PloS one · 2024
Efficacy comparison of immune combination therapies in subgroups for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорСравнительное исследованиеNetwork Meta-AnalysisНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Yani, Lau Wanyee, Li Yafei, Tian Yichen, Lei Yongrong, Xia Feng, Wang Jianhua
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of precision in the immunotherapy strategy tailored for patients exhibiting diverse clinical characteristics. This study aims to employ a rigorous network meta-analysis (NMA) approach to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of immune-combination therapies among patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, taking into account their varying clinico-characteristics.
METHODS: Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. The included first-line phase III studies were categorized into three types: immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents, immunotherapy combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and dual immunotherapy, with sorafenib serving as the control group. The primary endpoint used to assess efficacy was overall survival (OS), facilitating a comparative analysis among the three treatment modalities. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the varying effectiveness for patients with diverse clinico-characteristics. Secondary outcome measures included progression-free survival, objective response rate, and toxicity assessment.
RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were included in the NMA, encompassing a cohort of 3840 patients. The results revealed that immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents exhibited a significantly enhanced therapeutic effect in terms of improving OS compared to sorafenib (HR = 0.61, 95% CrI, 0.42-0.90). Furthermore, based on various clinicopathological features, this combination therapy demonstrated superior OS responses in specific patient subgroups: BCLC C (HR = 0.63, 95% CrI, 0.42-0.93), ECOG 1 (HR = 0.57, 95% CrI, 0.36-0.91), with extrahepatic spread (EHS) (HR = 0.59, 95% CrI, 0.37-0.92), alpha fetoprotein (AFP)<400ng/ml (HR = 0.56, 95% CrI, 0.33-0.94) and viral hepatitis positivity (HR = 0.56, 95% CrI, 0.39-0.77) (especially HBV (HR = 0.58, 95% CrI, 0.40-0.85)). Importantly, the advantage of this combination therapy was even more pronounced in patients with viral hepatitis positivity. Also, the adverse events associated with immunotherapy combined with antiangiogenic drugs were moderate.
CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents could represent the most effective first-line intervention for achieving improved OS, particularly in patients with viral hepatitis positivity.
METHODS: Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. The included first-line phase III studies were categorized into three types: immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents, immunotherapy combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and dual immunotherapy, with sorafenib serving as the control group. The primary endpoint used to assess efficacy was overall survival (OS), facilitating a comparative analysis among the three treatment modalities. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the varying effectiveness for patients with diverse clinico-characteristics. Secondary outcome measures included progression-free survival, objective response rate, and toxicity assessment.
RESULTS: A total of 6 studies were included in the NMA, encompassing a cohort of 3840 patients. The results revealed that immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents exhibited a significantly enhanced therapeutic effect in terms of improving OS compared to sorafenib (HR = 0.61, 95% CrI, 0.42-0.90). Furthermore, based on various clinicopathological features, this combination therapy demonstrated superior OS responses in specific patient subgroups: BCLC C (HR = 0.63, 95% CrI, 0.42-0.93), ECOG 1 (HR = 0.57, 95% CrI, 0.36-0.91), with extrahepatic spread (EHS) (HR = 0.59, 95% CrI, 0.37-0.92), alpha fetoprotein (AFP)<400ng/ml (HR = 0.56, 95% CrI, 0.33-0.94) and viral hepatitis positivity (HR = 0.56, 95% CrI, 0.39-0.77) (especially HBV (HR = 0.58, 95% CrI, 0.40-0.85)). Importantly, the advantage of this combination therapy was even more pronounced in patients with viral hepatitis positivity. Also, the adverse events associated with immunotherapy combined with antiangiogenic drugs were moderate.
CONCLUSIONS: Immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenetic agents could represent the most effective first-line intervention for achieving improved OS, particularly in patients with viral hepatitis positivity.