Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Cancer 2022-01, Vol.13 (10), p.3091-3102
Hauptverfasser: Pradeep, Jnaneshwari, Win, Thin Thin, Aye, Saint Nway, Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 3102
container_issue 10
container_start_page 3091
container_title Journal of Cancer
container_volume 13
creator Pradeep, Jnaneshwari
Win, Thin Thin
Aye, Saint Nway
Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T
description Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combined ICIs are not clear. This meta-analysis (MA) is aimed to update the efficacy and safety of ICIs by comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of advanced MM.Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, EbscoHost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy and safety of ICIs between a single ICI and combined ICIs. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on the study heterogeneity.Results: A total of nine RCTs were included in this MA. Regarding the efficacy, combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy showed statistically significant prolonged OS and PFS with HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.53, 0.79], p < 0.0001 and HR 0.48, 95% CI [0.38, 0.60], p< 0.0001 respectively. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed statistically significant longer ORR than monotherapy; with RR 2.15, 95% CI [1.63, 2.84], p < 0.00001. In terms of safety, the incidence of all AEs which include any AEs, high-grade, haematological, gastrointestinal, dermatological, pulmonary, liver and endocrine AEs were significantly lower with monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) of ICI compared to combination ICI therapy with a p-value < 0.00001 to 0.03.Conclusion: Efficacy of the combined nivolumab and ipilimumab was better than a single ICI, especially in the treatment of advanced MM. Although combination therapy showed better efficacy than monotherapy, monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) was safer than combination therapy as it tended to decrease the incidence of most of the treatment-related AEs.
doi_str_mv 10.7150/jca.72210
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9414012</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2760845282</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-e356a8f84f8a1b3fefe55a1718c55b099244ebc27028511d5800ef50c77c327e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkcFu1DAQhiMEolXpgTewxAUOae3YThwOSKtVgZW64kDhak2ccddLYi92UimvwFPjZStU8MUj_5_-8cxfFK8ZvWqYpNd7A1dNVTH6rDhnijdlW9fi-ZP6rLhMaU_z4W3VCP6yOOM1FVkR58WvG2udAbMQ8D35ChanhQRLNuM4eyTrHZofh-D8RDZ-5zo3hZiIDZGs-gfwBnuyhcHde8jEFgfwYYT3ZJXrCcqVh2FJLpHgyTb4MO0wwmEh3xNZh7FzHiaXpbvT86vihYUh4eXjfVF8-3hzt_5c3n75tFmvbkvDGZ1K5LIGZZWwCljHLVqUEljDlJGyo21bCYGdqRpaKclYLxWlaCU1TWN41SC_KD6cfA9zN2Jv0E8RBn2IboS46ABO_6t4t9P34UG3ggnKqmzw9tEghp8zpkmPLhkc8vQY5qRz65aymrVH9M1_6D7MMa_lSNVUCVmpI_XuRJkYUopo_36GUX0MWeeQ9Z-Q-W_ZYJlZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2760845282</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy</title><source>PubMed Central</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari ; Win, Thin Thin ; Aye, Saint Nway ; Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</creator><creatorcontrib>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari ; Win, Thin Thin ; Aye, Saint Nway ; Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combined ICIs are not clear. This meta-analysis (MA) is aimed to update the efficacy and safety of ICIs by comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of advanced MM.Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, EbscoHost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy and safety of ICIs between a single ICI and combined ICIs. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on the study heterogeneity.Results: A total of nine RCTs were included in this MA. Regarding the efficacy, combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy showed statistically significant prolonged OS and PFS with HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.53, 0.79], p &lt; 0.0001 and HR 0.48, 95% CI [0.38, 0.60], p&lt; 0.0001 respectively. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed statistically significant longer ORR than monotherapy; with RR 2.15, 95% CI [1.63, 2.84], p &lt; 0.00001. In terms of safety, the incidence of all AEs which include any AEs, high-grade, haematological, gastrointestinal, dermatological, pulmonary, liver and endocrine AEs were significantly lower with monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) of ICI compared to combination ICI therapy with a p-value &lt; 0.00001 to 0.03.Conclusion: Efficacy of the combined nivolumab and ipilimumab was better than a single ICI, especially in the treatment of advanced MM. Although combination therapy showed better efficacy than monotherapy, monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) was safer than combination therapy as it tended to decrease the incidence of most of the treatment-related AEs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1837-9664</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1837-9664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7150/jca.72210</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36046644</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Wyoming: Ivyspring International Publisher Pty Ltd</publisher><subject>Antigens ; Bias ; Chi-square test ; Clinical trials ; Combination therapy ; Immunotherapy ; Lymphocytes ; Medical prognosis ; Medical research ; Melanoma ; Meta-analysis ; Research Paper ; Skin cancer ; Statistical analysis ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Journal of Cancer, 2022-01, Vol.13 (10), p.3091-3102</ispartof><rights>2022. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>The author(s) 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-e356a8f84f8a1b3fefe55a1718c55b099244ebc27028511d5800ef50c77c327e3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9414012/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9414012/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Win, Thin Thin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aye, Saint Nway</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</creatorcontrib><title>Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy</title><title>Journal of Cancer</title><description>Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combined ICIs are not clear. This meta-analysis (MA) is aimed to update the efficacy and safety of ICIs by comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of advanced MM.Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, EbscoHost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy and safety of ICIs between a single ICI and combined ICIs. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on the study heterogeneity.Results: A total of nine RCTs were included in this MA. Regarding the efficacy, combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy showed statistically significant prolonged OS and PFS with HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.53, 0.79], p &lt; 0.0001 and HR 0.48, 95% CI [0.38, 0.60], p&lt; 0.0001 respectively. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed statistically significant longer ORR than monotherapy; with RR 2.15, 95% CI [1.63, 2.84], p &lt; 0.00001. In terms of safety, the incidence of all AEs which include any AEs, high-grade, haematological, gastrointestinal, dermatological, pulmonary, liver and endocrine AEs were significantly lower with monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) of ICI compared to combination ICI therapy with a p-value &lt; 0.00001 to 0.03.Conclusion: Efficacy of the combined nivolumab and ipilimumab was better than a single ICI, especially in the treatment of advanced MM. Although combination therapy showed better efficacy than monotherapy, monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) was safer than combination therapy as it tended to decrease the incidence of most of the treatment-related AEs.</description><subject>Antigens</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Chi-square test</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Combination therapy</subject><subject>Immunotherapy</subject><subject>Lymphocytes</subject><subject>Medical prognosis</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Melanoma</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Research Paper</subject><subject>Skin cancer</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1837-9664</issn><issn>1837-9664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkcFu1DAQhiMEolXpgTewxAUOae3YThwOSKtVgZW64kDhak2ccddLYi92UimvwFPjZStU8MUj_5_-8cxfFK8ZvWqYpNd7A1dNVTH6rDhnijdlW9fi-ZP6rLhMaU_z4W3VCP6yOOM1FVkR58WvG2udAbMQ8D35ChanhQRLNuM4eyTrHZofh-D8RDZ-5zo3hZiIDZGs-gfwBnuyhcHde8jEFgfwYYT3ZJXrCcqVh2FJLpHgyTb4MO0wwmEh3xNZh7FzHiaXpbvT86vihYUh4eXjfVF8-3hzt_5c3n75tFmvbkvDGZ1K5LIGZZWwCljHLVqUEljDlJGyo21bCYGdqRpaKclYLxWlaCU1TWN41SC_KD6cfA9zN2Jv0E8RBn2IboS46ABO_6t4t9P34UG3ggnKqmzw9tEghp8zpkmPLhkc8vQY5qRz65aymrVH9M1_6D7MMa_lSNVUCVmpI_XuRJkYUopo_36GUX0MWeeQ9Z-Q-W_ZYJlZ</recordid><startdate>20220101</startdate><enddate>20220101</enddate><creator>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari</creator><creator>Win, Thin Thin</creator><creator>Aye, Saint Nway</creator><creator>Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</creator><general>Ivyspring International Publisher Pty Ltd</general><general>Ivyspring International Publisher</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220101</creationdate><title>Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy</title><author>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari ; Win, Thin Thin ; Aye, Saint Nway ; Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c310t-e356a8f84f8a1b3fefe55a1718c55b099244ebc27028511d5800ef50c77c327e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Antigens</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Chi-square test</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Combination therapy</topic><topic>Immunotherapy</topic><topic>Lymphocytes</topic><topic>Medical prognosis</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Melanoma</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Research Paper</topic><topic>Skin cancer</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Win, Thin Thin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aye, Saint Nway</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of Cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pradeep, Jnaneshwari</au><au>Win, Thin Thin</au><au>Aye, Saint Nway</au><au>Sreeramareddy, Chandrashekhar T</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Cancer</jtitle><date>2022-01-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>3091</spage><epage>3102</epage><pages>3091-3102</pages><issn>1837-9664</issn><eissn>1837-9664</eissn><abstract>Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved as cancer immunotherapeutic agents for advanced malignant melanoma (MM) in recent years, and nivolumab and ipilimumab are the most widely used ICIs either alone or in combination. However, their efficacy and safety between single and combined ICIs are not clear. This meta-analysis (MA) is aimed to update the efficacy and safety of ICIs by comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of advanced MM.Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, EbscoHost and ClinicalTrials.gov for the eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the efficacy and safety of ICIs between a single ICI and combined ICIs. The outcomes analyzed included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A fixed-effect or random-effects model was adopted depending on the study heterogeneity.Results: A total of nine RCTs were included in this MA. Regarding the efficacy, combined nivolumab and ipilimumab therapy showed statistically significant prolonged OS and PFS with HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.53, 0.79], p &lt; 0.0001 and HR 0.48, 95% CI [0.38, 0.60], p&lt; 0.0001 respectively. Combination therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab also showed statistically significant longer ORR than monotherapy; with RR 2.15, 95% CI [1.63, 2.84], p &lt; 0.00001. In terms of safety, the incidence of all AEs which include any AEs, high-grade, haematological, gastrointestinal, dermatological, pulmonary, liver and endocrine AEs were significantly lower with monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) of ICI compared to combination ICI therapy with a p-value &lt; 0.00001 to 0.03.Conclusion: Efficacy of the combined nivolumab and ipilimumab was better than a single ICI, especially in the treatment of advanced MM. Although combination therapy showed better efficacy than monotherapy, monotherapy (either nivolumab or ipilimumab) was safer than combination therapy as it tended to decrease the incidence of most of the treatment-related AEs.</abstract><cop>Wyoming</cop><pub>Ivyspring International Publisher Pty Ltd</pub><pmid>36046644</pmid><doi>10.7150/jca.72210</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1837-9664
ispartof Journal of Cancer, 2022-01, Vol.13 (10), p.3091-3102
issn 1837-9664
1837-9664
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9414012
source PubMed Central; EZB Electronic Journals Library; PubMed Central Open Access
subjects Antigens
Bias
Chi-square test
Clinical trials
Combination therapy
Immunotherapy
Lymphocytes
Medical prognosis
Medical research
Melanoma
Meta-analysis
Research Paper
Skin cancer
Statistical analysis
Systematic review
title Efficacy and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Advanced Malignant Melanoma: A Meta-Analysis on Monotherapy Vs Combination Therapy
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T10%3A00%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Efficacy%20and%20Safety%20of%20Immune%20Checkpoint%20Inhibitors%20for%20Advanced%20Malignant%20Melanoma:%20A%20Meta-Analysis%20on%20Monotherapy%20Vs%20Combination%20Therapy&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Cancer&rft.au=Pradeep,%20Jnaneshwari&rft.date=2022-01-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=3091&rft.epage=3102&rft.pages=3091-3102&rft.issn=1837-9664&rft.eissn=1837-9664&rft_id=info:doi/10.7150/jca.72210&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2760845282%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2760845282&rft_id=info:pmid/36046644&rfr_iscdi=true