Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026
Efficacy and Safety of Canakinumab Compared With Standard Therapy for the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): A Systematic Review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Izadpanah Kamiar, Rezaei Masoud, Nejadghaderi Seyed Aria, Sharifi Hamid
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with few effective treatment options available for advanced stages. Canakinumab, an IL-1β inhibitor, has been investigated as a potential therapeutic agent due to its role in modulating tumor-promoting inflammation. However, its clinical efficacy and safety in NSCLC (non-small cell lung cancer) continue to be uncertain.
AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of canakinumab compared with other standard therapies in NSCLC treatment.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) were searched for clinical trials assessing canakinumab for NSCLC. Eligible studies included phase I-III clinical trials. The Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines were followed due to substantial heterogeneity in studies. Outcomes evaluated included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), major pathologic response (MPR), and treatment-related adverse events. Five clinical trials (three phase III, one phase II, and one phase IB) met the inclusion criteria, with sample sizes ranging from 88 to 1382 patients. The included studies evaluated canakinumab in four distinct clinical settings: adjuvant therapy after complete resection (CANOPY-A), first-line treatment in combination with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (CANOPY-1) or spartalizumab plus chemotherapy, second-line treatment in combination with docetaxel (CANOPY-2), and neoadjuvant therapy with or without pembrolizumab (CANOPY-N). Compared to standard therapies, canakinumab did not significantly improve ORR, PFS, OS, or MPR across any clinical setting. Safety analysis showed comparable adverse event rates between intervention and control groups.
CONCLUSION: Despite its promising mechanistic rationale, Canakinumab did not show significant clinical benefits in NSCLC. Although it is generally well tolerated, its role in NSCLC treatment remains uncertain. Future research should concentrate on identifying predictive biomarkers and optimizing combination strategies to enhance its therapeutic potential.
AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of canakinumab compared with other standard therapies in NSCLC treatment.
METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase) were searched for clinical trials assessing canakinumab for NSCLC. Eligible studies included phase I-III clinical trials. The Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines were followed due to substantial heterogeneity in studies. Outcomes evaluated included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), major pathologic response (MPR), and treatment-related adverse events. Five clinical trials (three phase III, one phase II, and one phase IB) met the inclusion criteria, with sample sizes ranging from 88 to 1382 patients. The included studies evaluated canakinumab in four distinct clinical settings: adjuvant therapy after complete resection (CANOPY-A), first-line treatment in combination with pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (CANOPY-1) or spartalizumab plus chemotherapy, second-line treatment in combination with docetaxel (CANOPY-2), and neoadjuvant therapy with or without pembrolizumab (CANOPY-N). Compared to standard therapies, canakinumab did not significantly improve ORR, PFS, OS, or MPR across any clinical setting. Safety analysis showed comparable adverse event rates between intervention and control groups.
CONCLUSION: Despite its promising mechanistic rationale, Canakinumab did not show significant clinical benefits in NSCLC. Although it is generally well tolerated, its role in NSCLC treatment remains uncertain. Future research should concentrate on identifying predictive biomarkers and optimizing combination strategies to enhance its therapeutic potential.