Department of Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, 22110, Jordan.
Facullty of Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, 22110, Jordan.
Clin Transl Oncol. 2021 Sep;23(9):1885-1904. doi: 10.1007/s12094-021-02598-6. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
More than half of melanoma patients taking first-line anti-PD-1 therapy either express transient or no response at all. The efficacy and safety of secondary treatments for these patients are still not well established. Here, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of different melanoma FDA-approved ICI modalities used in post-anti-PD-1 refractory settings.
We searched the PubMed database and the ASCO meetings library for studies on advanced melanoma patients with cancer progression on anti-PD-1 therapy and were then treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab combination, or retreated with anti-PD-1. Primary and secondary endpoints were efficacy and toxicity, respectively. Pooled estimates for each treatment group were obtained using a random or fixed effects model according to detected heterogeneity.
Fourteen studies, of which 10 on ipilimumab, 2 on anti-PD-1 treatment, and 6 on combination therapies, were included, involving a total of 1460 patients. Twelve studies reported objective response rates (ORRs) and nine of them reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs). As for ORR, patients experienced a response that was inferior compared to the same therapy in treatment -naïve patients, with combination therapy having the best ORR of a pooled 23.08% (95% CI: 16.75% to 30.03%), followed by ipilimumab with a pooled ORR of 8.19% (95% CI: 5.78% to 10.92%). Survival data were also inferior in the ipilimumab cohort (mOS: 5.1 to 7.4 months) compared to ipilimumab in anti-PD-1 naive patients. As for grade 3/4 irAE occurrence, the ipilimumab cohort showed an estimate of 43.77% (95% CI 22.55% to 66.19%).
Our findings provide the best current evidence that patients who progress on anti-PD-1 can still respond to different ICI modalities (ipilimumab with or without nivolumab, and retreatment or continuation beyond progression with anti-PD-1) with tolerable grade 3/4 irAEs. However, more prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.
超过一半的接受一线抗 PD-1 治疗的黑色素瘤患者要么表现出短暂的反应,要么根本没有反应。对于这些患者的二线治疗的疗效和安全性仍未得到很好的确定。在这里,我们评估了在抗 PD-1 难治性环境中使用的不同黑色素瘤 FDA 批准的免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)模式的疗效和安全性。
我们在 PubMed 数据库和 ASCO 会议文库中搜索了在抗 PD-1 治疗后癌症进展的晚期黑色素瘤患者的研究,然后用伊匹单抗、纳武单抗/伊匹单抗联合治疗,或用抗 PD-1 重新治疗。主要终点和次要终点分别为疗效和毒性。根据检测到的异质性,使用随机或固定效应模型获得每个治疗组的汇总估计值。
共纳入 14 项研究,其中 10 项关于伊匹单抗,2 项关于抗 PD-1 治疗,6 项关于联合治疗,共涉及 1460 名患者。12 项研究报告了客观缓解率(ORR),其中 9 项报告了免疫相关不良事件(irAEs)。就 ORR 而言,与治疗初治患者相比,患者的反应较差,联合治疗的 ORR 最佳,为 23.08%(95%CI:16.75%至 30.03%),其次是伊匹单抗,ORR 为 8.19%(95%CI:5.78%至 10.92%)。与抗 PD-1 初治患者的伊匹单抗相比,伊匹单抗组的生存数据也较差(mOS:5.1 至 7.4 个月)。至于 3/4 级 irAE 的发生,伊匹单抗组的估计值为 43.77%(95%CI 22.55%至 66.19%)。
我们的研究结果提供了最佳的现有证据,表明在抗 PD-1 治疗后进展的患者仍然可以对不同的 ICI 模式(伊匹单抗联合或不联合纳武单抗,以及进展后继续或重新使用抗 PD-1)产生反应,且可耐受 3/4 级 irAE。然而,还需要更多的前瞻性临床试验来证实这些结果。