Cargando…

Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of malignant melanoma are continuing to increase, and until recently effective treatments were lacking. However, since 2011 three immunotherapeutic agents, known as checkpoint inhibitors, have been approved. This review aims to establish whether these three drugs – i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Karlsson, Adam K, Saleh, Sohag N
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5580705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28883738
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S120877
_version_ 1783260946535284736
author Karlsson, Adam K
Saleh, Sohag N
author_facet Karlsson, Adam K
Saleh, Sohag N
author_sort Karlsson, Adam K
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of malignant melanoma are continuing to increase, and until recently effective treatments were lacking. However, since 2011 three immunotherapeutic agents, known as checkpoint inhibitors, have been approved. This review aims to establish whether these three drugs – ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab – offer greater efficacy and tolerability compared to control interventions (placebo, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy) in patients with stage III or IV unresectable cutaneous melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search on four major medical and scientific databases yielded 7,553 records, of which seven met the inclusion criteria, with a total study population of 3,628. Only prospective Phase II or III randomized controlled trials on checkpoint inhibitors for patients with unresectable cutaneous melanoma that reported data on survival (overall or progression-free), tumor response, or adverse events were included. Three meta-analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The hazard ratio for progression or death was 0.54 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–0.67), and the odds ratio for best overall response rate was 4.48 (95% CI: 2.77–7.24), both in favor of checkpoint inhibitors. However, control treatments were associated with an insignificantly lower rate of discontinuation of treatment due to adverse effects or treatment-related adverse events (odds ratio =1.63 [95% CI: 0.55–4.88]). CONCLUSION: This study finds that checkpoint inhibitors are more effective than control interventions, both in terms of survival and tumor response, and yet no less tolerable. PD1 therapies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) appear to offer greater efficacy than CTLA4 therapy (ipilimumab). The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab was, however, the most effective, but significantly less tolerable than monotherapy. The lack of published clinical data does, however, limit this study. Further research is needed in two areas in particular: 1) to determine the optimal use of checkpoint inhibitors, specifically in terms of combination therapy, and 2) to identify reliable biomarkers to predictive responders and guide treatment assignment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5580705
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55807052017-09-07 Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis Karlsson, Adam K Saleh, Sohag N Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol Review BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of malignant melanoma are continuing to increase, and until recently effective treatments were lacking. However, since 2011 three immunotherapeutic agents, known as checkpoint inhibitors, have been approved. This review aims to establish whether these three drugs – ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab – offer greater efficacy and tolerability compared to control interventions (placebo, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy) in patients with stage III or IV unresectable cutaneous melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search on four major medical and scientific databases yielded 7,553 records, of which seven met the inclusion criteria, with a total study population of 3,628. Only prospective Phase II or III randomized controlled trials on checkpoint inhibitors for patients with unresectable cutaneous melanoma that reported data on survival (overall or progression-free), tumor response, or adverse events were included. Three meta-analyses were carried out. RESULTS: The hazard ratio for progression or death was 0.54 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44–0.67), and the odds ratio for best overall response rate was 4.48 (95% CI: 2.77–7.24), both in favor of checkpoint inhibitors. However, control treatments were associated with an insignificantly lower rate of discontinuation of treatment due to adverse effects or treatment-related adverse events (odds ratio =1.63 [95% CI: 0.55–4.88]). CONCLUSION: This study finds that checkpoint inhibitors are more effective than control interventions, both in terms of survival and tumor response, and yet no less tolerable. PD1 therapies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) appear to offer greater efficacy than CTLA4 therapy (ipilimumab). The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab was, however, the most effective, but significantly less tolerable than monotherapy. The lack of published clinical data does, however, limit this study. Further research is needed in two areas in particular: 1) to determine the optimal use of checkpoint inhibitors, specifically in terms of combination therapy, and 2) to identify reliable biomarkers to predictive responders and guide treatment assignment. Dove Medical Press 2017-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5580705/ /pubmed/28883738 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S120877 Text en © 2017 Karlsson and Saleh. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Karlsson, Adam K
Saleh, Sohag N
Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort checkpoint inhibitors for malignant melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5580705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28883738
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S120877
work_keys_str_mv AT karlssonadamk checkpointinhibitorsformalignantmelanomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT salehsohagn checkpointinhibitorsformalignantmelanomaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis