OBJECTIVE: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death all over the world, and brings a heavy social economic burden especially in China. Several immuno-combination therapies have shown promising efficacy in the first-line treatment of unresectable HCC and are widely used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, which combination is the most affordable one is unknown. Our study assessed the cost-effectiveness of the immuno-combinations as first-line treatment for patients with unresectable HCC from the perspective of Chinese payers.
METHODS: A Markov model was built according to five multicenter, phase III, open-label, randomized trials (Himalaya, IMbrave150, ORIENT-32, CARES-310, LEAP-002) to investigate the cost-effectiveness of tremelimumab plus durvalumab (STRIDE), atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A + B), sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar (IBI305) (S + B), camrelizumab plus rivoceranib (C + R), and pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib (P + L). Three disease states were included: progression free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD) as well as death. Medical costs were searched from West China Hospital, published literatures or the Red Book. Cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were evaluated to compare costs among different combinations. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robust of the model.
RESULTS: The total cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of C + R, S + B, P + L, A + B and STRIDE were $12,109.27 and 0.91, $26,961.60 and 1.12, $55,382.53 and 0.83, $70,985.06 and 0.90, $84,589.01 and 0.73, respectively, resulting in the most cost-effective strategy of C + R with CER of $13,306.89 per QALY followed by S + B with CER of $24,072.86 per QALY. Compared with C + R, the ICER of S + B strategy was $70,725.38 per QALY, which would become the most cost-effective when the willing-to-pay threshold exceeded $73,500/QALY. In the subgroup analysis, with the application of Asia results in Leap-002 trial, the model results were the same as global data. In the sensitivity analysis, with the variation of parameters, the results were robust.
CONCLUSIONS: As one of the promising immuno-combination therapies in the first-line systemic treatment of HCC, camrelizumab plus rivoceranib demonstrated the potential to be the most cost-effective strategy, which warranted further studies to best inform the real-world clinical practices.

UNASSIGNED: Diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma (DIPG) stands as the predominant type of brainstem glioma. It is characterized by a notably brief median survival period, with the majority of patients experiencing disease progression within six months following radiation therapy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT) compared to conventionally fractionated radiotherapy (CFRT) in DIPG treatment.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature search was conducted in four databases, and relevant studies comparing HFRT and CFRT in DIPG were included. Data were extracted and analyzed for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment-related toxicities. Statistical analysis was performed using random-effects models with heterogeneity assessment.
UNASSIGNED: Five studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 518 patients. No significant difference in one-year OS was observed between HFRT and CFRT (29% vs. 22%, p = 0.94). The median OS was similar in both treatment groups (9.7 vs. 9.3 months, p = 0.324). Similarly, no significant difference in one-year PFS was found between HFRT and CFRT (19.8% vs. 16.6%, p = 0.82), with comparable median PFS (9.3 vs. 9.4 months, p = 0.20). In meta-regression analysis, there was no association of chemotherapy (p > 0.05) or radiation biologically effective dose (BED) (p > 0.05) regarding OS or PFS outcomes. There were no significant differences in treatment-related toxicities.
UNASSIGNED: HFRT yields one-year OS and PFS rates similar to CFRT in DIPG, with no significant differences in treatment-related toxicities. Chemotherapy and BED did not affect OS or PFS.

BACKGROUND: Systemic conversion therapy provides patients with initially unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) the chance to salvage radical liver resection and superior survival outcomes, but the optimal conversion strategy is unclear.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library between 2007 and 2024 focusing on studies reporting conversion therapy for HCC. The treatment groups were divided into Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI), TKI plus loco-regional therapy (LRT), TKI plus anti-PD-1 therapy (TKI + PD-1), TKI + PD-1 + LRT, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) plus LRT, and Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A + T) groups. The conversion to surgery rate (CSR), objective response rate (ORR), grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed.
RESULTS: 38 studies and 4,042 patients were included. The pooled CSR were 8% (95% CI, 5-12%) in TKI group, 13% (95% CI, 8-19%) in TKI + LRT group, 28% (95% CI, 19-37%) in TKI + PD-1 group, 33% (95% CI, 25-41%) in TKI + PD-1 + LRT group, 23% (95% CI, 1-46%) in ICI + LRT group, and 5% (95% CI, 3-8%) in A + T group, respectively. The pooled HR for OS (0.45, 95% CI, 0.35-0.60) and PFS (0.49, 95% CI, 0.35-0.70) favored survival benefit of conversion surgery. Subgroup analysis revealed that lenvatinib + PD-1 + LRT conferred higher CSR of 35% (95% CI, 26-44%) and increased ORR of 70% (95% CI, 56-83%).
CONCLUSIONS: The current study indicates that TKI + PD-1 + LRT, especially lenvatinib + PD-1 + LRT, may be the superior conversion therapy with a manageable safety profile for patients with initially unresectable HCC. The successful conversion therapy favors the superior OS and PFS compared with systemic treatment alone.
BACKGROUND: International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (registration code: CRD 42024495289).

BACKGROUND: Circulating cytokines can represent non-invasive biomarkers to improve prediction of clinical outcomes of cancer patients. Here, plasma levels of IL-8, CCL4, osteopontin, LIF and BDNF were determined at baseline (T0), after 2 months of therapy (T2) and, when feasible, at progression (TP), in 70 melanoma patients treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors. The association of baseline cytokine levels with clinical response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was evaluated.
METHODS: Cytokine concentrations were measured using the xMAP technology. Their ability to discriminate between responding (Rs) and non-responding (NRs) patients was assessed by Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis. PFS and OS were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. The Cox proportional hazard model was used in the univariate and multivariate analyses to estimate crude and adjusted hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
RESULTS: CCL4 and LIF were undetectable in the majority of samples. The median osteopontin concentration at T0 and T2 was significantly higher in NRs than in Rs. The median T0 and T2 values of IL-8 were also higher in NRs than in Rs, although the statistical significance was not reached. No differences were detected for BDNF. In 39 Rs with matched T0, T2, and TP samples, osteopontin and IL-8 significantly decreased from T0 to T2 and rose again at TP, while BDNF levels remained unchanged. In NRs, none of the cytokines showed a significant decrease at T2. Only osteopontin demonstrated a good ability to discriminate between Rs and NRs. A high IL-8 T0 level was associated with significantly shorter PFS and OS and higher risk of progression and mortality, and remained an independent negative prognostic factor for OS in multivariate analysis. An elevated osteopontin T0 concentration was also significantly associated with worse OS and increased risk of death. Patients with high IL-8 and high osteopontin showed the lowest PFS and OS, and in multivariate analysis this cytokine combination remained independently associated with a three- to six-fold increased risk of mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Circulating IL-8 and osteopontin appear useful biomarkers to refine prognosis evaluation of patients undergoing targeted therapy, and deserve attention as potential targets to improve its clinical efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is a heterogeneous disease with prognoses varying from months to years at time of castration-resistant diagnosis. Optimal first-line therapy for those with different prognoses is unknown.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of men in a national healthcare delivery system receiving first-line therapy for mCRPC (abiraterone, enzalutamide, docetaxel, or ketoconazole) from 2010 to 2017, with follow-up through 2019. Using commonly drawn prognostic labs at start of mCRPC therapy (hemoglobin, albumin, and alkaline phosphatase), we categorized men into favorable, intermediate, or poor prognostic groups depending on whether they had none, one to two, or all three laboratory values worse than designated laboratory cutoffs. We used Kaplan-Meier methods to examine prostate specific antigen (PSA) progression-free and overall survival (OS) according to prognostic group and first-line therapy, and multivariable cox regression to determine variables associated with survival outcomes.
RESULTS: Among 4135 patients, median PSA progression-free survival (PFS) was 6.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.6-7.3), and median OS 18.8 months (95% CI 18.0-19.6), ranging from 5.7 months (95% CI 4.8-7.0) in the poor prognosis group to 31.3 months (95% CI 29.7-32.9) in the favorable group. OS was similar regardless of initial treatment received for favorable and intermediate groups, but worse for those in the poor prognostic group who received ketoconazole (adjusted hazard ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.2-3.6). PSA PFS was worse for those who received ketoconazole compared to abiraterone across all prognostic groups (favorable HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34-2.31; intermediate HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.41-2.25; poor HR 8.01, 95% CI 2.93-21.9).
CONCLUSIONS: Commonly drawn labs at mCRPC treatment start may aid in predicting survival and response to therapies, potentially informing discussions with care teams. First-line treatment selection impacts disease progression for all men with mCRPC regardless of prognostic group, but impacted OS only for men with poor prognosis at treatment start.

OBJECTIVE: Long-term survival data from clinical trials show that survival curves of patients with advanced melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) gradually reach a plateau, suggesting that patients have a chance of achieving long-term survival.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate long-term survival in patients with advanced melanoma treated with ICIs outside clinical trials.
METHODS: Cohort study using prospectively collected data from the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry, including patients in the Netherlands with advanced melanoma treated with first-line ICIs from 2012 to 2019. Data were analyzed from January to September 2023.
METHODS: Patients were treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab, antibodies that target programmed cell death (anti-PD-1), or ipilimumab.
METHODS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and melanoma-specific survival were analyzed, and a Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate factors associated with PFS after reaching partial response (PR) or complete response (CR).
RESULTS: A total of 2490 patients treated with first-line ICIs were included (median [IQR] age, 65.0 [55.3-73.0] years; 1561 male patients [62.7%]). Most patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 1 or lower (2202 patients [88.5%]) and normal lactate dehydrogenase levels (1715 patients [68.9%]). PFS for all patients was 23.4% (95% CI, 21.7%-25.2%) after 3 years and 19.7% (95% CI, 18.0%-21.4%) after 5 years. Overall survival for all patients was 44.0% (95% CI, 42.1%-46.1%) after 3 years and 35.9% (95% CI, 33.9%-38.0%) after 5 years. Patients with metastases in 3 or more organ sites had a significantly higher hazard of progression after reaching PR or CR (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.11-1.69).
CONCLUSIONS: This cohort study of patients with advanced melanoma treated with ICIs in clinical practice showed that their survival reached a plateau, comparable with patients participating in clinical trials. These findings can be used in daily clinical practice to guide long-term surveillance strategies and inform both physicians and patients regarding long-term treatment outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: The purpose of the study was to identify the best sequence of therapy beginning with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) as the first-line therapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in terms of overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and rates of discontinuation and adverse effects during the treatment period.
UNASSIGNED: This is a retrospective, nationwide multicenter study of patients with mRCC after diagnosis at 10 different tertiary medical centers in Korea from January 1992 to December 2017. We focused on patients at either \"favorable\" or \"intermediate\" risk according to the International mRCC Database Consortium criteria, and they were followed up (median 335 days). Finally, a total of 1409 patients were selected as the study population. We generated a Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for covariates, and the different therapy schemes were statistically tested in terms of OS as well as PFS. In addition, frequencies of discontinuation and adverse events were compared among the therapy schemes.
UNASSIGNED: Of the primary patterns of treatment sequences (24 sequences), \"sunitinib-pazopanib\" and \"sunitinib-everolimus-immunotherapy\" showed the most beneficial results in both OS and PFS with significantly lower hazards than \"sunitinib\", which is the most commonly treated agent in Korea. Considering that the \"TKI-TKI\" structure showed relatively higher discontinuation rates with higher adverse effects, the overall beneficial sequence would be \"sunitinib-everolimus-immunotherapy\".
UNASSIGNED: Among several sequential therapy starting with TKIs, \"sunitinib-everolimus- immunotherapy\" was found to be the best scheme for mRCC patients with \"favorable\" or \"intermediate\" risks.

UNASSIGNED: Ovarian cancer (OC) is a major gynecological malignancy with varying prognosis. The Neutrophil-toLymphocyte Ratio (NLR) has been proposed as a potential prognostic biomarker. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic and clinical value of NLR in OC.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following PRISMA guidelines, including studies that evaluated the association between NLR and survival outcomes in OC patients. Search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Quality assessment was done using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Heterogeneity was assessed, and pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using fixed or random-effects models as appropriate.
UNASSIGNED: Sistematski pregled i meta-analiza su obavljeni u skladu sa smernicama PRISMA, uključujući studije koje su procenile povezanost između NLR i ishoda preživljavanja kod pacijenata sa OC. Pretraga je obavljena u bazama podataka PubMed, Embase, Web of Science i Cochrane Library. Procena kvaliteta je urađena korišćenjem Njukasl-Otava skale (NOS). Heterogenost je procenjena, a udruženi odnosi opasnosti (HRs) su izračunati korišćenjem modela fiksnih ili slučajnih efekata prema potrebi.
UNASSIGNED: Analizirano je dvadeset studija koje su uključivale različite etničke pripadnosti, uzraste i veličinu uzorka. Utvrđeno je da je visok NLR u obrnutoj korelaciji sa ukupnim preživljavanjem (OS) (HR=1,21, 95% CI 1,09-1,34, P<0,001) i preživljavanjem bez progresije (PFS) (HR=1,20, 95% CI 1,03-1,38, P<0,001). Stratifikovane analize su pokazale jaču povezanost kod azijskih pacijenata, studije sa manjim veličinama uzoraka, mlađim pacijentima i višim graničnim vrednostima NLR.
UNASSIGNED: Meta-analiza sugeriše značajnu inverznu povezanost između NLR i ishoda preživljavanja kod pacijenata sa OC, naglašavajući potencijal NLR-a kao jednostavnog, isplativog prognostičkog biomarkera. Međutim, značajna heterogenost i uticaj zbunjujućih faktora naglašavaju potrebu za daljim istraživanjem.

BACKGROUND: FGFR genomic aberrations occur in approximately 5-10% of human cancers. Erdafitinib has previously demonstrated efficacy and safety in FGFR-altered advanced solid tumors, such as gliomas, thoracic, gastrointestinal, gynecological, and other rare cancers. However, its efficacy and safety in Asian patients remain largely unknown. We conducted a multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase IIa study of erdafitinib to evaluate its efficacy in Asian patients with FGFR-altered advanced cholangiocarcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and esophageal cancer.
METHODS: Patients with pathologically/cytologically confirmed, advanced, or refractory tumors who met molecular and study eligibility criteria received oral erdafitinib 8 mg once daily with an option for pharmacodynamically guided up-titration to 9 mg on a 28-day cycle, except for four NSCLC patients who received erdafitinib 10 mg (7 days on/7 days off) as they were recruited before the protocol amendment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, duration of response, disease control rate, overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics.
RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (cholangiocarcinoma: 22; NSCLC: 12; esophageal cancer: 1) were enrolled. At data cutoff (November 19, 2021), the objective response rate for patients with cholangiocarcinoma was 40.9% (95% CI, 20.7-63.6); the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.6-12.7) and median overall survival was 40.2 months (95% CI, 12.4-not estimable). No patient with RET/FGFR-altered NSCLC achieved objective response and the disease control rate was 25.0% (95% CI, 5.5-57.2%), with three patients with stable disease. The single patient with esophageal cancer achieved partial response. All patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events, and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 22 (62.9%) patients. Hyperphosphatemia was the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse event (all-grade, 85.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib demonstrated efficacy in a population of Asian patients in selected advanced solid tumors, particularly in those with advanced FGFR-altered cholangiocarcinoma. Treatment was tolerable with no new safety signals.
BACKGROUND: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02699606); study registration (first posted): 04/03/2016.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is a cancer of the elderly, with a median age at diagnosis of 71. More than one-third of people diagnosed with lung cancer are over 75 years old. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are special antibodies that target a pathway in the immune system called the programmed cell death 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway. These antibodies help the immune system fight cancer cells by blocking signals that cancer cells use to avoid being attacked by the immune system. ICIs have changed the treatment of people with lung cancer. In particular, for people with previously-untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), current first-line treatment now comprises ICIs plus platinum-based chemotherapy, rather than platinum-based chemotherapy alone, regardless of their PD-L1 expression status. However, as people age, their immune system changes, becoming less effective in its T cell responses. This raises questions about how well ICIs work in older adults.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab) in treatment-naïve adults aged 65 years and older with advanced NSCLC.
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Trial Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other trial registers, and the websites of drug regulators. The latest search date was 23 August 2023. We also checked references and searched abstracts from the meetings of seven cancer organisations from 2019 to August 2023.
METHODS: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the efficacy and safety of adding ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone for people 65 years and older who had not previously been treated. All data emanated from international multicentre studies involving adults with histologically-confirmed advanced NSCLC who had not received any previous systemic anticancer therapy for their advanced disease.
METHODS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were overall survival and treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). Our secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, objective response rate, time to response, duration of response, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).
RESULTS: We included 17 primary studies, with a total of 4276 participants, in the review synthesis. We identified nine ongoing studies, and listed one study as \'awaiting classification\'. Twelve of the 17 studies included people older than 75 years, accounting for 9% to 13% of their participants. We rated some studies as having \'some concerns\' for risk of bias arising from the randomisation process, deviations from the intended interventions, or measurement of the outcome. The overall GRADE rating for the certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to low because of the risk of bias, imprecision, or inconsistency. People aged 65 years and older The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably increased overall survival compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.88; 8 studies, 2093 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported data for treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events may not differ between the two treatment groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.32; 1 study, 127 participants; low-certainty evidence). The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improves progression-free survival (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.68; 7 studies, 1885 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People aged 65 to 75 years, inclusive The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improved overall survival compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87; 6 studies, 1406 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported data for treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events probably increased in people treated with ICIs plus platinum-based chemotherapy compared to those treated with platinum-based chemotherapy alone (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.13; 1 study, 97 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.73; 8 studies, 1466 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People aged 75 years and older There may be no difference in overall survival in people treated with ICIs combined with platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.16; 4 studies, 297 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data on treatment-related adverse events were available in this age group. The effect of combination ICI and platinum-based chemotherapy on progression-free survival is uncertain (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.36; 3 studies, 226 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Only three studies assessed the objective response rate. For time to response, duration of response, and health-related quality of life, we do not have any evidence yet.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone, adding ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably leads to higher overall survival and progression-free survival, without an increase in treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher), in people 65 years and older with advanced NSCLC. These data are based on results from studies dominated by participants between 65 and 75 years old. However, the analysis also suggests that the improvements reported in overall survival and progression-free survival may not be seen in people older than 75 years.