Comparative survival benefit of currently licensed second or third line treatments for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) negative advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and secondary analysis of trials.


Journal

BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
25 Apr 2019
Historique:
received: 26 01 2018
accepted: 21 03 2019
entrez: 27 4 2019
pubmed: 27 4 2019
medline: 16 8 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

A review of therapies for advanced cancers licenced by the EMA between 2009 and 2013 concluded that for more than half of these drugs there was little evidence of overall survival or quality of life benefit. Recent years have witnessed a growing number of licensed second-line pharmacotherapies for advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With the aim of gauging patient survival benefit, we conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and compared survival outcomes from available licensed treatments for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC. RCTs of second/third line treatments in participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and negative/low expression of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) and of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) were included. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web of Science) from January, 2000 up to July, 2017. Two or more independent reviewers screened bibliographic records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of studies. Published Kaplan Meier plots for OS and PFS along with restricted-mean-survival methods and parametric modelling were used to estimate the survival outcomes as mean number of months of survival. Network meta-analysis was undertaken to rank interventions and to make indirect comparisons. We included 11 RCTs with data for 7581 participants that compared nine different drugs. In studies of patients regardless of histology groups, targeted drugs (ramucirumab and nintedanib) yielded small overall survival gains of < 2.5 months over docetaxel, erlotinib provided no benefit, while immunotherapies (atezolizumab and pembrolizumab) delivered 5 to 6 months gain. Studies with patients stratified by histology confirmed the apparent superiority of immunotherapy (nivolumab and atezolizumab) over targeted treatments (ramucirumab, nintedanib, afatinib) providing between about 4 to 8 months OS gain over docetaxel. In network analysis immunotherapies consistently ranked higher than alternatives irrespective of population histology and outcome measure. Our review indicates that nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab provide superior survival benefits compared to other licensed drugs for late stage NSCLC. Patient gains from these immunotherapies are substantial compared to the expected average survival with chemotherapy (docetaxel) of < 1 year for people with squamous histology and about 1.25 year for those with non-squamous histology.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
A review of therapies for advanced cancers licenced by the EMA between 2009 and 2013 concluded that for more than half of these drugs there was little evidence of overall survival or quality of life benefit. Recent years have witnessed a growing number of licensed second-line pharmacotherapies for advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). With the aim of gauging patient survival benefit, we conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and compared survival outcomes from available licensed treatments for patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC.
METHODS METHODS
RCTs of second/third line treatments in participants with advanced/metastatic NSCLC and negative/low expression of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase (ALK) and of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) were included. We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web of Science) from January, 2000 up to July, 2017. Two or more independent reviewers screened bibliographic records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias of studies. Published Kaplan Meier plots for OS and PFS along with restricted-mean-survival methods and parametric modelling were used to estimate the survival outcomes as mean number of months of survival. Network meta-analysis was undertaken to rank interventions and to make indirect comparisons.
RESULTS RESULTS
We included 11 RCTs with data for 7581 participants that compared nine different drugs. In studies of patients regardless of histology groups, targeted drugs (ramucirumab and nintedanib) yielded small overall survival gains of < 2.5 months over docetaxel, erlotinib provided no benefit, while immunotherapies (atezolizumab and pembrolizumab) delivered 5 to 6 months gain. Studies with patients stratified by histology confirmed the apparent superiority of immunotherapy (nivolumab and atezolizumab) over targeted treatments (ramucirumab, nintedanib, afatinib) providing between about 4 to 8 months OS gain over docetaxel. In network analysis immunotherapies consistently ranked higher than alternatives irrespective of population histology and outcome measure.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Our review indicates that nivolumab, pembrolizumab and atezolizumab provide superior survival benefits compared to other licensed drugs for late stage NSCLC. Patient gains from these immunotherapies are substantial compared to the expected average survival with chemotherapy (docetaxel) of < 1 year for people with squamous histology and about 1.25 year for those with non-squamous histology.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31023244
doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5507-6
pii: 10.1186/s12885-019-5507-6
pmc: PMC6485098
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antibodies, Monoclonal 0
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized 0
Protein Kinase Inhibitors 0
atezolizumab 52CMI0WC3Y
Erlotinib Hydrochloride DA87705X9K
Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase EC 2.7.10.1
EGFR protein, human EC 2.7.10.1
ErbB Receptors EC 2.7.10.1

Types de publication

Journal Article Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

392

Références

N Engl J Med. 2005 Jul 14;353(2):123-32
pubmed: 16014882
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Sep;14(10):981-8
pubmed: 23883922
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Dec 07;13:152
pubmed: 24314264
Ann Oncol. 2016 Sep;27(suppl 5):v1-v27
pubmed: 27664245
N Engl J Med. 2015 Oct 22;373(17):1627-39
pubmed: 26412456
J Clin Oncol. 2000 May;18(10):2095-103
pubmed: 10811675
Lancet. 2014 Aug 23;384(9944):665-73
pubmed: 24933332
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
N Engl J Med. 2015 Jul 9;373(2):123-35
pubmed: 26028407
J Clin Oncol. 2004 May 1;22(9):1589-97
pubmed: 15117980
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(32):1-195
pubmed: 12065068
Cancer. 2013 Aug 1;119(15):2754-64
pubmed: 23661337
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Feb 01;12:9
pubmed: 22297116
Lancet. 2016 Apr 9;387(10027):1540-1550
pubmed: 26712084
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 25;13(7):e0199575
pubmed: 30044785
BJU Int. 2017 Apr;119(4):522-529
pubmed: 27256016
Lancet. 2017 Jan 21;389(10066):255-265
pubmed: 27979383
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun;12(2):115-24
pubmed: 26862009
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jul 20;24(21):3490-6
pubmed: 16849766
Ann Oncol. 2015 Aug;26(8):1547-73
pubmed: 26026162
Lancet. 2016 Apr 30;387(10030):1837-46
pubmed: 26970723
Lancet Oncol. 2014 Feb;15(2):143-55
pubmed: 24411639
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Apr;131:207-14
pubmed: 25533871
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Aug;16(8):897-907
pubmed: 26156651
Oncologist. 2009 Mar;14(3):253-63
pubmed: 19221167
BMC Med. 2017 Oct 30;15(1):193
pubmed: 29082855
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Aug;29(8):673-85
pubmed: 21599035
BMJ. 2017 Oct 4;359:j4530
pubmed: 28978555

Auteurs

Martin Connock (M)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.

Xavier Armoiry (X)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England. armoiryxa@gmail.com.
School of Pharmacy (ISPB) / UMR CNRS 5510 MATEIS / Lyon University Hospitals, Edouard Herriot hospital, Pharmacy Department, University of Lyon, 8 avenue Rockefeller, 69008, Lyon, France. armoiryxa@gmail.com.

Alexander Tsertsvadze (A)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.
School of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

G J Melendez-Torres (GJ)

Peninsula Technology AssessmentGroup (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.

Pamela Royle (P)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.

Lazaros Andronis (L)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.

Aileen Clarke (A)

Warwick Medical School, Division of Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill road, CV47AL, Coventry, England.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH