This study aimed to identify the most effective first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer based on overall survival, identify the most commonly used treatment, and generate a meaningful ranking among all available treatments based on their relative effectiveness. Researchers used the ANOVA parametrization method to fit the second-order fractional polynomial network meta-analysis with a random-effect model. Using a non-proportional hazards network meta-analysis, 46 treatments were compared by considering a combination of direct and indirect evidence extracted from clinical trial studies. Included in the review were 46 trials involving 21350 patients. Between January 2000 and January 2023, researchers conducted a thorough search through Embase, PubMed/Medline, and Scopus. To undertake a secondary analysis of this data, we recreate individual patient data from published Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival curves and assess the accuracy of that reconstruction. A random-effects model was used to evaluate the pooled overall survival and hazard ratio with a 95 percent confidence interval. The predicted survival curves for the network meta-analysis showed that GOLFIG and FOLFOX + Cetuximab treatments have higher survival, respectively. Our results provide moderate quality evidence and comparative effective estimates for various available first-line treatments for metastasis colorectal cancer based on network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma face a poor prognosis. Standard first-line treatment involves platinum-based combinations followed by avelumab maintenance therapy. Follow-up therapies include enfortumab vedotin, vinflunine, and taxanes.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze new drug combinations in first-line and follow-up treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma concerning their clinical relevance, toxicities, and novel treatment sequences.
METHODS: Analysis of new study data from EV-302/KN-A39 (enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab) and CheckMate-901 (nivolumab and gemcitabine-cisplatin) for untreated metastatic patients as well as TROPHY-U-01 (sacituzumab govitecan) and THOR (erdafitinib) for later lines.
RESULTS: The new standard in first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial carcinoma is the combination of enfortumab vedotin and pembrolizumab. For cisplatin-eligible patients with contraindications to enfortumab vedotin, the combination of nivolumab and gemcitabine-cisplatin offers an alternative. Erdafitinib presents a new biomarker-based option in the follow-up treatment of metastatic urothelial carcinoma.
CONCLUSIONS: These novel combinations are revolutionizing the treatment standard for metastatic urothelial carcinoma and necessitate a new approach to managing side effects.
UNASSIGNED: HINTERGRUND: Patienten mit einem lokal fortgeschrittenen oder metastasierten Urothelkarzinom (mUC) haben eine schlechte Prognose. Standard in der Erstlinie ist eine Platin-basierte Kombination, gefolgt von einer Avelumab-Erhaltungstherapie. Zu den Folgetherapien gehören Enfortumab-Vedotin (EV), Vinflunin und Taxane.
UNASSIGNED: Neue Substanzkombinationen in der Erstlinien- und Folgetherapien des mUC werden hinsichtlich ihrer klinischen Relevanz, Toxizitäten und neuer Therapiesequenz analysiert.
METHODS: Neue Studiendaten zu EV-302/KN-A39 (EV und Pembrolizumab) und CheckMate-901 (Nivolumab und Gemcitabin-Cisplatin) für unbehandelte, metastasierte Patienten sowie TROPHY-U-01 (Sacituzumab-Govitecan) und THOR (Erdafitinib) werden für spätere Therapielinien analysiert.
UNASSIGNED: Neuer Standard in der Erstlinientherapie für Patienten mit einem mUC ist die Kombination aus EV und Pembrolizumab. Für Cisplatin-geeignete Patienten mit Kontraindikationen gegen EV ist die Kombination aus Nivolumab und Gemcitabin-Cisplatin eine Alternative. Erdafitinib stellt eine neue biomarkerbasierte Option in der Folgetherapie des mUC dar.
UNASSIGNED: Die neuen Therapiekombinationen revolutionieren den Behandlungsstandard des mUC und machen ein neues Nebenwirkungsmanagement erforderlich.

ROS1 rearrangements are considered rare in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This retrospective real-world study aimed to evaluate first-line treatment with crizotinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) standard of care vs. new generation ROS1 anti-cancer agents. Forty-nine ROS1-expressing NSCLC patients, diagnosed with advanced metastatic disease, were included. Molecular profiling using either FISH/CISH or NGS was performed on tissue samples. Twenty-eight patients were treated with crizotinib, while fourteen patients were administered newer drugs (entrectinib, repotrectinib) and seven patients received platinum-doublet chemotherapy in a first-line setting. Overall response rate and disease control rate for the crizotinib and entrectinb/repotrectinib cohort were 68% and 82% vs. 86% and 93%, respectively. Median progression free survival was 1.6 years (95% CI 1.15-2.215) for the crizotinib treatment vs. 2.35 years for the entrectinib/repotrectinib cohort (95% CI 1.19-3.52). Central nervous system progression was noted in 20% and 25% of the crizotinib and entrectinib/repotrectinib cohorts, respectively. This multi-center study presents real-world treatment patterns of ROS1 NSCLC population, indicating that crizotinib exhibited comparable results to entrectinib/repotrectinib in a first-line setting, although both response rate and survival was numerically longer with treatment with newer agents.

UNASSIGNED: Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) encompass a wide range of diseases from precancerous states such as monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis to the rapidly growing Burkitt lymphoma. In 2022, we witnessed two new classifications for these malignant lymphoid tumors: The World Health Organization (WHO) 5th edition Classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours and the International Consensus Classification of Mature Lymphoid Neoplasms (ICC).
UNASSIGNED: Given our improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying lymphomagenesis at the molecular level, several novel agents have been or are being actively developed, including targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Therefore, this review features new and developing first-line pharmacotherapies in NHL. It is organized by the mechanism of action of the drug with the relevant key trials highlighted.
UNASSIGNED: We provide an overview of the development of curative combination chemotherapies for lymphomas, and then discuss the importance of working on a unified classification for these tumors. We discuss resistance to targeted therapies, particularly with the continuous use of Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors, how to sequence T-cell therapies (bispecific T-cell engagers and chimeric antigen receptor therapy), and the impact of financial toxicity. We also review possible strategies to increase cure rates at lower costs, with less toxicity, and while promoting global health.

UNASSIGNED: In the landscape of metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (mSTS) treatment, anthracyclines have shown efficacy; however, their associated toxicity imposes significant limitations, especially in frail elderly patients with mSTS who are highly susceptible to severe adverse effects. In this context, trabectedin, due to its distinct pharmacological profile and safety profile, may represent an interesting alternative being demonstrated to be active in treating mSTS. These features hold particular significance for elderly and unfit patients with mSTS, where balancing treatment benefits with potential adverse effects represents the pivotal objective.
UNASSIGNED: The investigation was focused on a specific group of 11 elderly patients with mSTS aged ≥70, all undergoing first-line treatment with trabectedin, and it was supported by comprehensive pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies. Among these patients, 9 out of 11 started the treatment at a dose of 1.5 mg/m2.
UNASSIGNED: The primary objective of this investigation is to highlight trabectedin as a valuable first-line treatment option for elderly and unfit patients with mSTS. Additionally, this investigation seeks to explore whether higher administered doses of trabectedin can enhance clinical outcomes while maintaining the same toxicity profiles. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 77 days (95% CI, 53-89), the median overall survival (OS) was 397 days (95% CI, 66-2,102), while the overall toxicity of grade 3-4 severity amounted to 43%.
UNASSIGNED: These findings provide new insights into the clinical outcomes and toxicity associated with trabectedin in an elderly patient population, enhancing our understanding of better treatment approaches for a specific population of patients with mSTS.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of recombinant human endostatin (Rh-endostatin) plus programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in a real-world setting.
METHODS: This was a retrospective study on patients with EGFR/ALK-negative, advanced or metastatic NSCLC. Patients received Rh-endostatin plus PD-1 inhibitors and chemotherapy every three weeks for 4 to 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety.
RESULTS: A total of 68 patients were included in this retrospective analysis. As of data cutoff (December 13, 2022), the median follow-up of 21.4 months (interquartile range [IQR], 8.3-44.4 months). The median PFS and OS was 22.0 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.6-27.4) and 31.0 months (95% CI: 23.4-not evaluable [NE]), respectively. The ORR was 72.06% (95% CI: 59.85-82.27%), and DCR was 95.59% (95% CI: 87.64-99.08%). Patients with stage IIIB/IIIC NSCLC had significantly longer median PFS (23.4 vs. 13.2 months), longer median OS (not reached vs. 18.0 months), and higher ORR (89.2% vs. 51.6%) than those with stage IV NSCLC (all p ≤ 0.001). The ORR was higher in patients with high PD-L1 expression (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥ 50%) than in those with low PD-L1 expression or positive PD-L1 expression (75% vs. 50%, p = 0.025). All patients experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and ≥ grade 3 TRAEs occurred in 16 (23.53%) patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Rh-endostatin combined with PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment yielded favorable effectiveness with a manageable profile in patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC, representing a promising treatment modality.

UNASSIGNED: Cryoablation has emerged as a recognized interventional strategy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Numerous trials have investigated cryoablation as a first-line therapy for AF. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of cryoablation on quality of life (QoL) and safety outcomes compared to antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with symptomatic AF.
UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cryoablation and AADs as first-line treatments for AF until May 2023. Continuous outcome data were analyzed using mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and dichotomous outcome data were analyzed using relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs. The primary outcomes assessed were QoL and serious adverse events.
UNASSIGNED: Our analysis included four RCTs involving 928 patients. Cryoablation was associated with a significant improvement in the AF Effect on Quality of Life (AFEQT) score (3 trials; MD 7.46, 95% CI 2.50 to 12.42; p = 0.003; I 2 = 79%) and EQ-VAS score (2 trials; MD 1.49, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.86; p < 0.001; I 2 = 0%) compared to AAD therapy. Additionally, cryoablation demonstrated a modest increase in EQ-5D score from baseline compared to AAD therapy, with no statistically significance (2 trials; MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.07; p = 0.07; I 2 = 79%). Furthermore, the rate of serious adverse events was significantly lower with cryoablation compared to AAD therapy (4 trials; 11.8% vs. 16.3%; RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-1.00; p = 0.05; I 2 = 0%). Cryoablation was also associated with a reduction in overall adverse events, incidence of persistent AF, hospitalizations, and additional ablation. However, there was no significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events and emergency department visits between the two treatment groups.
UNASSIGNED: Cryoablation, as a first-line treatment for symptomatic AF patients, significantly improved AF-specific quality of life and reduced serious adverse events, as well as overall adverse events, persistent AF, hospitalizations, and additional ablation compared to AADs.

UNASSIGNED: Both camrelizumab plus paclitaxel and carboplatin (CTC) and sintilimab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin or carboplatin (SGP) have been approved by the National Medical Products Administration of China (NMPA) for the first-line treatment of local advanced or metastatic sqNSCLC. However, the comparison of the two treatments as first-line treatments in efficacy or pharmacoeconomics has barely been studied. To deeply understand the costs and outcomes of the two treatments, this work directly compared the cost-effectiveness for the first-line treatment of local advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC in the Chinese mainland.
UNASSIGNED: A network meta-analysis was first performed based on the three clinical trials, namely, CameL-Sq, ORIENT-12, and C-TONG1002, to compare the clinical benefits of the two treatments. The Weibull approximation was applied to further calculate the life expectancy of the two treatments. The partitioned survival model (PSM) was next established, and one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also performed to evaluate the stability of the underlying parameter values and assumptions within the model.
UNASSIGNED: CTC treatment gained 0.68 QALYs and cost $14,764. SGP treatment gained 0.54 QALYs and cost $14,584. The CTC arm gained 0.14 additional QALYs and cost $179 more than the SGP arm, and the ICERs was $1,269/QALY, which was lower than one-fold GDP per capita in the Chinese mainland ($12,734 GDP per capita in 2022). In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, when the WTP ranged from $12,734-38,202 (1-3 folds, 2022 GDP per capita in China), the CTC group had higher probabilities than the SGP group for being cost effective, which ranged from 85.65% to 88.38%.
UNASSIGNED: From the perspective of the payers, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was cost-effective compared with sintilimab plus chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of local advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC in the Chinese mainland.

UNASSIGNED: Selecting between programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor or programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) patients urgently needs to be answered.
UNASSIGNED: Eligible phase 3 randomized clinical trials evaluating regimens based on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line treatment in ES-SCLC patients were systematically searched on the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and major international conferences from 01/01/2018 to 18/09/2023. The individual patient data (IPD) were recuperated from the Kaplan-Meier curves of the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of the included studies using the IPDfromKM method. The reconstructed data were pooled into unified arms, including the PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy group (PD-L1 group), PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy group (PD-1 group), and PD-1 (L1) inhibitor and chemotherapy plus other (anlotinib group, tiragolumab group, and tremelimumab group). Subsequently, the PD-L1 group was indirectly compared with the other groups. A standard statistical analysis was conducted using the \"survival\" package for the time-to-event endpoint. The primary outcomes were the OS and PFS of the PD-L1 group and the PD-1 inhibitor group. The secondary outcomes included safety and the 12- and 24-month restricted mean survival time (RMST) of the PD-L1 group and PD-1 group.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 9 studies including 11 immunotherapy cohorts were included. No significant difference in PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.86-1.06), OS (HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.84-1.05), and 12-month and 24-month RMST for OS (P = 0.198 and P = 0.216, respectively) was observed between the PD-L1 group and the PD-1 group. In contrast, the anlotinib group showed significantly better OS (HR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55-0.89), PFS (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.83), and RMST for OS compared to the PD-L1 group. The tiragolumab group showed similar efficacy to the PD-L1 group. However, the tremelimumab group exhibited inferior efficacy than the PD-L1 group. The incidence of ≥grade 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was significantly higher in the PD-1 group compared to the PD-L1 group (85.4% vs. 69.6%, P <.001), whereas the incidence of irAEs was similar between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: This reconstructed IPD analysis revealed that PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy achieved similar efficacy to PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in ES-SCLC patients, whereas PD-L1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy had a better safety profile.

BACKGROUND: Encouraging antitumor activity of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) has been shown in several small-scale studies. This study compared the efficacy and safety of AS versus standard-of-care nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (AG) as a first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC).
METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, phase II trial, eligible patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic PC were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive AS (nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; S-1 twice daily on days 1 through 14) or AG (nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) for 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).
RESULTS: Between July 16, 2019, and September 9, 2022, 62 patients (AS, n = 32; AG, n = 30) were treated and evaluated. With a median follow-up of 8.36 months at preplanned interim analysis (data cutoff, March 24, 2023), the median PFS (8.48 vs 4.47 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.402; P = .002) and overall survival (OS; 13.73 vs 9.59 months; HR, 0.226; P < .001) in the AS group were significantly longer compared to the AG group. More patients had objective response in the AS group than AG group (37.50% vs 6.67%; P = .005). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia and leucopenia in both groups, and gamma glutamyl transferase increase was observed only in the AG group.
CONCLUSIONS: The first-line AS regimen significantly extended both PFS and OS of Chinese patients with advanced PC when compared with the AG regimen, with a comparable safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03636308).