The safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in children, adolescents, and young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

EJC paediatric oncology Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-09 DOI:10.1016/j.ejcped.2025.100215
Pedro C.A. Reis , João Evangelista Ponte Conrado , Mariana Macambira Noronha , Luís Felipe Leite da Silva , Erick Figueiredo Saldanha , Jonathan Metts
{"title":"The safety and efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in children, adolescents, and young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Pedro C.A. Reis ,&nbsp;João Evangelista Ponte Conrado ,&nbsp;Mariana Macambira Noronha ,&nbsp;Luís Felipe Leite da Silva ,&nbsp;Erick Figueiredo Saldanha ,&nbsp;Jonathan Metts","doi":"10.1016/j.ejcped.2025.100215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has changed the treatment landscape for many types of adult cancer. However, for children, adolescents, and young adults (CAYAs) clinical experience lags behind that of adults. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ICB in the CAYA population.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for clinical trials evaluating ICB therapies for cancer in CAYA patients. We pooled the incidences of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), objective response rates (ORRs), stable disease (SD), and their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs). For the ORR and TRAE endpoints, we performed a subgroup analysis of each drug (PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4) and tumor type.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>15 trials were included, comprising 797 patients (median age ranging from 6.5 to 16.0 years). All-grade TRAE rate of 66 % was found (95 % CI 60–71), while the proportion of grade 3/4 TRAEs was 19 % (95 % CI 14–27). For tumor type subgroup analysis of all-grade TRAEs and grade 3/4 TRAEs, solid tumors had the highest rates, 92 % (95 % CI 41–99) and 32 % (95 % CI 11–63), respectively. Fatigue, anemia, and nausea were the most frequently reported TRAEs. The ORR was 13 % (95 % CI 5–27). In subgroup analyses, PD-1 inhibitors and Hodgkin Lymphoma had the highest ORR, with 25 % (95 % CI 8–56) and 59 % (95 % CI 23–87), respectively. SD was noted in 21 % (95 % CI 14–30) of patients.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Overall, ICB is well tolerated in CAYA patients with different cancer types, and certain subsets of CAYA cancer are ICB-responsive.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":94314,"journal":{"name":"EJC paediatric oncology","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100215"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJC paediatric oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772610X25000029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has changed the treatment landscape for many types of adult cancer. However, for children, adolescents, and young adults (CAYAs) clinical experience lags behind that of adults. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ICB in the CAYA population.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for clinical trials evaluating ICB therapies for cancer in CAYA patients. We pooled the incidences of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), objective response rates (ORRs), stable disease (SD), and their corresponding confidence intervals (CIs). For the ORR and TRAE endpoints, we performed a subgroup analysis of each drug (PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4) and tumor type.

Results

15 trials were included, comprising 797 patients (median age ranging from 6.5 to 16.0 years). All-grade TRAE rate of 66 % was found (95 % CI 60–71), while the proportion of grade 3/4 TRAEs was 19 % (95 % CI 14–27). For tumor type subgroup analysis of all-grade TRAEs and grade 3/4 TRAEs, solid tumors had the highest rates, 92 % (95 % CI 41–99) and 32 % (95 % CI 11–63), respectively. Fatigue, anemia, and nausea were the most frequently reported TRAEs. The ORR was 13 % (95 % CI 5–27). In subgroup analyses, PD-1 inhibitors and Hodgkin Lymphoma had the highest ORR, with 25 % (95 % CI 8–56) and 59 % (95 % CI 23–87), respectively. SD was noted in 21 % (95 % CI 14–30) of patients.

Conclusions

Overall, ICB is well tolerated in CAYA patients with different cancer types, and certain subsets of CAYA cancer are ICB-responsive.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
免疫检查点阻断在儿童、青少年和年轻人中的安全性和有效性:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析
免疫检查点阻断(ICB)已经改变了许多类型成人癌症的治疗前景。然而,对于儿童,青少年和年轻人(CAYAs)的临床经验落后于成人。因此,我们进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估ICB在CAYA人群中的安全性和有效性。方法检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库,检索评价ICB治疗CAYA患者癌症的临床试验。我们汇总了治疗相关不良事件(TRAEs)、客观缓解率(ORRs)、疾病稳定性(SD)及其相应的置信区间(ci)的发生率。对于ORR和TRAE终点,我们对每种药物(PD-1、PD-L1和CTLA-4)和肿瘤类型进行了亚组分析。结果纳入15项试验,包括797例患者(中位年龄为6.5 - 16.0岁)。全分级TRAE发生率为66 %(95 % CI 60-71), 3/4级TRAE比例为19 %(95 % CI 14-27)。对于所有级别TRAEs和3/4级TRAEs的肿瘤类型亚组分析,实体瘤的发生率最高,分别为92 %(95 % CI 41-99)和32 %(95 % CI 11-63)。疲劳、贫血和恶心是最常见的trae。ORR为13 %(95 % CI 5-27)。在亚组分析中,PD-1抑制剂和霍奇金淋巴瘤的ORR最高,分别为25 %(95 % CI 8-56)和59 %(95 % CI 23-87)。21 %(95 % CI 14-30)的患者出现SD。结论总体而言,不同癌症类型的CAYA患者对ICB具有良好的耐受性,并且某些亚型的CAYA癌症对ICB有反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pain management during interventions in paediatric oncology in Europe – Results from a pan-European survey Multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitors in paediatric soft tissue sarcoma – A review Evaluation of the impact of adherence to infection prevention measures on the quality of life in children with hematologic malignancies Experiences of receiving explanations about medical conditions among adolescent children with cancer: A qualitative study Making shared care work: A national qualitative case study on collaborative practice in pediatric oncology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1