Cargando…

Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE: This systematic review with network meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of currently licensed second-line treatments in patients with late stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC receivi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Armoiry, Xavier, Tsertsvadze, Alexander, Connock, Martin, Royle, Pamela, Melendez-Torres, G. J., Souquet, Pierre-Jean, Clarke, Aileen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6059384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30044785
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199575
_version_ 1783341849355747328
author Armoiry, Xavier
Tsertsvadze, Alexander
Connock, Martin
Royle, Pamela
Melendez-Torres, G. J.
Souquet, Pierre-Jean
Clarke, Aileen
author_facet Armoiry, Xavier
Tsertsvadze, Alexander
Connock, Martin
Royle, Pamela
Melendez-Torres, G. J.
Souquet, Pierre-Jean
Clarke, Aileen
author_sort Armoiry, Xavier
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This systematic review with network meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of currently licensed second-line treatments in patients with late stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC receiving second/third line treatments were screened. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web of Science) from January, 2000 to July, 2017. Two reviewers screened bibliographic records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and drug-related grade 3–5 adverse-events (AEs). We pooled study-specific hazard ratios (HR; for OS and PFS) and risk ratios (RR; for AEs) using conventional and network-meta-analyses, and ranked interventions by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. FINDINGS: We included 11 RCTs (7,581 participants) comparing nine drugs. All drugs except for erlotinib significantly improved OS compared to docetaxel. Nivolumab was the highest ranking drug followed by atezolizumab and pembrolizumab. There was no significant difference in OS across these three drugs (HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.79, 1.21 for nivolumab vs atezolizumab; HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.77, 1.25 for nivolumab vs pembrolizumab). For PFS, ramucirumab + docetaxel and nivolumab were the drugs with the highest ranking. All interventions except ramucirumab + docetaxel had a reduced risk for severe drug-related AEs vs. docetaxel. Of the drugs with the highest ranking on AEs, nivolumab was significantly safer compared to atezolizumab (RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38, 0.79) or pembrolizumab (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.34, 0.81). IMPLICATIONS: Nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab exhibited superior benefit/risk balance compared to other licensed drugs used late stage NSCLC. Our results indicate that the use of immunotherapies in people diagnosed with non-specific late stage NSCLC should be promoted. The use of docetaxel may now be judged irrelevant as a comparator intervention for approval of new drugs for second line treatment of NSCLC. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42017065928.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6059384
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60593842018-08-06 Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis Armoiry, Xavier Tsertsvadze, Alexander Connock, Martin Royle, Pamela Melendez-Torres, G. J. Souquet, Pierre-Jean Clarke, Aileen PLoS One Research Article PURPOSE: This systematic review with network meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of currently licensed second-line treatments in patients with late stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC receiving second/third line treatments were screened. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web of Science) from January, 2000 to July, 2017. Two reviewers screened bibliographic records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of included studies. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and drug-related grade 3–5 adverse-events (AEs). We pooled study-specific hazard ratios (HR; for OS and PFS) and risk ratios (RR; for AEs) using conventional and network-meta-analyses, and ranked interventions by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. FINDINGS: We included 11 RCTs (7,581 participants) comparing nine drugs. All drugs except for erlotinib significantly improved OS compared to docetaxel. Nivolumab was the highest ranking drug followed by atezolizumab and pembrolizumab. There was no significant difference in OS across these three drugs (HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.79, 1.21 for nivolumab vs atezolizumab; HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.77, 1.25 for nivolumab vs pembrolizumab). For PFS, ramucirumab + docetaxel and nivolumab were the drugs with the highest ranking. All interventions except ramucirumab + docetaxel had a reduced risk for severe drug-related AEs vs. docetaxel. Of the drugs with the highest ranking on AEs, nivolumab was significantly safer compared to atezolizumab (RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38, 0.79) or pembrolizumab (RR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.34, 0.81). IMPLICATIONS: Nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab exhibited superior benefit/risk balance compared to other licensed drugs used late stage NSCLC. Our results indicate that the use of immunotherapies in people diagnosed with non-specific late stage NSCLC should be promoted. The use of docetaxel may now be judged irrelevant as a comparator intervention for approval of new drugs for second line treatment of NSCLC. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42017065928. Public Library of Science 2018-07-25 /pmc/articles/PMC6059384/ /pubmed/30044785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199575 Text en © 2018 Armoiry et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Armoiry, Xavier
Tsertsvadze, Alexander
Connock, Martin
Royle, Pamela
Melendez-Torres, G. J.
Souquet, Pierre-Jean
Clarke, Aileen
Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_short Comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_sort comparative efficacy and safety of licensed treatments for previously treated non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6059384/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30044785
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199575
work_keys_str_mv AT armoiryxavier comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT tsertsvadzealexander comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT connockmartin comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT roylepamela comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT melendeztorresgj comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT souquetpierrejean comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT clarkeaileen comparativeefficacyandsafetyoflicensedtreatmentsforpreviouslytreatednonsmallcelllungcancerasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis