Suppr超能文献

3种BRAF+MEK抑制剂治疗晚期BRAF突变黑色素瘤的网状间接比较

Network indirect comparison of 3 BRAF + MEK inhibitors for the treatment of advanced BRAF mutated melanoma.

作者信息

Consoli F, Bersanelli M, Perego G, Grisanti S, Merelli B, Berruti A, Petrelli F

机构信息

Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, Medical Oncology, University of Brescia at ASST-Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy.

Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy.

出版信息

Clin Transl Oncol. 2020 Jun;22(6):900-907. doi: 10.1007/s12094-019-02207-7. Epub 2019 Sep 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUD

Synergistic combinations between BRAF and MEK inhibitors, such as dabrafenib plus trametinib, vemurafenib plus cobimetinib or encorafenib plus binimetinib, represent the current standard of care in metastatic or locally advanced BRAF V600 mutated malignant melanomas (MM). However, no studies explored the direct head-to-head comparison between the three different combinations. In this paper, we performed a network meta-analysis to evaluate their efficacy in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety profile.

METHOD

We performed a systematic review of the literature about published first line trials of BRAF and MEK inhibitors doublets in advanced mutated malignant melanoma. We compared then the results with an adjusted indirect analysis of randomized-controlled trials. Our primary survival outcome was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS, ORR, G3-4 toxicities described in at least 5% of patients in experimental arms.

RESULTS

We identified three phase-3 trials: coBRIM (vemurafenib and cobimetinib), COMBI-v (dabrafenib and trametinib) and Columbus study (encorafenib and binimetinib) for a total of 1230 included patients. The control arm was vemurafenib in all studies. The indirect comparison revealed no statistically differences for OS, PFS and ORR across trials, while safety profile differed between the three couples of agents.

CONCLUSION

This indirect adjusted meta-analysis suggests a similar efficacy and a slightly different safety profile, related to specific molecular properties of the three different BRAF and MEK inhibitors currently approved in the management of advanced MM.

摘要

背景

BRAF和MEK抑制剂之间的协同联合用药,如达拉非尼联合曲美替尼、维莫非尼联合考比替尼或恩考芬尼联合比美替尼,是转移性或局部晚期BRAF V600突变恶性黑色素瘤(MM)目前的标准治疗方案。然而,尚无研究对这三种不同联合用药进行直接的头对头比较。在本文中,我们进行了一项网状荟萃分析,以评估它们在总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、总缓解率(ORR)和安全性方面的疗效。

方法

我们对已发表的关于BRAF和MEK抑制剂双联疗法用于晚期突变恶性黑色素瘤一线试验的文献进行了系统综述。然后,我们将结果与随机对照试验的调整间接分析结果进行比较。我们的主要生存结局是OS。次要终点是PFS、ORR、各试验组中至少5%的患者出现的3-4级毒性。

结果

我们确定了三项3期试验:coBRIM(维莫非尼和考比替尼)、COMBI-v(达拉非尼和曲美替尼)和哥伦布研究(恩考芬尼和比美替尼),共纳入1230例患者。所有研究中的对照组均为维莫非尼。间接比较显示,各试验在OS、PFS和ORR方面无统计学差异,而三组药物之间的安全性有所不同。

结论

这项间接调整的荟萃分析表明,在晚期MM治疗中目前获批的三种不同BRAF和MEK抑制剂,其疗效相似,但安全性略有不同,这与它们的特定分子特性有关。

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