Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and indirect comparison of randomized trials

Pembrolizumab and tislelizumab have demonstrated significant clinical benefits in first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC. However, no head-to-head clinical trial has ever compared the optimal choice. Therefore, we conducted an indirect comparison to explore the optimal choice for advanced NSCLC com...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in pharmacology 2023-06, Vol.14, p.1172969-1172969
Hauptverfasser: Guo, Yimeng, Jia, Junting, Hao, Zhiying, Yang, Jing
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Pembrolizumab and tislelizumab have demonstrated significant clinical benefits in first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC. However, no head-to-head clinical trial has ever compared the optimal choice. Therefore, we conducted an indirect comparison to explore the optimal choice for advanced NSCLC combined with chemotherapy. We conducted a systematic review of randomized trials; the clinical outcomes included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Indirect comparisons between tislelizumab and pembrolizumab were conducted with the Bucher method. Data were abstracted from 6 randomized trials involving more than 2,000 participants. Direct meta-analysis showed that both treatment regimens improved clinical outcomes compared with chemotherapy alone (PFS: hazard ratio (HR) 0.55, 95% CI 0.45-0.67; HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.47-0.60; ORR: relative risk (RR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.32-1.71; RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.44-2.48). Regarding safety outcomes, tislelizumab and pembrolizumab have a higher risk in the incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.21; RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.03-1.24). The indirect comparison showed that there was no significant difference between tislelizumab plus chemotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in terms of PFS (HR: 1.04, 95% CI 0.82-1.31), ORR (RR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.59-1.07), the incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87-1.12), and AEs leading to death (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.23-2.09). In progression-free survival subgroup analysis, the results demonstrate no significant differences in PFS by PD-L1 TPS expression level, age, liver metastasis status, and smoking status between tislelizumab plus chemotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. The efficacy and safety of tislelizumab combination chemotherapy were not substantially different from pembrolizumab combination chemotherapy.
ISSN:1663-9812
1663-9812
DOI:10.3389/fphar.2023.1172969