pemetrexed

培美曲塞
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:这项回顾性研究旨在调查中国携带EGFR20蛋白的非小细胞肺癌患者的治疗模式和结果。EGFR20ins突变与对EGFR-TKIs的不良反应相关,关于各种治疗方式的疗效的现实数据有限。
    方法:在本回顾性研究中,单中心研究,治疗结果,包括PFS和ORR,根据影像学评估对不同治疗方案进行评估。还探讨了突变异质性对治疗效果的影响。
    结果:分析了302例诊断为EGFR20蛋白的NSCLC患者的数据。在一线治疗中,EGFR-TKI单药治疗与铂类化疗相比,PFS欠佳(3.00mvs.6.83米,HR=3.674,95CI=2.48-5.44,p<0.001)。与铂类联合培美曲塞相比,铂类联合培美曲塞联合贝伐单抗治疗可改善PFS和ORR(7.50mvs.5.43米,HR=0.593,95CI=0.383-0.918,p=0.019)。在后期治疗中,EGFR-TKIs或ICIs单药治疗疗效欠佳。特定的EGFR20ins亚型,A763_Y764insFQEA,在现实环境中对EGFR-TKIs表现出良好的反应。
    结论:这项大规模的现实世界研究为中国EGFR20ins突变的NSCLC患者的治疗模式和结果提供了有价值的见解。这些发现有助于理解EGFR20ins治疗,并为未来的临床试验和药物开发提供现实基准。
    BACKGROUND: This retrospective study aimed to investigate treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR20ins in China. EGFR20ins mutations are associated with poor responses to EGFR-TKIs, and limited real-world data exist regarding the efficacy of various treatment modalities.
    METHODS: In this retrospective, single-center study, treatment outcomes, including PFS and ORR, were evaluated for different treatment regimens based on imaging assessments. The impact of mutation heterogeneity on treatment efficacy was also explored.
    RESULTS: Data from 302 patients diagnosed with NSCLC with EGFR20ins were analyzed. EGFR-TKI monotherapy demonstrated suboptimal PFS compared to platinum-based chemotherapy in the first-line setting (3.00 m vs. 6.83 m, HR = 3.674, 95%CI = 2.48-5.44, p < 0.001). Platinum plus pemetrexed plus bevacizumab combination therapy showed improved PFS and ORR compared to platinum plus pemetrexed (7.50m vs. 5.43 m, HR = 0.593, 95%CI = 0.383-0.918, p = 0.019). In later-line treatments, monotherapy with EGFR-TKIs or ICIs exhibited suboptimal efficacy. The specific EGFR20ins subtype, A763_Y764insFQEA, showed favorable responses to EGFR-TKIs in real-world settings.
    CONCLUSIONS: This large-scale real-world study provides valuable insights into the treatment patterns and outcomes of NSCLC patients with EGFR20ins mutations in China. These findings contribute to the understanding of EGFR20ins treatment and provide real-world benchmark for future clinical trials and drug development.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:培美曲塞与贝伐单抗联合可能在改善非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的疗效方面具有一定潜力,本荟萃分析旨在探讨培美曲塞联合贝伐单抗对NSCLC治疗效果的影响.
    方法:PubMed,EMBase,WebofScience,EBSCO,系统搜索了Cochrane图书馆数据库,我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCTs),评估培美曲塞联合贝伐单抗对NSCLC患者治疗效果的影响.该荟萃分析包括总生存期和无进展生存期。
    结果:4项随机对照试验最终纳入meta分析。总的来说,与贝伐单抗治疗非小细胞肺癌相比,培美曲塞加用显示显著改善总生存期(风险比[HR]=0.87;95%置信区间[CI]=0.76~0.99;P=0.03),生存率(奇数比[OR]=1.41;95%CI=1.06至1.86;P=0.02),无进展生存期(HR=0.63;95%CI=0.55~0.72;P<0.00001)和无进展生存率(OR=1.92;95%CI=1.38~2.67;P<0.00001),但导致≥3级不良事件增加(OR=2.15;95%CI=1.62~2.84;P<0.00001).
    结论:与贝伐单抗治疗相比,添加培美曲塞可有效改善NSCLC的治疗效果。
    BACKGROUND: Combining pemetrexed with bevacizumab may have some potential in improving the efficacy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and this meta-analysis aims to explore the impact of pemetrexed addition to bevacizumab on treatment efficacy for NSCLC.
    METHODS: PubMed, EMbase, Web of science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched, and we included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of pemetrexed addition to bevacizumab on treatment efficacy in patients with NSCLC. Overall survival and progression-free survival were included in this meta-analysis.
    RESULTS: Four RCTs were finally included in the meta-analysis. Overall, compared with bevacizumab for NSCLC, pemetrexed addition showed significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76 to 0.99; P = 0.03), survival rate (odd ratio [OR] = 1.41; 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.86; P = 0.02), progression-free survival (HR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.55 to 0.72; P < 0.00001) and progression-free survival rate (OR = 1.92; 95% CI = 1.38 to 2.67; P < 0.00001), but led to the increase in grade ≥ 3 adverse events (OR = 2.15; 95% CI = 1.62 to 2.84; P < 0.00001).
    CONCLUSIONS: Pemetrexed addition may be effective to improve treatment efficacy for NSCLC compared to bevacizumab treatment.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Clinical Trial Protocol
    恶性胸膜间皮瘤(MPM)是一种侵袭性癌症,预后极差。最近,免疫检查点抑制(ICI)在目前正在进行的革命中占据了中心位置,这场革命正在改变几种恶性肿瘤的标准治疗方法,包括MPM。由于多种论据和越来越多的证据支持化疗和免疫治疗之间存在治疗协同作用,以及不同类别的免疫治疗剂,我们设计了一个多中心,单臂,I/II期试验,其中程序性死亡配体1(PD-L1)抑制和树突状细胞(DC)疫苗接种均纳入上皮样MPM患者的一线常规铂/培美曲塞治疗方案(Immuno-MESODEC,ClinicalTrials.gov标识符NCT05765084)。15名不可切除的上皮样亚型MPM的未治疗患者将接受4个3周(±3天)的化学免疫疗法周期治疗。由顺铂(75mg/m2)和培美曲塞(500mg/m2)组成的标准治疗化疗将补充抗PD-L1抗体阿替珠单抗(1200mg)和自体Wilms肿瘤1mRNA电穿孔的树突状细胞(WT1/DC)疫苗接种(8-10×106个细胞/疫苗接种)。在完成化学免疫疗法方案后,可以任选地施用额外的阿替珠单抗(1680mg)剂量和/或WT1/DC疫苗接种(8-10x106个细胞/疫苗接种)。患者的随访将在最终阿特珠单抗给药和/或WT1/DC疫苗接种后持续90天或诊断后24个月,以后发生的。试验的主要终点是安全性和可行性,次要终点是临床疗效和免疫原性.这项I/II期试验将评估在治疗上皮样MPM的一线标准化疗中添加阿特珠单抗和WT1/DC疫苗是否可行和安全。如果是,对于这种难以治疗的癌症,这种新颖的联合治疗策略应作为一种有前景的高级治疗选择进行进一步研究.
    Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive cancer with a very poor prognosis. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has taken center stage in the currently ongoing revolution that is changing standard-of-care treatment for several malignancies, including MPM. As multiple arguments and accumulating lines of evidence are in support of the existence of a therapeutic synergism between chemotherapy and immunotherapy, as well as between different classes of immunotherapeutics, we designed a multicenter, single-arm, phase I/II trial in which both programmed-death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibition and dendritic cell (DC) vaccination are integrated in the first-line conventional platinum/pemetrexed-based treatment scheme for epithelioid MPM patients (Immuno-MESODEC, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05765084). Fifteen treatment-naïve patients with unresectable epithelioid subtype MPM will be treated with four 3-weekly (±3 days) chemo-immunotherapy cycles. Standard-of-care chemotherapy consisting of cisplatinum (75mg/m2) and pemetrexed (500mg/m2) will be supplemented with the anti-PD-L1 antibody atezolizumab (1200 mg) and autologous Wilms\' tumor 1 mRNA-electroporated dendritic cell (WT1/DC) vaccination (8-10 x 106 cells/vaccination). Additional atezolizumab (1680 mg) doses and/or WT1/DC vaccinations (8-10 x 106 cells/vaccination) can be administered optionally following completion of the chemo-immunotherapy scheme. Follow-up of patients will last for up to 90 days after final atezolizumab administration and/or WT1/DC vaccination or 24 months after diagnosis, whichever occurs later. The trial\'s primary endpoints are safety and feasibility, secondary endpoints are clinical efficacy and immunogenicity. This phase I/II trial will evaluate whether addition of atezolizumab and WT1/DC vaccination to frontline standard-of-care chemotherapy for the treatment of epithelioid MPM is feasible and safe. If so, this novel combination strategy should be further investigated as a promising advanced treatment option for this hard-to-treat cancer.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:树突状细胞免疫疗法已被证明是安全的,并在人类中诱导免疫应答。我们旨在建立负载有同种异体肿瘤细胞裂解物的树突状细胞的功效(MesoPher,AmpheraBV,\'s-Hertogenbosch,荷兰)作为胸膜间皮瘤患者的维持治疗。
    方法:在此开放标签中,随机化,2/3阶段研究,组织学证实不可切除的胸膜间皮瘤患者,18岁或以上,东部肿瘤协作组的表现状态评分为0-1,并且在四至六个周期的标准化疗(培美曲塞500mg/m2加铂[顺铂75mg/m2或卡铂5的曲线下面积])后疾病未进展来自比利时的四个中心,法国,和荷兰。参与者被随机分配(1:1),使用块随机化(块大小为4),按中心和组织学分层(上皮样与其他),MesoPher治疗加上最好的支持性护理或单独的最佳支持性护理。患者最多接受5次MesoPher输注,在第1、15和29天以及第18和30周给予治疗。在每个时间点,参与者接受了25×106个树突状细胞的注射(2/3的树突状细胞静脉给药,1/3的树突状细胞皮内给药).最好的支持性护理是根据当地机构标准。主要终点是总生存期,在随机分配接受治疗的所有参与者中进行评估(完整分析集),并在所有随机分配的参与者中进行安全性评估,如果他们是MesoPher组,他们接受了白细胞去除术。这项研究在ClinicalTrials.gov注册,NCT03610360,并为应计关闭。
    结果:在2018年6月21日至2021年6月10日之间,对176例患者进行了筛查,并随机分配到MesoPher组(n=88)或最佳支持治疗组(n=88)。MesoPher组的一名参与者没有进行白细胞去除术。平均年龄为68岁(SD8),176人中有149人(85%)是男性,27人(15%)为女性,173(98%)是白人,两个是亚洲人(1%),和一个(1%)是其他种族。截至数据截止(2023年6月24日),在中位随访15·1个月(IQR9·5-22·4)后,MesoPher组的中位总生存期为16·8个月(95%CI12·4-20·3;88例死亡中的61[69%]),最佳支持治疗组为18·3个月(14·3-21·9;88例死亡中的59[67%])(风险比1·10[95%CI0·77-1·57];log-rankp=0·62).最常见的3-4级治疗引起的不良事件是胸痛(MesoPher组87个中的3个[3%],最佳支持治疗组88个中的2个[2%]),呼吸困难(无vs2[2%]),贫血(2[2%]vs无),恶心(无vs2[2%]),和肺炎(无vs2[2%])。没有因治疗引起的不良事件而死亡的记录。治疗相关的不良事件包括输液相关反应(发烧,发冷,和疲劳),发生在MesoPher组87例患者中的64例(74%),和注射部位反应(瘙痒,红斑,和硬结),发生在73例(84%)患者中,严重程度均为1-2级。没有确定与治疗相关的死亡。
    结论:MesoPher未显示胸膜间皮瘤患者的总生存期改善。免疫检查点疗法现已成为胸膜间皮瘤的标准治疗方法。MesoPher和免疫检查点治疗的组合需要进一步的随机研究,这可能会增加疗效而不增加主要毒性。
    背景:AmpheraBV和EUHORIZON。
    BACKGROUND: Dendritic cell immunotherapy has proven to be safe and induces an immune response in humans. We aimed to establish the efficacy of dendritic cells loaded with allogeneic tumour cell lysate (MesoPher, Amphera BV, \'s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands) as maintenance therapy in patients with pleural mesothelioma.
    METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, phase 2/3 study, patients with histologically confirmed unresectable pleural mesothelioma, aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-1, and non-progressing disease after four to six cycles of standard chemotherapy (with pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 plus platinum [cisplatin 75 mg/m2 or carboplatin area under the curve of 5]) were recruited from four centres in Belgium, France, and The Netherlands. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using block randomisation (block size of 4), stratified by centre and histology (epithelioid vs other), to MesoPher treatment plus best supportive care or best supportive care alone. Patients received up to a maximum of five MesoPher infusions, with treatment administered on days 1, 15, and 29, and weeks 18 and 30. At each timepoint, participants received an injection of 25 × 106 dendritic cells (two-thirds of the dendritic cells were administered intravenously and a third were injected intradermally). Best supportive care was per local institutional standards. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in all participants randomly assigned to treatment (full analysis set) and safety assessed in all randomly assigned participants, and who underwent leukapheresis if they were in the MesoPher group. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03610360, and is closed for accrual.
    RESULTS: Between June 21, 2018, and June 10, 2021, 176 patients were screened and randomly assigned to the MesoPher group (n=88) or best supportive care alone group (n=88). One participant in the MesoPher group did not undergo leukapheresis. Mean age was 68 years (SD 8), 149 (85%) of 176 were male, 27 (15%) were female, 173 (98%) were White, two were Asian (1%), and one (1%) was other race. As of data cutoff (June 24, 2023), after a median follow up of 15·1 months (IQR 9·5-22·4), median overall survival was 16·8 months (95% CI 12·4-20·3; 61 [69%] of 88 died) in the MesoPher group and 18·3 months (14·3-21·9; 59 [67%] of 88 died) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·77-1·57]; log-rank p=0·62). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were chest pain (three [3%] of 87 in the MesoPher group vs two [2%] of 88 in the best supportive care group), dyspnoea (none vs two [2%]), anaemia (two [2%] vs none), nausea (none vs two [2%]), and pneumonia (none vs two [2%]). No deaths due to treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded. Treatment-related adverse events consisted of infusion-related reactions (fever, chills, and fatigue), which occurred in 64 (74%) of 87 patients in the MesoPher group, and injection-site reactions (itch, erythema, and induration), which occurred in 73 (84%) patients, and all were grade 1-2 in severity. No deaths were determined to be treatment related.
    CONCLUSIONS: MesoPher did not show improvement in overall survival in patients with pleural mesothelioma. Immune checkpoint therapy is now standard of care in pleural mesothelioma. Further randomised studies are needed of combinations of MesoPher and immune checkpoint therapy, which might increase efficacy without adding major toxicities.
    BACKGROUND: Amphera BV and EU HORIZON.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    对于在接受EGFR酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(EGFR-TKI)治疗时疾病进展的非小细胞肺癌患者,特别是第三代TKIs,最佳治疗方案仍然有限。
    比较依罗西单抗联合化疗与单纯化疗对表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)变异的复发晚期或转移性非小细胞肺癌患者的疗效。
    双盲,安慰剂对照,随机化,2022年1月至2022年11月,在中国55个研究中心进行的3期试验纳入了参与者;总共纳入了322例符合条件的患者.
    参与者每3周接受一次艾芬司单抗(n=161)或安慰剂(n=161)加培美曲塞和卡铂,共4个周期,其次是依文司马联合培美曲塞或安慰剂联合培美曲塞维持治疗.
    主要终点是由独立的影像学审查委员会(IRRC)根据实体瘤1.1版疗效评估标准评估的意向治疗人群的无进展生存期。报告了第一次计划中期分析的结果。
    在依文西单抗和安慰剂组的322名患者中,中位年龄为59.6岁vs59.4岁,52.2%vs50.9%的患者为女性.截至2023年3月10日,中位随访时间为7.89个月。伊文西单抗组的中位无进展生存期为7.1(95%CI,5.9-8.7)个月,安慰剂组的中位无进展生存期为4.8(95%CI,4.2-5.6)个月(差异,2.3个月;危险比[HR],0.46[95%CI,0.34-0.62];P<.001)。预设的亚组分析显示,在几乎所有亚组中,接受依文西单抗治疗的患者的无进展生存获益优于安慰剂,包括在接受第三代EGFR-TKI治疗时疾病进展的患者(HR,0.48[95%CI0.35-0.66])和脑转移患者(HR,0.40[95%CI,0.22-0.73])。Ivonesimab的客观缓解率为50.6%(95%CI,42.6%-58.6%),安慰剂的客观缓解率为35.4%(95%CI,28.0%-43.3%)(差异,15.6%[95%CI,5.3%-26.0%];P=.006)。中位总生存期数据尚未成熟;在数据截止时,69例(21.4%)患者死亡。3级或更高的治疗引起的不良事件发生在依文西单抗组的99名患者(61.5%)和安慰剂组的79名患者(49.1%),其中最常见的是化疗相关.3级或更高的免疫相关的不良事件发生在10例患者中(6.2%)在伊文西单抗组比4(2.5%)在安慰剂组。3级或更高的血管内皮生长因子相关不良事件发生在依伏西单抗组的5例患者(3.1%),安慰剂组的4例患者(2.5%)。
    Ivonescimab联合化疗可显著改善TKI治疗的非小细胞肺癌患者的无进展生存期,安全性可耐受。
    ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT05184712。
    For patients with non-small cell lung cancer whose disease progressed while receiving EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy, particularly third-generation TKIs, optimal treatment options remain limited.
    To compare the efficacy of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone for patients with relapsed advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer with the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) variant.
    Double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, phase 3 trial at 55 sites in China enrolled participants from January 2022 to November 2022; a total of 322 eligible patients were enrolled.
    Participants received ivonescimab (n = 161) or placebo (n = 161) plus pemetrexed and carboplatin once every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy of ivonescimab plus pemetrexed or placebo plus pemetrexed.
    The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population assessed by an independent radiographic review committee (IRRC) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. The results of the first planned interim analysis are reported.
    Among 322 enrolled patients in the ivonescimab and placebo groups, the median age was 59.6 vs 59.4 years and 52.2% vs 50.9% of patients were female. As of March 10, 2023, median follow-up time was 7.89 months. Median progression-free survival was 7.1 (95% CI, 5.9-8.7) months in the ivonescimab group vs 4.8 (95% CI, 4.2-5.6) months for placebo (difference, 2.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46 [95% CI, 0.34-0.62]; P < .001). The prespecified subgroup analysis showed progression-free survival benefit favoring patients receiving ivonescimab over placebo across almost all subgroups, including patients whose disease progressed while receiving third-generation EGFR-TKI therapy (HR, 0.48 [95% CI 0.35-0.66]) and those with brain metastases (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.22-0.73]). The objective response rate was 50.6% (95% CI, 42.6%-58.6%) with ivonescimab and 35.4% (95% CI, 28.0%-43.3%) with placebo (difference, 15.6% [95% CI, 5.3%-26.0%]; P = .006). The median overall survival data were not mature; at data cutoff, 69 patients (21.4%) had died. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 99 patients (61.5%) in the ivonescimab group vs 79 patients (49.1%) in the placebo group, the most common of which were chemotherapy-related. Grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 patients (6.2%) in the ivonescimab group vs 4 (2.5%) in the placebo group. Grade 3 or higher vascular endothelial growth factor-related adverse events occurred in 5 patients (3.1%) in the ivonescimab group vs 4 (2.5%) in the placebo group.
    Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival with tolerable safety profile in TKI-treated non-small cell lung cancer.
    ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05184712.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    实体瘤的反应评估标准(RECIST)通常用于评估临床试验中的治疗反应,但不用于常规护理;因此,基于RECIST的终点难以纳入观察性研究。用于测量临床反应的临床医师锚定方法已得到验证,但未与临床试验数据进行广泛比较。限制它们作为临床决策证据的使用。
    比较非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者临床试验和观察队列中基于反应和进展的终点。
    这项回顾性队列研究使用了IMpower132试验(2016年4月7日至2017年5月31日进行)的患者水平数据和一个全国性的电子健康记录(EHR)衍生的去识别数据库(2011年1月1日至2022年3月31日收集的数据)。根据IMpower132试验的纳入和排除标准选择观察队列中的患者。观察队列中的所有患者均患有IV期NSCLC。
    所有患者均随机接受或接受一线卡铂或顺铂联合培美曲塞治疗。
    终点包括响应率,响应的持续时间,和无进展生存期,比较研究和观察队列在加权前后.观察性队列的反应率来自EHR。
    共有769名患者符合纳入标准,494在观察性队列中(中位[IQR]年龄,67[60-74]岁;228[46.2%]女性;45[9.1%]黑人或非裔美国人;352[71.3%]白人;53[10.7%]美洲印第安人或阿拉斯加原住民,亚洲人,夏威夷或太平洋岛民,或多种族)和试验队列中的275人(中位[IQR]年龄,63[56-68]年;90[32.7%]女性;4[1.5%]黑人或非裔美国人;194[70.5%]白人;65[23.6%]美洲印第安人或阿拉斯加原住民,亚洲人,夏威夷或太平洋岛民,或多种族)。所有3个终点在研究队列之间具有可比性。与加权观察队列中的患者相比,试验患者的反应评估数量更高。由于观察到的部分反应率高于基于RECIST的部分反应率,因此EHR得出的反应率在数字上高于加权后的客观反应率(249.3的100.3[40.2%]对275的105[38.2%])。在至少有1次反应评估的患者中,EHR得出的缓解率仍然高于客观缓解率(100.3/193.4[51.9%]vs105/256[41.0%]),这是因为观察队列中无缓解评估的患者比例较高.
    在这项研究中,临床试验和加权观察组之间基于反应和进展的终点相似,这增加了对观察终点可靠性的信心,并可以为它们与试验终点的关系提供信息。此外,观察到的应答率差异(包括与排除无应答评估患者的差异)凸显了未来研究在评估EHR来源的应答率和客观应答率之间的关系时采用这种双向方法的重要性.
    UNASSIGNED: Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) are commonly used to assess therapeutic response in clinical trials but not in routine care; thus, RECIST-based end points are difficult to include in observational studies. Clinician-anchored approaches for measuring clinical response have been validated but not widely compared with clinical trial data, limiting their use as evidence for clinical decision-making.
    UNASSIGNED: To compare response- and progression-based end points in clinical trial and observational cohorts of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
    UNASSIGNED: This retrospective cohort study used patient-level data from the IMpower132 trial (conducted April 7, 2016, to May 31, 2017) and a nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived deidentified database (data collected January 1, 2011, to March 31, 2022). Patients in the observational cohort were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the IMpower132 trial. All patients in the observational cohort had stage IV NSCLC.
    UNASSIGNED: All patients were randomized to or received first-line carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed.
    UNASSIGNED: End points included response rates, duration of response, and progression-free survival, compared between the trial and observational cohorts before and after weighting. Response rates for the observational cohort were derived from the EHR.
    UNASSIGNED: A total of 769 patients met inclusion criteria, 494 in the observational cohort (median [IQR] age, 67 [60-74] years; 228 [46.2%] female; 45 [9.1%] Black or African American; 352 [71.3%] White; 53 [10.7%] American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or multiracial) and 275 in the trial cohort (median [IQR] age, 63 [56-68] years; 90 [32.7%] female; 4 [1.5%] Black or African American; 194 [70.5%] White; 65 [23.6%] American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, or multiracial). All 3 end points were comparable between the study cohorts. Trial patients had a higher number of response assessments compared with patients in the weighted observational cohort. The EHR-derived response rate was numerically higher than the objective response rate after weighting (100.3 of 249.3 [40.2%] vs 105 of 275 [38.2%]) due to higher rates of observed partial response than RECIST-based partial response. Among patients with at least 1 response assessment, the EHR-derived response rate remained higher than the objective response rate (100.3 of 193.4 [51.9%] vs 105 of 256 [41.0%]) due to a higher proportion of patients in the observational cohort with no response assessment.
    UNASSIGNED: In this study, response- and progression-based end points were similar between clinical trial and weighted observational cohorts, which increases confidence in the reliability of observational end points and can inform their interpretation in relation to trial end points. Additionally, the difference observed in response rates (including vs excluding patients with no response assessment) highlights the importance of future research adopting this 2-way approach when evaluating the relationship of EHR-derived and objective response rates.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:化疗可以通过促进免疫引发来潜在地增强免疫检查点抑制剂的活性。1b/2期JAVELIN化疗Medley试验评估了晚期尿路上皮癌或非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的一线阿维鲁单抗+同步化疗。
    方法:在尿路上皮癌患者中,每3周(Q3W)连续给予Avelumab800mg或1200mg标准剂量的顺铂吉西他滨,非鳞状NSCLC患者的卡铂+培美曲塞。双重主要终点是剂量限制性毒性(DLT;1b期)和确认的客观反应(1b/2期)。
    结果:在1b阶段,尿路上皮癌和非小细胞肺癌组接受了avelumab800mg(分别为13和6例)或1200mg(各6例)+化疗.在接受avelumab800mg或1200mg化疗的可评估尿路上皮癌患者中,DLT发生在1/12(8.3%)和1/6(16.7%),分别;NSCLC队列中未发生DLT。在第2阶段,另外35例尿路上皮癌患者接受了1200mg的阿维鲁单抗化疗。在所有接受治疗的患者中,无论阿维鲁单抗剂量如何,安全性特征相似.使用avelumab800mg或1200mg+化疗的客观反应率(内部95%置信度),分别,在1b/2期,尿路上皮癌中分别为53.8%(25.1-80.8)和39.0%(24.2-55.5),非小细胞肺癌占50.0%(11.8-88.2)和33.3%(4.3-77.7)。
    结论:在尿路上皮癌和非小细胞肺癌中使用avelumab+化疗的初步疗效和安全性发现与先前类似联合治疗方案的研究一致。关于临床活动的结论受患者人数少的限制。
    结果:gov标识符,NCT03317496。
    UNASSIGNED: Chemotherapy can potentially enhance the activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors by promoting immune priming. The phase Ib/II JAVELIN Chemotherapy Medley trial (NCT03317496) evaluated first-line avelumab + concurrent chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
    UNASSIGNED: Avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg was administered continuously every 3 weeks with standard doses of cisplatin + gemcitabine in patients with urothelial carcinoma, or carboplatin + pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. Dual primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; phase Ib) and confirmed objective response (phase Ib/II).
    UNASSIGNED: In phase Ib, urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC cohorts received avelumab 800 mg (n = 13 and n = 6, respectively) or 1,200 mg (n = 6 each) + chemotherapy. In evaluable patients with urothelial carcinoma treated with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, DLT occurred in 1/12 (8.3%) and 1/6 (16.7%), respectively; no DLT occurred in the NSCLC cohort. In phase II, 35 additional patients with urothelial carcinoma received avelumab 1,200 mg + chemotherapy. Across all treated patients, safety profiles were similar irrespective of avelumab dose. Objective response rates (95% confidence internal) with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, respectively, across phase Ib/II, were 53.8% (25.1-80.8) and 39.0% (24.2-55.5) in urothelial carcinoma, and 50.0% (11.8-88.2) and 33.3% (4.3-77.7) in NSCLC.
    UNASSIGNED: Preliminary efficacy and safety findings with avelumab + chemotherapy in urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC were consistent with previous studies of similar combination regimens. Conclusions about clinical activity are limited by small patient numbers.
    UNASSIGNED: This phase Ib/II trial evaluated avelumab (immune checkpoint inhibitor) administered concurrently with standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or advanced nonsquamous NSCLC without actionable mutations. Efficacy and safety appeared consistent with previous studies of similar combinations, although patient numbers were small.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项随机临床试验研究了在吉非替尼中加入培美曲塞和卡铂化疗是否可以改善表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)变异的非小细胞肺癌患者的生存率。
    This randomized clinical trial examines whether adding chemotherapy with pemetrexed and carboplatin to gefitinib improves survival among patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)–variant non–small cell lung cancer.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:Pembrolizumab联合epacadostat(吲哚胺2,3-双加氧酶-1抑制剂)在日本晚期实体瘤患者中的耐受性良好,开放标签,第一阶段KEYNOTE-434研究(NCT02862457)。我们报告B部分的结果,在日本晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中评估了epacadostat联合派姆单抗和化疗。
    方法:年龄≥20岁的符合条件的患者经组织学或细胞学证实为IIIB期或IV期非小细胞肺癌,此前没有进行全身治疗。和ECOG性能状态为0或1。患者每天两次口服epacadostat100mg,pembrolizumab200mg静脉注射每3周≤35个周期,和4个周期的化疗(队列1:顺铂+培美曲塞,非鳞状细胞;队列2:卡铂+培美曲塞,非鳞状细胞;队列3:卡铂加紫杉醇,鳞状或非鳞状)。主要终点是剂量限制性毒性(DLTs)的发生率。根据其他研究的不利结果,方案修正案从治疗组合中删除了epacadostat.
    结果:在19例患者中,7人参加队列1,6人参加队列2和3。中位随访时间为13.7(范围,4.2-27.8)个月。17例(29%)可评估DLT的患者中有5例(队列1,n=1;队列2和3,各n=2);最常见的是斑丘疹(3级,n=3)和丙氨酸转氨酶升高(2级,n=1;3级,n=2)。所有患者都经历了治疗相关的不良事件(AE);58%经历了3级或4级治疗相关的AE。客观应答率为47%。
    结论:发现在日本晚期NSCLC患者中,epacadostat联合pembrolizumab和化疗是可以耐受的。
    背景:ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT02862457。
    BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab plus epacadostat (indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-1 inhibitor) was well tolerated in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors in part A of the nonrandomized, open-label, phase 1 KEYNOTE-434 study (NCT02862457). We report results from part B, which evaluated epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and chemotherapy in Japanese patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
    METHODS: Eligible patients aged ≥ 20 years had histologically or cytologically confirmed stage IIIB or IV NSCLC with no prior systemic therapy, and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received epacadostat 100 mg orally twice-daily, pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every-3-weeks for ≤ 35 cycles, and 4 cycles of chemotherapy (cohort 1: cisplatin plus pemetrexed, non-squamous; cohort 2: carboplatin plus pemetrexed, non-squamous; cohort 3: carboplatin plus paclitaxel, squamous or non-squamous). Primary endpoint was incidence of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Following unfavorable results from other studies, a protocol amendment removed epacadostat from the treatment combination.
    RESULTS: Of 19 patients, 7 were enrolled in cohort 1, and 6 each in cohorts 2 and 3. Median follow-up was 13.7 (range, 4.2-27.8) months. Five of 17 (29%) DLT-evaluable patients experienced ≥ 1 DLT (cohort 1, n = 1; cohorts 2 and 3, n = 2 each); most commonly maculopapular rash (grade 3, n = 3) and increased alanine aminotransferase (grade 2, n = 1; grade 3, n = 2). All patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (AEs); 58% experienced grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs. Objective response rate was 47%.
    CONCLUSIONS: The combination of epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and chemotherapy was found to be tolerable in Japanese patients with advanced NSCLC.
    BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02862457.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Multicenter Study
    KN046是一种靶向PD-L1和CTLA-4的双特异性抗体,为转移性非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)提供了有希望的治疗选择。在这项多中心第二阶段试验中,非鳞状(非sq)NSCLC患者接受培美曲塞,而sq-NSCLC患者接受紫杉醇治疗,加上KN046和卡铂。在四个周期之后,维持治疗包括KN046联合培美曲塞治疗非sq-NSCLC和KN046治疗sq-NSCLC.客观反应率为46.0%,中位缓解持续时间为8.1个月.中位无进展生存期和总生存期分别为5.8和26.6个月,分别。常见的不良事件包括贫血(87.4%),食欲不振(72.4%),和中性粒细胞减少(70.1%)。最普遍的免疫相关不良事件是瘙痒(28.7%)。这些结果表明,KN046和化疗的一线治疗对转移性NSCLC患者是有效和可耐受的。保证在更大的3期试验中进行进一步调查。该试验在ClinicalTrials.gov(NCT04054531)注册。
    KN046, a bispecific antibody targeting PD-L1 and CTLA-4, presents a promising therapeutic option for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this multicenter phase 2 trial, patients with nonsquamous (non-sq) NSCLC receive pemetrexed, whereas those with sq-NSCLC receive paclitaxel, plus KN046 and carboplatin. Following four cycles, maintenance therapy includes KN046 with pemetrexed for non-sq-NSCLC and KN046 for sq-NSCLC. The objective response rate is 46.0%, and the median duration of response is 8.1 months. The median progression-free and overall survival are 5.8 and 26.6 months, respectively. The common adverse events include anemia (87.4%), loss of appetite (72.4%), and neutropenia (70.1%). The most prevalent immune-related adverse event is pruritus (28.7%). These findings indicate that first-line treatment with KN046 and chemotherapy is effective and tolerable in metastatic NSCLC patients, warranting further investigation in a larger phase 3 trial. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04054531).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号