30 日的文献进行了系统搜索,并采用贝叶斯固定效应模型进行了分析。
本研究共纳入 25 项随机临床试验(RCT),涉及 13010 名患者。结果显示,在总生存期方面,帕博利珠单抗联合阿昔替尼(HR:0.53;95%可信区间[CrI]:0.38-0.73)和纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗(HR:0.63;95% CrI:0.50-0.79)均显著优于舒尼替尼,而帕博利珠单抗联合阿昔替尼可能是(68%)的最佳选择。在无进展生存期方面,卡博替尼(HR:0.66;95% CrI:0.46-0.94)、帕博利珠单抗联合阿昔替尼(HR:0.69;95% CrI:0.57-0.84)、avelumab 联合阿昔替尼(HR:0.69;95% CrI:0.56-0.85)、纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗(HR:0.82;95% CrI:0.68-0.99)和阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗(HR:0.86;95% CrI:0.74-0.99)在统计学上均优于舒尼替尼,而卡博替尼可能是(43%)的首选方案。纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗(OR:0.50;95% CrI:0.28-0.84)和阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗(OR:0.56;95% CrI:0.36-0.83)与舒尼替尼相比,导致严重不良事件的发生率显著降低。
我们的研究结果表明,帕博利珠单抗联合阿昔替尼可能是 mRCC 的最佳治疗方法,而纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗在疗效和可接受性之间具有最有利的平衡,可能为治疗决策提供新的指导。
本研究由河南省科技攻关项目(编号:192102310036)资助。