Superiority of polatuzumab vedotin over other novel agents in previously untreated ABC-type diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a network meta-analysis of 20 RCTs.

Because of lacking of head-to-head comparison among polatuzumab (Pola) vedotin and other novel agents for untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the optimal option remains undefined. We searched twelve relevant published reports, covering 8376 subjects. Interestingly, the PFS benefit with Pola-R-CHP over other regimens was found prominently in those B-cell-like type (ABC-type) patients. For those ABC-type patients, the PFS advantage with Pola-R-CHP was statistically significant, when compared to R-CHOP+Bort (HR: 0.52, P=0.02), R-CHOP+Ibru (HR: 0.43, P=0.001), R-CHOP+Lena (HR: 0.51, P=0.009), G-CHOP (HR: 0.46, P=0.008), and R-CHOP (HR: 0.40, P<0.001). Meanwhile, for those germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) type patients, no PFS advantage with Pola-R-CHP was found when compared to R-CHOP+Bort (HR: 1.18, P=0.46), R-CHOP+Lena (HR: 1.21, P=0.45), G-CHOP (HR: 1.39, P=0.14), R-CHOP-14 (HR: 0.94, P=0.82), and R-CHOP (HR: 1.00, P=1). The PFS advantage with Pola-R-CHP over other regimens might be confined to those patients of ABC-type DLBCL.

Superiority of ibrutinib plus bendamustine and rituximab in newly diagnosed patients with mantle-cell lymphoma ineligible for intensive therapy: A network meta-analysis.

Because of lacking of head-to-head comparison among recently effective novel agents' combination regimens for newly diagnosed patients with mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL) who are ineligible for intensive therapy like autologous stem-cell transplantation, the optimal option for these patients still remains undefined. We searched relevant published reports. Three randomized controlled trials with 1459 subjects were identified. In the network meta-analysis, ibrutinib plus bendamustine and rituximab (Ibru + BR) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) when compared to bortezomib, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (VR-CAP; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.55, p = .03) and rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP; HR: 0.35, p < .001) for newly diagnosed patients with MCL ineligible for intensive therapy. Among these first-line treatment regimens (Ibru + BR, VR-CAP, R-CHOP, and BR), Ibru + BR had the highest probability of 94.9% to be the best intervention in PFS analysis. No significant difference was found in adverse events analysis. Our data indicated that Ibru + BR seemed to prolong the PFS when compared to VR-CAP and R-CHOP for newly diagnosed patients with MCL ineligible for intensive therapy. Considering our limits, prospective clinical trials directly comparing these regimens are warranted.

Daratumumab added to standard of care in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: A network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To investigate the activity and safety of daratumumab added to standard of care and evaluate the relative efficacy of DRd vs DVMP and other regimens on survival endpoints for untreated myeloma, we undertook this meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched published reports that described the activity and safety of daratumumab added to standard of care for untreated myeloma. RESULTS: Six daratumumab trials were identified, covering 5106 subjects. Daratumumab containing combinations for untreated myeloma attained an impressive complete response or better (≥CR) rate of 24%, very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate of 67%, overall response rate (ORR) of 92%. Daratumumab added to standard of care significantly improved progression free survival (PFS): the HR for PFS was 0.52 [0.44, 0.61], P < .001. The HR for overall survival (OS) was 0.73 [0.52, 1.04], P = .09. In the network meta-analysis for patients ineligible for autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT), DRd regimen produced significant PFS advantage vs other first-line treatments (VMP HR:0.39 P < .001, Rd HR:0.55 P < .001, MPT HR:0.38 P < .001, and MP HR:0.22 P < .001); DVMP regimen also produced significant PFS advantage vs VMP (HR:0.50 P < .001), MPT (HR:0.49 P < .001), and MP (HR:0.28 P < .001). Among these first-line regimens (DRd, DVMP, VMP, Rd, MPT, and MP), DRd regimen had the highest probability to be the best intervention, with 83.4% and 91.0% probability to reach the longest PFS and OS, respectively. Toxicity consisted primarily of myelosuppression. And, the vital non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (41% of all grades) and upper respiratory tract infection (39% of all grades). CONCLUSIONS: Daratumumab added to standard of care could produce clinical benefits in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. DRd and DVMP could be good combination options for those patients ineligible for ASCT.

Carfilzomib-containing combinations as frontline therapy for multiple myeloma: A meta-analysis of 13 trials.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the activity and safety of carfilzomib-containing combinations as frontline therapy for multiple myeloma. METHODS: We searched published carfilzomib reports for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. RESULTS: Thirteen trials were identified, covering 704 subjects. Pooled analysis showed that carfilzomib combinations as frontline therapy for multiple myeloma attained an impressive at least complete response (≥CR) rate of 21%, at least very good partial response (≥VGPR) rate of 68%, overall response rate (ORR) of 94%. The ≥CR rates of 18% pre-SCT were increased to 43% of post-ASCT, and 64% of postconsolidation (P<.001). For those patients receiving carfilzomib therapy, response quality improved further over time (≥CR rates of 10% after 2nd cycle, 20% after 4th cycle, 43% after 8th cycle; ≥VGPR of 29% after 2nd cycle, 68% after 4th cycle, 88% after 8th cycle). ≥CR rates of 49% from CFZ-LEN-DEX triplet regimen were higher than 18% from CFZ-CYC-DEX triplet regimen and 21% from CFZ-THA-DEX triplet regimen (P=.03). CONCLUSIONS: Carfilzomib combinations could produce clinical benefits in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. High-quality response rate could be further improved through ASCT, consolidation therapy, and more cycles of chemotherapy even in the era of carfilzomib. CFZ-LEN-DEX could be a good combination regimen.

Pooled analysis of the reports of pomalidomide after failure of lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib for multiple myeloma.

The use of pomalidomide after lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib failure in patients with multiple myeloma is not clearly clarified in clinical practice. We sought to compile the available clinical reports to better understand the effectiveness of pomalidomide after failure of lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib. We searched published reports including pomalidomide, lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib. Seven reports were identified. Pomalidomide-based regimen was pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM + LoDEX). Six randomized controlled trials enrolling a total of 641 patients that evaluated the treatment effects of pomalidomide after lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib failure in patients with multiple myeloma were included. Pooled results showed that the overall response rate (ORR) was 31% in the POM + LoDEX group. Analysis of heterogeneity showed very little (p = 0.997, I(2) = 0%), suggesting that response rates of POM + LoDEX therapy were consistent across those included trials. Stable disease was achieved in 40% of 603 patients (heterogeneity: p = 0.980, I(2) = 0%). In those >65 years, overall response was achieved in 32% of 71 patients (heterogeneity: p = 0.77, I(2) = 0%). POM + LoDEX showed promising activity in the 95 patients with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities: ORR was 27% (heterogeneity: p = 0.97, I(2) = 0%). In the pooled analysis, toxicity consisted primarily of myelosuppression: Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was seen in 53% (heterogeneity: p = 0.857, I(2) = 0%). Pomalidomide may produce clinical benefits in patients who had shown refractory on prior lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib therapy. Moreover, elder patients and high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities were not negative predictors for pomalidomide response after lenalidomide and (or) bortezomib failure. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Efficacy of Single-Agent Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy in Biologically Selected Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of 19 Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of first-generation single-agent epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients with known EGFR mutation status, we undertook this pooled analysis. METHOD: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, the Science Citation Index, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meetings. RESULTS: Out of 2,129 retrieved articles, 19 RCTs enrolling 2,016 patients with wild-type EGFR tumors and 1,034 patients with mutant EGFR tumors were identified. For these EGFR mutant patients, single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy improved progression-free survival (PFS) over chemotherapy: the summary hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.41 (p < 0.001) for the first-line setting and 0.46 (p = 0.02) for the second-/third-line setting. For those EGFR wild-type patients, single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy did not do as well as chemotherapy in the first-line setting (HR = 1.65, p = 0.03) and in the second-/third-line setting (HR = 1.27, p = 0.006). No statistically significant difference was observed in terms of overall survival (OS). Using platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as a common comparator, indirect comparison showed the superior efficacy of single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy over EGFR-TKIs added to chemotherapy in PFS [HR = 1.35 (1.03, 1.77), p = 0.03]. Additionally, a marginal trend towards the same direction was found in the OS analysis [HR = 1.16 (0.99, 1.35), p = 0.06]. Interestingly, for those EGFR wild-type tumors, single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy was inferior to EGFR-TKIs added to chemotherapy in PFS [HR = 0.38 (0.33, 0.44), p < 0.001] and OS [HR = 0.83 (0.71, 0.97), p = 0.02]. CONCLUSIONS: For these EGFR mutant patients, single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy prolonged PFS over chemotherapy. However, single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy was inferior to chemotherapy in PFS for those EGFR wild-type patients. Single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy could improve PFS over the combination of EGFR-TKIs and chemotherapy in these EGFR mutant patients. However, EGFR-TKIs combined with chemotherapy could provide additive PFS and OS benefit over single-agent EGFR-TKI therapy in those EGFR wild-type patients.

Intensified therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) versus conventional therapy as first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma: a meta-analysis.

There are two different international standards for the treatment of follicular lymphoma (FL): intensified therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) and conventional therapy in the first-line setting. However, their role remains unclear. Our aim was to define the treatment effect of intensified therapy followed by ASCT compared with conventional therapy as first-line treatment of patients with FL in terms of overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). We searched for randomised controlled trials in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register and the Science Citation Index (1985 to June 2011). Effect measures used were hazard ratios (HR) for OS, EFS and secondary tumour rate. Two independent review authors extracted data and assessed quality of trials. Four trials were identified, covering a total of 941 subjects. The random-effects summary HR by comparing the treatment effect on OS between intensified and conventional therapy was 0.95 [0.70, 1.30] (p = 0.75), indicating that no additional survival benefit was derived from the intensified therapy followed by ASCT. A significant benefit of intensified therapy followed by ASCT as first-line treatment was detected in terms of EFS: the random-effects summary HR (intensified versus conventional therapy) was 0.59 [0.44, 0.79] (p < 0.001). This meta-analysis showed that despite its superior EFS, intensified therapy followed by ASCT does not improve the OS compared with conventional therapy.

Continuous treatment with new agents for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

To examine the role of novel agents such as bortezomib, lenalidomide, and thalidomide as continuous therapy (induction and consolidation/maintenance) in the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma, we carried out a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. A comprehensive literature search (Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register, and the Science Citation Index) was performed. The initial search yielded 849 citations, of which 11 randomized-controlled trials enrolling 4775 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Continuous addition of bortezomib to conventional therapy before and after autologous stem cell transplantation prolonged overall survival significantly: the summary hazard ratio was 0.80, 95% confidence interval [0.64, 0.99] (P=0.04). Continuous therapy with novel agents consistently improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with therapy with conventional agents alone. For those patients ineligible for a transplant, the summary hazard ratios for PFS were 0.69 [0.56, 0.85] (P<0.001) for continuous thalidomide therapy and 0.47 [0.33, 0.68] (P<0.001) for continuous lenalidomide therapy; for those patients ineligible for a transplant, the summary hazard ratios for PFS were 0.68 [0.59, 0.79] (P<0.001) for continuous thalidomide therapy and 0.72 [0.61, 0.85] (P<0.001) for continuous lenalidomide therapy. In summary, continuous therapy with novel agents improved PFS consistently, and bortezomib may improve the overall survival of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma when it is added to standard transplantation therapy continuously.

Rapid and complete reconstitution of autologous haemopoiesis after cord blood infusion in treatment-naive patients with severe aplastic anemia receiving high-dose cyclophosphamide/ATG therapy.

UNLABELLED: Although high-dose cyclophosphamide seems to achieve durable complete remission, there are still concerns about its too much early toxicity. So, we designed a clinical study to investigate the effects of high-dose cyclophosphamide/ATG combined with cord blood infusion as first-line therapy for patients with severe aplastic anemia. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Between January 2003 and September 2007, we treated 16 treatment-naive patients with severe aplastic anemia with cord blood infusion after high-dose cyclophosphamide (50 mg/kg/d × 2) and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (3 mg/kg/d × 5) therapy. RESULTS: Although only one patient had durable full donor engraftment, 14 of the enrolled 16 patients had rapid autologous hematopoietic recovery. The median recovery time for neutrophils and platelets was only 23 and 37 d after infusion of cord blood. Of the 15 responding patients, all patients achieved treatment-free remission: nine patients met the criteria for a complete remission; six patients achieved a partial remission. CONCLUSION: Infusion of cord blood after high-dose cyclophosphamide/ATG resulted in a rapid autologous hematologic recovery and a high response rate in patients with treatment-naive patients with severe aplastic anemia. These promising results merit further investigation and confirmation on a larger number of patients.

In vivo T-cell depletion with antithymocyte globulins improves overall survival after myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic disorders.

To assess the effect of prophylactic treatment with antithymocyte globulin (ATG) on graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) in myeloablative transplant patients, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized and cohort studies. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register and the Science Citation Index were searched for studies on ATG treatment in patients with hematologic disorders undergoing myeloablative transplantation. Four randomized controlled trials, six retrospective and one prospective cohort study were included, covering 1,549 patients. The summary hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival were 0.84.

Postrelapse survival rate correlates with first-line treatment strategy with thalidomide in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis.

To define whether or not thalidomide exposure upfront to newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma would adversely impact postrelapse survival (PRS), we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register and the Science Citation Index were searched. Thirteen trials were identified, covering a total of 6097 subjects, and PRS data were available from eight trials. The summary hazard ratio (thalidomide vs control) of all those trials for PRS was 1.23 [95% CI, 1.05-1.45]. The HRs of thalidomide maintenance subgroups were 0.90 [0.57-1.41] for PRS, 0.61 [0.44-0.83] for progression-free survival (PFS) and 0.54 [0.36-0.80] for overall survival, respectively. The corresponding ratios of thalidomide induction and maintenance subgroups were 1.41 [1.13-1.76] for PRS, 0.68 [0.59-0.79] for PFS and 0.87 [0.73-1.04] for overall survival, respectively. In conclusion, thalidomide exposed upfront correlated with shorter PRS that partially compensated for prolonged initially PFS and resulted in no survival benefit when it is given as both induction pre-autologous and maintenance post-autologous stem cell transplantation; shorter PRS was not observed, and survival was improved when it is given only during maintenance phase following autologous stem cell transplantation in the patients with myeloma and who are eligible for transplant.

Novel agents-based regimens as induction treatment prior to autologous stem-cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

To investigate the effect of novel agents like bortezomib, lenalidomide and thalidomide as part of induction treatment prior to autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) for previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register and the Science Citation Index were searched for RCTs of novel agents as part of induction therapy before ASCT. Three RCTs of bortezomib, two RCTs of thalidomide and no RCT of lenalidomide were identified, covering a total of 2,316 subjects. Due to different mechanisms of action, we performed a subgroup analysis by type of agent (thalidomide or bortezomib). The weighted risk ratios of a complete response (CR) were 4.25 [95% CI: 2.44-7.41] (p < 0.001) for bortezomib and 1.66 [95% CI: 1.15-2.38] (p = 0.007) for thalidomide, respectively. The summary hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) were 0.73 [95% CI: 0.59-0.89] (p = 0.002) for bortezomib and 0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.79] (p < 0.001) for thalidomide, respectively. The corresponding ratios for overall survival (OS) were 0.87 [95% CI: 0.64-1.18] (p = 0.37) and 0.88 [95% CI: 0.73-1.05] (p = 0.14), respectively. Additionally, there was a statistically significant heterogeneity between subgroups (thalidomide and bortezomib) for CR (p = 0.005) but nonsignificant for PFS (p = 0.64) and OS (p = 0.97). In conclusion, our analysis showed novel agents as induction treatment prior to ASCT improved CR and PFS but not OS.

Antiepidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody improves survival outcomes in the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

The aim of this study was to determine whether or not the addition of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) monoclonal antibody (mAb) to standard chemotherapy or best supportive care (BSC), compared with chemotherapy or BSC alone, can improve overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), and evaluate the influence of KRAS mutant status on the efficacy of anti-EGFR mAb. Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register, and the Science Citation Index were searched. Nine trials were identified, covering a total of 7941 patients. The treatment of mCRC with a combination of anti-EGFR mAb and chemotherapy or BSC, as compared with chemotherapy or BSC alone, improved the OS [hazard ratio (HR), 0.90 (0.84-0.96); P=0.002]. The benefit of anti-EGFR mAb in patients with KRAS wild-type tumors was apparent in relation to a marginal trend toward improved OS [HR, 0.84 (0.70-1.01); P=0.06], and significantly improved PFS [HR, 0.64 (0.51-0.81); P<0.001]. No benefit for the addition of anti-EGFR mAb was detected for any efficacy end-point in patients with KRAS mutant tumors. The summary HRs (anti-EGFR mAb vs control) were 0.98 (0.88-1.08) (P=0.71) for OS and 1.08 (0.94-1.25) (P=0.27) for PFS, respectively. In conclusion, this analysis provides confirmation that, compared with chemotherapy or BSC alone, anti-EGFR mAb with chemotherapy or BSC reduces the risk of progression and death of mCRC and that this benefit is seen only in patients with wild-type KRAS tumors.

Comparison of lorlatinib, alectinib and brigatinib in ALK inhibitor-naive/untreated ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Because of lacking of head-to-head comparison among lorlatinib, alectinib and brigatinib for patients with ALK inhibitor-naive or untreated (ALK inhibitor-naive and chemotherapy-naive) ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the optimal option for these patients still remains undefined. We searched published reports that described the activity and safety of those novel ALK inhibitors (lorlatinib, alectinib and brigatinib) for ALK inhibitor-naive or untreated (ALK inhibitor-naive and chemotherapy-naive) ALK-positive advanced NSCLC. Five randomized controlled trials were identified, covering 1111 subjects. In the network meta-analysis, lorlatinib seemed to prolong progression free survival than brigatinib (Hazard Ratio: 0.57, P = 0.03) and alectinib (Hazard ratio: 0.65, P = 0.05) for previously untreated patients with ALK-positive advanced NSCLC as assessed by the independent review committee. Meanwhile, lorlatinib significantly improved significant progression free survival than brigatinib (Hazard ratio: 0.57, P = 0.03) and alectinib (Hazard ratio: 0.59, P = 0.03) for ALK inhibitor-naive patients. Among lorlatinib, alectinib, brigatinib, and crizotinib, lorlatinib had the highest probability to reach the best overall confirmed response rates (probability of 48%) and intracranial confirmed response rates (probability of 44%). No significant difference was found among them in overall survival and adverse events analysis. In terms of progression free survival, our results indicated that lorlatinib was the best treatment choice for patients with ALK inhibitor-naive or untreated (ALK inhibitor-naive and chemotherapy-naive) ALK-positive advanced NSCLC. The future head-to-head trials assessing the relative efficacy of lorlatinib, alectinib and brigatinib were warranted.

Comparison of acalabrutinib plus obinutuzumab, ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab and venetoclax plus obinutuzumab for untreated CLL: a network meta-analysis.

The optimal chemotherapy-free regimens for treatment-naive CLL still remains undefined. We searched relevant published reports. Three trials with 1017 subjects were identified. In the network meta-analysis, acalabrutinib plus obinutuzumab (Aca + Obi) improved PFS than ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (Ibu + Obi) (HR:0.43, p = .02) and venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (Ven + Obi) (HR:0.30, p < .001) as IRC assessment. Sensitivity analysis of investigator assessment also showed improved PFS with Aca + Obi than Ibu + Obi (HR:0.46, p = .04) and Ven + Obi (HR:0.34, p = .002). Among these first-line treatments (Aca + Obi, Ibu + Obi, Ven + Obi and chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (Chl + Obi)), Aca + Obi regimen had the highest probability of 99.1% (IRC assessment) or 98.0% (investigator assessment) to reach the longest PFS. The survival advantage with Aca + Obi was not statistically significant, compared to Ibu + Obi (HR:0.51, p = .21) and Ven + Obi (HR:0.38, p = .07). No significant difference was found in AEs analysis. Our data indicated that Aca + Obi seemed to prolong the PFS than Ibu + Obi and Ven + Obi. Considering our limits, prospective clinical trials directly comparing these regimens are warranted.

The Efficacy of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Harboring Wild-type Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: A Meta-analysis of 25 RCTs.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of first-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with wild-type (WT) EGFR tumors, we performed an indirect meta-analysis to assess the treatment effects of EGFR-TKIs in such patients. METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane controlled trials register, the Science Citation Index, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meetings. Effect measures used were hazard ratios (HR) for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: Out of 2134 retrieved articles, 25 randomized controlled trials including more than 4467 patients were identified. This pooled analysis showed the inferior efficacy of TKI over chemotherapy among patients with WT EGFR NSCLC in terms of PFS (HR, 1.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 1.72; P=0.006). When used as first-line treatment, TKIs have also fared worse than chemotherapy when compared with standard platinum doublet regimens in patients with WT EGFR in terms of PFS (HR, 2.15; 95% CI: 1.68, 2.76; P<0.001). And, the same inferior trend was found with TKIs in those trials of second-line/third-line treatment in terms of PFS (HR, 1.35; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.61; P<0.001). However, according to the pooled results, EGFR-TKIs still produced a reduction of 19% in the risk of progression over placebo in such WT EGFR patients ineligible for further chemotherapy (HR, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.97; P=0.02). Furthermore, addition of EGFR-TKI to chemotherapy resulted in an improvement of PFS over chemotherapy alone (HR, 0.83; 95% CI: 0.71, 0.96; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced NSCLC harboring WT EGFR, EGFR-TKIs were inferior to standard chemotherapy both for first-line treatment and for second-line/third-line treatment, but still superior to placebo in patients unfit for further chemotherapy. And, addition of EGFR-TKIs to chemotherapy could provide additive benefit over chemotherapy alone in such patients.

The efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and its comparison with EGFR-TKIs for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To better understand the efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab) in patients with previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: The Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, Embase, Medline, and the Science Citation Index were searched for prospective published reports of atezolizumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab in previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC. RESULTS: Finally, we identified 14 prospective published reports including four trials of atezolizumab covering 542 subjects, three trials of pembrolizumab covering 1566 subjects, seven trials of nivolumab covering 1678 subjects. When compared to docetaxel, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy could significantly improve overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, P<0.001) and progression-free survival (HR 0.83, P=0.002) for previously treated patients with advanced NSCLC. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy produced an overall response rate of 19% in the 2374 evaluable patients. When using docetaxel as the common comparator, indirect comparison of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy versus EGFR-TKIs showed progression-free survival benefit (HR 0.62, P<0.001) and overall survival benefit (HR 0.60, P<0.001) for those patients with EGFR wild-type. Meanwhile, for those EGFR mutant patients, indirect comparison indicated that anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was inferior to EGFR-TKIs therapy in terms of progression-free survival (HR 3.20, P<0.001), but no survival difference (HR 1.30, P=0.18). CONCLUSION: Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy could produce progression-free survival and overall survival improvement over docetaxel for patients with previously treated NSCLC. For EGFR wild-type patients, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy seemed to prolong progression-free survival and overall survival when compared to EGFR-TKIs. Meanwhile, for these EGFR mutant patients, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy was inferior to EGFR-TKIs therapy in terms of progression-free survival.