免疫检查点抑制剂的免疫相关严重不良事件:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-19 DOI:10.1007/s00228-024-03647-z
Clara Oliveira, Beatrice Mainoli, Gonçalo S Duarte, Tiago Machado, Rita G Tinoco, Miguel Esperança-Martins, Joaquim J Ferreira, João Costa
{"title":"免疫检查点抑制剂的免疫相关严重不良事件:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Clara Oliveira, Beatrice Mainoli, Gonçalo S Duarte, Tiago Machado, Rita G Tinoco, Miguel Esperança-Martins, Joaquim J Ferreira, João Costa","doi":"10.1007/s00228-024-03647-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment, though uncertainty exists regarding their immune-related safety. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative safety profile (odds ratio) of ICIs and estimate the absolute rate of immune-related serious adverse events (irSAEs) in cancer patients undergoing treatment with ICIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized trials till February 2021, including all ICIs for all cancers. Primary outcome was overall irSAEs, and secondary outcomes were pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, hypophysitis, myocarditis, nephritis, and pancreatitis. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analyses, estimated absolute rates and ranked treatments according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 96 trials (52,811 participants, median age 62 years). Risk of bias was high in most trials. Most cancers were non-small cell lung cancer (28 trials) and melanoma (15 trials). The worst-ranked ICI was ipilimumab (SUCRA 14%; event rate 848/10,000 patients) while the best-ranked ICI was atezolizumab (SUCRA 82%; event rate 119/10,000 patients).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Each ICI showed a unique safety profile, with certain events more frequently observed with specific ICIs, which should be considered when managing cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11001692/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immune-related serious adverse events with immune checkpoint inhibitors: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Clara Oliveira, Beatrice Mainoli, Gonçalo S Duarte, Tiago Machado, Rita G Tinoco, Miguel Esperança-Martins, Joaquim J Ferreira, João Costa\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00228-024-03647-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment, though uncertainty exists regarding their immune-related safety. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative safety profile (odds ratio) of ICIs and estimate the absolute rate of immune-related serious adverse events (irSAEs) in cancer patients undergoing treatment with ICIs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized trials till February 2021, including all ICIs for all cancers. Primary outcome was overall irSAEs, and secondary outcomes were pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, hypophysitis, myocarditis, nephritis, and pancreatitis. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analyses, estimated absolute rates and ranked treatments according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 96 trials (52,811 participants, median age 62 years). Risk of bias was high in most trials. Most cancers were non-small cell lung cancer (28 trials) and melanoma (15 trials). The worst-ranked ICI was ipilimumab (SUCRA 14%; event rate 848/10,000 patients) while the best-ranked ICI was atezolizumab (SUCRA 82%; event rate 119/10,000 patients).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Each ICI showed a unique safety profile, with certain events more frequently observed with specific ICIs, which should be considered when managing cancer patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11001692/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-024-03647-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/19 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-024-03647-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)给癌症治疗带来了革命性的变化,但其与免疫相关的安全性仍存在不确定性。本研究旨在评估ICIs的安全性比较(几率比),并估算接受ICIs治疗的癌症患者发生免疫相关严重不良事件(irSAEs)的绝对比率:我们搜索了截至 2021 年 2 月的随机试验,包括所有癌症的所有 ICIs。主要结果为总体irSAEs,次要结果为肺炎、结肠炎、肝炎、肾上腺皮质功能减退症、心肌炎、肾炎和胰腺炎。我们进行了贝叶斯网络荟萃分析,估算了绝对发生率,并根据累积排序曲线下表面(SUCRA)对治疗进行了排序:我们纳入了 96 项试验(52811 名参与者,中位年龄 62 岁)。大多数试验的偏倚风险较高。大多数癌症是非小细胞肺癌(28 项试验)和黑色素瘤(15 项试验)。排名最差的 ICI 是伊匹单抗(SUCRA 14%;事件发生率为 848/10,000),而排名最好的 ICI 是阿特珠单抗(SUCRA 82%;事件发生率为 119/10,000):结论:每种 ICI 都显示出独特的安全性,某些事件在特定 ICI 上发生的频率更高,在管理癌症患者时应考虑到这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Immune-related serious adverse events with immune checkpoint inhibitors: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Purpose: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized cancer treatment, though uncertainty exists regarding their immune-related safety. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative safety profile (odds ratio) of ICIs and estimate the absolute rate of immune-related serious adverse events (irSAEs) in cancer patients undergoing treatment with ICIs.

Methods: We searched for randomized trials till February 2021, including all ICIs for all cancers. Primary outcome was overall irSAEs, and secondary outcomes were pneumonitis, colitis, hepatitis, hypophysitis, myocarditis, nephritis, and pancreatitis. We conducted Bayesian network meta-analyses, estimated absolute rates and ranked treatments according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).

Results: We included 96 trials (52,811 participants, median age 62 years). Risk of bias was high in most trials. Most cancers were non-small cell lung cancer (28 trials) and melanoma (15 trials). The worst-ranked ICI was ipilimumab (SUCRA 14%; event rate 848/10,000 patients) while the best-ranked ICI was atezolizumab (SUCRA 82%; event rate 119/10,000 patients).

Conclusion: Each ICI showed a unique safety profile, with certain events more frequently observed with specific ICIs, which should be considered when managing cancer patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
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:481959085
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