Shah Darshi, Shah Veer, Shah Karan, Shah Prachi J, Alsadhan Muatassem, Haslam Alyson, Prasad Vinay, Qazilbash Muzaffar H, Chakraborty Rajshekhar, Mohyuddin Ghulam Rehman
Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, 11790, USA.
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, 10029, USA.
EClinicalMedicine. 2025 Jul 22;86:103378. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103378. eCollection 2025 Aug.
This review comprehensively assesses all prospective trials on anti-cancer vaccines for common hematological malignancies by analyzing trial designs, endpoints, and whether these endpoints are met across these trials.
We included onco prospective clinical trials involving therapeutic anti-cancer vaccines for hematological malignancies published up to May 2025. We excluded retrospective cohort studies, case reports, non-research opinion publications, and studies not related to hematological malignancies. Information sources: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, and ClinicalTrials.gov. All the included RCTs were assessed for bias using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Review of Interventions, version 6.2 and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Results were synthesized descriptively, using frequencies (%) and medians (interquartile range [IQR]). The study protocol utilized was recorded in the PROSPERO database (Registration ID. CRD42024504780).
Out of 2856 studies screened, a total of 187 studies were included. The median sample size was 18 (IQR = 20), and 33/187 (18%) studies were randomized. Most utilized primary endpoints were translational and safety, of which the endpoint was met 65/81 (80%) and 51/74 (69%) of the time, respectively. In 35/187 (19%) of the total studies included, the primary endpoint was a clinical efficacy endpoint (PFS, OS, duration of remission, cancer response) of which, 11/35 (31%) of studies met their clinical primary endpoint. Of the 33 randomized studies, 24 measured a clinical endpoint as their primary endpoint. Besides BCG administration in AML, no vaccine trial met a clinical efficacy endpoint in a randomized trial. There was not a single instance in which a vaccine product demonstrated an improvement in overall survival. The risk of bias assessment for RCTs showed most studies at low or intermediate risk of bias.
This systematic review of all therapeutic anti-cancer vaccine trials in common hematological malignancies shows that although vaccines generally demonstrate immunogenicity, they have mostly failed to show consistent anti-cancer activity. Limitations include a lack of quantitative synthesis due to heterogeneity of assessed interventions, small sample sizes in most studies, and a lack of clear endpoint description in some studies.
None. PROSPERO Registration ID. CRD42024504780.
本综述通过分析试验设计、终点指标以及这些终点指标在各个试验中的达成情况,全面评估了所有针对常见血液系统恶性肿瘤的抗癌疫苗前瞻性试验。
我们纳入了截至2025年5月发表的涉及治疗性抗癌疫苗用于血液系统恶性肿瘤的肿瘤学前瞻性临床试验。我们排除了回顾性队列研究、病例报告、非研究性观点出版物以及与血液系统恶性肿瘤无关的研究。信息来源:Embase、MEDLINE、Web of Science核心合集和ClinicalTrials.gov。所有纳入的随机对照试验均使用《Cochrane系统评价干预措施手册》第6.2版和Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行偏倚评估。结果采用频率(%)和中位数(四分位间距[IQR])进行描述性综合分析。所采用的研究方案记录在PROSPERO数据库中(注册号:CRD42024504780)。
在筛选的2856项研究中,共纳入187项研究。样本量中位数为18(IQR = 20),187项研究中有33项(18%)为随机试验。大多数采用的主要终点指标是转化指标和安全性指标,其中这些终点指标分别在65/81(80%)和51/74(69%)的研究中达成。在纳入的全部研究中有35/187(19%)项研究,其主要终点指标为临床疗效终点指标(无进展生存期、总生存期、缓解持续时间、癌症反应),其中11/35(31%)项研究达到了其临床主要终点指标。在33项随机试验中,有24项将临床终点指标作为其主要终点指标。除了在急性髓系白血病中接种卡介苗外,没有疫苗试验在随机试验中达到临床疗效终点指标。没有一个疫苗产品能证明其在总生存期方面有所改善。随机对照试验的偏倚风险评估显示,大多数研究处于低或中度偏倚风险。
这项对所有常见血液系统恶性肿瘤治疗性抗癌疫苗试验的系统评价表明,尽管疫苗通常表现出免疫原性,但它们大多未能显示出一致的抗癌活性。局限性包括由于评估干预措施的异质性而缺乏定量综合分析、大多数研究样本量较小以及一些研究缺乏明确的终点指标描述。
无。PROSPERO注册号:CRD42024504780。