Lombardi Pasquale, Filetti Marco, Falcone Rosa, Di Bidino Rossella, Iacovelli Roberto, Ciccarese Chiara, Bria Emilio, Tortora Giampaolo, Scambia Giovanni, Daniele Gennaro
Phase 1 Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli, IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Department of Health Technology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Italy.
Cancer Treat Rev. 2022 May;106:102377. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2022.102377. Epub 2022 Mar 16.
Several first-line immune-checkpoints inhibitors (ICI) based combinations have been studied in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) without any direct comparison between the regimens. The objective of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to provide the most updated evidence about the preferred first line ICI-based regimen for mRCC. We searched various databases, including PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus and the major conference proceedings (ASCO, ESMO). Eligible studies were randomized trial, published before June 2021 that evaluated first-line, ICI-based combinations compared with the standard of care in mRCC. Screening was performed independently by two investigators. A Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess trial quality. Relative effects of competing treatments were assessed by Bayesian network meta-analysis. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was used. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate, complete response and adverse events. Six trials with 5478 patients comparing 7 treatments were identified. Network meta-analysis showed that lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab had the highest probability to be the best treatment in terms of OS (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) 80.7%) and PFS (SUCRA 99.6%), while in sarcomatoid patients, nivolumab plus cabozantinib had the highest rank in terms of survival outcomes (SUCRA 85.8% and SUCRA 77.3%, respectively). Although we established a ranking among new first-line mRCC treatment combinations, the absence of direct comparisons between the multiple treatment options represents a major hurdle in establishing optimal therapeutic sequences. Our results could represent a starting point for head-to-head trials between the most promising combinations.
几种基于一线免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)的联合方案已在转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)中进行了研究,但这些方案之间没有任何直接比较。本系统评价和网络荟萃分析的目的是提供关于mRCC首选一线ICI联合方案的最新证据。我们检索了多个数据库,包括PubMed、科学网和Scopus以及主要会议论文集(美国临床肿瘤学会、欧洲肿瘤内科学会)。符合条件的研究为2021年6月前发表的随机试验,该试验评估了一线基于ICI的联合方案与mRCC标准治疗的比较。由两名研究人员独立进行筛选。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估试验质量。通过贝叶斯网络荟萃分析评估竞争性治疗的相对效果。采用系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南。结局包括总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、总缓解率、完全缓解率和不良事件。确定了6项试验,共5478例患者,比较了7种治疗方法。网络荟萃分析显示,在OS方面(累积排名曲线下面积(SUCRA)为80.7%)和PFS方面(SUCRA为99.6%),乐伐替尼加派姆单抗最有可能是最佳治疗方法,而在肉瘤样患者中,纳武单抗加卡博替尼在生存结局方面排名最高(分别为SUCRA 85.8%和SUCRA 77.3%)。尽管我们在新的一线mRCC治疗联合方案中建立了排名,但多种治疗方案之间缺乏直接比较是确定最佳治疗顺序的主要障碍。我们的结果可能代表了最有前景的联合方案之间进行头对头试验的起点。