Immunotherapy Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Urothelial Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Isadora Mamede , Lorena Escalante-Romero , Davi S. Gonçalves Celso , Pedro C. Abrahao Reis , Maria Inez Dacoregio , Ana Caroline Alves , Carlos Stecca
{"title":"Immunotherapy Plus Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Urothelial Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials","authors":"Isadora Mamede ,&nbsp;Lorena Escalante-Romero ,&nbsp;Davi S. Gonçalves Celso ,&nbsp;Pedro C. Abrahao Reis ,&nbsp;Maria Inez Dacoregio ,&nbsp;Ana Caroline Alves ,&nbsp;Carlos Stecca","doi":"10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Platinum-based chemotherapy (CTX) has historically been the primary treatment for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC), with limited alternative options. The therapeutic landscape experienced a paradigm shift following the results of the EV-302 and Checkmate-901 trials, which led to the approval of Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (EV-P) as the preferred first-line treatment, and nivolumab plus CTX for those unable to receive the preferred regimen. Currently, further investigations are underway to explore PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in the initial treatment of aUC.</p></div><div><h3>Patients and methods</h3><p>We conducted a systematic search across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-CTX combinations versus CTX alone as first-line treatment for advanced UC. Employing a random-effects model, we pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our analysis encompassed 3 RCTs, involving 2162 participants, with 51.16% randomized to combination therapy with platinum-based CTX. Compared to CTX alone, immune-chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75-0.93; <em>P</em> &lt; .01), progression-free survival (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.86; <em>P</em> &lt; .01), and objective response rate (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.06-1.36; <em>P</em> &lt; .01), while elevating the risk of immune-related adverse events (<em>P</em>-value = .02).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this meta-analysis of RCTs, ICI plus CTX demonstrated a significant association with improved survival at the expense of an increased risk of immune-related adverse events. Therefore, our findings suggest that this combination should be considered as an initial treatment for aUC in platinum-eligible patients who cannot receive EV-P.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558767324001253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Platinum-based chemotherapy (CTX) has historically been the primary treatment for advanced urothelial cancer (aUC), with limited alternative options. The therapeutic landscape experienced a paradigm shift following the results of the EV-302 and Checkmate-901 trials, which led to the approval of Enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab (EV-P) as the preferred first-line treatment, and nivolumab plus CTX for those unable to receive the preferred regimen. Currently, further investigations are underway to explore PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors in the initial treatment of aUC.

Patients and methods

We conducted a systematic search across PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI)-CTX combinations versus CTX alone as first-line treatment for advanced UC. Employing a random-effects model, we pooled hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

Our analysis encompassed 3 RCTs, involving 2162 participants, with 51.16% randomized to combination therapy with platinum-based CTX. Compared to CTX alone, immune-chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75-0.93; P < .01), progression-free survival (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.86; P < .01), and objective response rate (RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.06-1.36; P < .01), while elevating the risk of immune-related adverse events (P-value = .02).

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis of RCTs, ICI plus CTX demonstrated a significant association with improved survival at the expense of an increased risk of immune-related adverse events. Therefore, our findings suggest that this combination should be considered as an initial treatment for aUC in platinum-eligible patients who cannot receive EV-P.

免疫疗法加化疗与单纯化疗作为晚期尿路上皮癌的一线治疗:随机对照试验的最新系统综述和荟萃分析
导言铂类化疗(CTX)历来是晚期尿路上皮癌(aUC)的主要治疗方法,替代方案有限。在EV-302和Checkmate-901试验结果公布后,治疗模式发生了转变,Enfortumab vedotin加pembrolizumab(EV-P)被批准为首选一线治疗方案,nivolumab加CTX被批准用于无法接受首选方案的患者。患者和方法我们在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆对随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统性检索,比较了免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)-CTX联合治疗与单用CTX作为晚期UC一线治疗的效果。采用随机效应模型,我们汇总了危险比(HR)及95%置信区间(CI)。结果我们的分析包括3项RCT,涉及2162名参与者,其中51.16%的参与者随机接受了铂类CTX联合疗法。与单用CTX相比,免疫化疗能显著提高总生存期(HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.75-0.93; P <.01)、无进展生存期(HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.86; P <.01)和客观反应率(RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.06-1.36; P <.01)。结论在这项RCT荟萃分析中,ICI加CTX与生存率改善有显著相关性,但以免疫相关不良事件风险增加为代价。因此,我们的研究结果表明,对于符合铂治疗条件但无法接受EV-P治疗的患者,应考虑将这种联合疗法作为aUC的初始治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信