Severe and fatal adverse events of immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy has changed the treatment landscape for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, little evidence exists on the treatment-related severe adverse events (SAEs) and fatal adverse events (FAEs) of ICI combination therapy in mRCC. Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICI combination therapy versus conventional tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)-targeted therapy in mRCC. Data on SAEs and FAEs were analyzed using revman5.4 software. Results: Eight RCTs (n=5380) were identified. The analysis showed no differences in SAEs (60.5% vs. 64.5%) and FAEs (1.2% vs. 0.8%) between the ICI and TKI groups (odds ratio [OR], 0.83; 95%CI 0.58-1.19, p=0.300 and OR, 1.54; 95%CI 0.89-2.69, p=0.120, respectively). ICI-combination therapy was associated with less risk of hematotoxicities, including anemia (OR, 0.24, 95%CI 0.15-0.38, p<0.001), neutropenia (OR, 0.07, 95%CI 0.03-0.14, p<0.001), and thrombocytopenia (OR, 0.05, 95%CI 0.02-0.12, p<0.001), but with increased risks of hepatotoxicities (ALT increase [OR, 3.39, 95%CI 2.39-4.81, p<0.001] and AST increase [OR, 2.71, 95%CI 1.81-4.07, p<0.001]), gastrointestinal toxicities (amylase level increase [OR, 2.32, 95%CI 1.33-4.05, p=0.003] and decreased appetite [OR, 1.77, 95%CI 1.08-2.92, p=0.020]), endocrine toxicity (adrenal insufficiency [OR, 11.27, 95%CI 1.55-81.87, p=0.020]) and nephrotoxicity of proteinuria (OR, 2.21, 95%CI 1.06-4.61, p=0.030). Conclusions: Compared with TKI, ICI combination therapy has less hematotoxicity in mRCC but more specific hepatotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, endocrine toxicity, and nephrotoxicity, with a similar severe toxicity profile. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42023412669.

Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: A meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy in the first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R/M-SCCHN). METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis between ICI combination therapy and standard of care (SOC) treatment (chemotherapy with or without cetuximab) in R/M-SCCHN based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 2576 patients were included in the analysis. Compared with SOC, PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73, 95 % CI 0.62-0.87, p = 0.0004), PFS (HR, 0.65, 95 % CI 0.43-0.99, p = 0.04) and ORR (risk ratio [RR], 1.10; 95 % CI 1.01-1.19, p = 0.02) of patients, while double-agent immunotherapy could not improve either the outcome of OS, PFS, or ORR (all p > 0.05). In safety analyses, combination immunotherapy showed similar risks of grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs (RR, 0.79, 95 % CI 0.56-1.11, P = 0.17) and treatment-related deaths (RR, 1.16, 95 % CI 0.65-2.07, P = 0.63) compared to SOC. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with SOC, PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy enhanced OS, PFS, and ORR in the first-line treatment for patients with R/M-SCCHN, but double-agent immunotherapy showed no more benefit for these patients.

Nephrotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Few data are available regarding the nephrotoxicity of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). This study aimed to investigate the nephrotoxicity of ICI-based combination therapy versus standard of care sunitinib in patients with advanced RCC. METHODS: We searched Embase/PubMed/Cochrane Library for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Treatment-related nephrotoxicities including increase of creatinine and proteinuria were analyzed by Review Manager 5.4 software. RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 5239 patients were included. The analysis showed that ICI combination therapy had similar risks of any grade (RR = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.77-1.37, P = 0.87) and grade 3-5 (RR = 1.48, 95% CI: 0.19-11.66, P = 0.71) increased creatinine compared with sunitinib monotherapy. However, ICI combination therapy was associated with significantly higher risks of any grade (RR = 2.33, 95% CI: 1.54-3.51, P < 0.0001) and grade 3-5 proteinuria (RR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.21-4.17, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that ICI combination therapy shows more nephrotoxicity of proteinuria than sunitinib in advanced RCC, which deserves a high attention in the clinic.

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy versus standard of care in the first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitor plus chemotherapy vs standard of care (SoC) treatment in the first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-SCCHN). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy vs SoC as first-line treatment for R/M-SCCHN were searched from electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library). The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: In total, three phase 3 RCTs (KEYNOTE-048, CAPTAIN-1st, and JUPITER-02; n = 1120) with three PD-1 inhibitors (pembrolizumab, camrelizumab and toripalimab) were included in the analysis. Compared with SoC, PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy significantly prolonged PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66, 95% CI 0.40-0.93, p < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60-0.86, p < 0.001) of patients. There was no statistical differences in ORR (odds ratio [OR] 1.26; 95% CI 0.97-1.64, p = 0.086), grade 3 or higher AEs (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.50-1.17, p = 0.221), and treatment-related deaths (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.60-2.98, p = 0.470) between the two groups. CONCLUSION: PD-1 inhibitor plus chemotherapy showed more survival benefit than SoC in the first-line treatment for R/M-SCCHN, with a similar safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of adjuvant therapy with PD­1/PD­L1 inhibitors in cancer.

Anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibodies have been widely used in cancers. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in human cancers. Studies were searched from Cochrane Library, PubMed and Embase databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated adjuvant therapy with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents in solid cancers were eligible for inclusion. As the primary focus of the meta-analysis, clinical outcome measures including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed by Stata 15.0 software. A total of six RCTs (n=4,436) met the inclusion criteria. The DFS [hazard ratio (HR)=0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63-0.78; P<0.001] and OS (HR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.46-0.86, P<0.001) of patients were significantly prolonged by adjuvant immunotherapy. Subgroup analysis indicated that significantly improved DFS was observed in patients treated with different anti-PD-1/PD-L1 drugs (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab), as well as in those with different tumors (melanoma, urothelial carcinoma, esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer, or renal cell carcinoma), and PD-L1 status [negative (<1%) or positive (≥1%)]. However, PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors was associated with increased ≥ grade 3 treatment-related AEs (odds ratio=1.63; 95% CI: 1.20-2.21; P=0.002). The available evidence suggests that adjuvant therapy with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors provided more survival benefit than placebo for patients with cancer, with increased grade 3 or higher AEs. Prospero registration no. CRD42021290654.

The angiotensin receptor and neprilysin inhibitor, LCZ696, in heart failure: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: LCZ696 is a novel neuroendocrine inhibitor that has been widely used in heart failure (HF). However, its advantage over other neuroendocrine inhibitors, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) has not been fully elucidated. This study aimed to provide the latest evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of LCZ696 as compared to other ACEis and ARBs with regards to the treatment of HF. METHODS: We systematically searched databases, including PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The outcome measures included all-cause mortality, rate of hospitalizations for HF, rate of death from cardiovascular causes, change in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels, and decline of renal function. RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 19,078 patients were identified. The meta-analysis indicated that LCZ696 was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.93; P = .0005), rate of hospitalizations for HF (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.73-0.87; P < .00001), reduction in NT-proBNP levels (rate ratio = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.88; P < .0001), and decline in renal function (odds ratio = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.68-0.88; P < .0001) compared with ACEis and ARBs. However, there was no statistical difference in the rate of death from cardiovascular causes (HR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.03; P = .09) between LCZ696 and ACEis and ARBs. CONCLUSION: LCZ696 is superior to ACEis and ARBs in the treatment of HF. Hence, it should be more widely used clinically.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor as maintenance therapy for advanced or metastatic cancers: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as maintenance therapy for advanced or metastatic cancers. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis of eligible studies investigating the outcomes including progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) with a significance level set to 0.05 was performed. RESULTS: Five RCTs (n = 2828) were identified in this analysis. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) of PFS and OS for ICI maintenance therapy were 0.88 (95% CI: 0.68-1.13, P = .31) and 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.74-0.92, P = .0005), respectively; the pooled odds ratio (OR) of ORR was 2.24 (95% CI: 1.23-4.09, P = .0008). Subgroup analysis indicated that anti-PD-L1 antibody significantly improved the OS (P = .0008), while anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-1 plus anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 antibodies significantly prolonged the PFS of patients. CONCLUSION: ICI maintenance therapy enhanced the survival of patients with advanced or metastatic cancers.

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor monotherapy in recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitor monotherapy compared to the standard of care in the first-line setting for recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials. The clinical outcomes of overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rates, and grade 3 or higher adverse events were analyzed using Stata SE 15 software with a significance level set to 0.05. RESULTS: We identified four randomized controlled trials (1 nivolumab, 2 pembrolizumab, and 1 durvalumab), including a total of 2474 patients. The results of the meta-analysis showed pooled hazard ratios of overall and progression-free survival for programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitor monotherapy of 0.82 (95% CI: 0.73-0.91, p < 0.001) and 0.96 (95%CI: 0.84-1.07, p < 0.001) and pooled odds ratios of objective response rates and grade 3 or higher adverse events of 1.04 (95%CI: 0.46-2.37; p = 0.926) and 0.28 (95%CI: 0.22-0.35, p < 0.001), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that inhibitors for both programmed cell death-1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and programmed cell death-ligand 1 (durvalumab) were associated with significantly longer overall survival (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.90, p < 0.001 and HR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.70-1.06, p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 inhibitor monotherapy showed more clinical benefit versus the standard of care in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, with an acceptable safety profile.

Combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced renal cell carcinoma: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: We searched PubMed/Embase/Cochrane Library for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Clinical outcome measures including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORRs), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed by Stata 15.1 software. RESULTS: Seven RCTs involving 3461 patients were included. The pooled hazard ratios of OS and PFS for combination therapy were 0.67 (0.53-0.82, p < 0.001) and 0.68 (0.52-0.83, p < 0.001), respectively. Longer OS and PFS for combination therapy was also observed in the PD-L1 expression leve ≥1% group. The pooled odds ratios of ORRs and grade 3 or higher AEs were 2.31 (1.61-3.32, p < 0.001) and 0.94 (0.65-1.37, p = 0.753), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy showed more clinical benefit in the first-line treatment for advanced RCC, with a safety profile.