Checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aung Myint Tun, Kyaw Zin Thein, Wai Lin Thein, Elizabeth Guevara

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of upfront add-on immunotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). Methods: We performed a literature search on first-line chemotherapy ± immunotherapy in NSCLC. We utilized Revman version 5.3 to calculate the estimated pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) and pooled risk ratio for objective response rate (ORR), all-grade and high-grade adverse events with 95% CI. Results: We analyzed 4322 patients. The pooled hazard ratios for OS, PFS and ORR were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.62-0.88; p = 0.0007), 0.62 (95% CI: 0.57-0.68; p = 0.00001) and 1.51 (95% CI: 1.3-1.74; p = 0.00001), respectively. The pooled risk ratios for all-grade and high-grade adverse events were 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99-1.03; p = 0.27) and 1.17 (95% CI: 1.07-1.28; p = 0.0006), respectively. Conclusion: Add-on immunotherapy significantly improves PFS, OS and ORR for the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC with a reasonable safety profile.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numberFSO421
JournalFuture Science OA
Volume5
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2019
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • advanced non-small-cell lung cancer
  • checkpoint inhibitors
  • chemotherapy
  • first-line therapy
  • immune-related adverse events
  • objective response rate
  • overall survival
  • progression-free survival
  • randomized controlled trials
  • systematic review and meta-analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biotechnology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this