Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical Outcomes of First-line Therapies for Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review of Trials Published Between 2010 and 2020.
García-Fumero, Ricardo; Fernández-López, Cristina; Calleja-Hernández, Miguel Ángel; Expósito-Ruiz, Manuela; Espín, Jaime; Expósito-Hernández, José.
Afiliação
  • García-Fumero R; Department of Pharmacy, University Hospital Gran Canaria Doctor Negrín, Las Palmas.
  • Fernández-López C; Department of Pharmacy, Catalan Institute of Oncology, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona.
  • Calleja-Hernández MÁ; Department of Pharmacy, University Hospital Virgen Macarena, Seville.
  • Expósito-Ruiz M; University of Granada.
  • Espín J; University of Granada.
  • Expósito-Hernández J; Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP), Granada.
Am J Clin Oncol ; 46(10): 433-438, 2023 10 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37522643
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

To analyze the evolution of clinical outcomes derived from clinical trials on first-line therapies for advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) published between 2010 and 2020, focusing on how these outcomes impact survival rates and management of patients.

METHODS:

A systematic review of phase III and pivotal phase II clinical trials was conducted by a structured search on Medline and Embase. A comprehensive set of variables was collected to assess their influence on survival rates. We also estimated the clinical benefit by applying the ESMO-MCBS v1.1 and extracted the authors' conclusions.

RESULTS:

Sixty-six studies involving 34,951 patients were included. Best survival outcomes were found for nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (OS and progression-free survival medians 19.4 and 10.2 mo) and for those expressing molecular targets (OS and progression-free survival medians 23.8 and 11.0 mo). No significant influence on survival rates was observed for industry funding and disease stage (IIIB/IV vs. IV). ESMO-MCBS v1.1 was applied in 45 positive studies and resulted in a meaningful clinical benefit score in 37.8%. Quality of life (QoL) was reported in 57.6% of the original publications and showed statistical significance favoring the experimental arm in 33.3%. Positive authors' conclusions (75.7% of trials) were based on OS and/or QoL in 34% and on surrogate endpoints in 66%.

CONCLUSIONS:

Extended survival times and a steady improvement in QoL have been observed. However, there were more than twice as many studies reporting positive authors' conclusions as studies meeting the ESMO threshold for meaningful clinical benefit.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas / Neoplasias Pulmonares Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Clin Oncol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células não Pequenas / Neoplasias Pulmonares Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Clin Oncol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article