Ciro Celsa, Giuseppe Cabibbo, David James Pinato, Gabriele Di Maria, Marco Enea, Marco Vaccaro, Salvatore Battaglia, Giacomo Emanuele Maria Rizzo, Paolo Giuffrida, Carmelo Marco Giacchetto, Gabriele Rancatore, Maria Vittoria Grassini, Calogero Cammà
{"title":"平衡晚期肝细胞癌一线系统疗法的疗效和耐受性:一项网络 Meta 分析。","authors":"Ciro Celsa, Giuseppe Cabibbo, David James Pinato, Gabriele Di Maria, Marco Enea, Marco Vaccaro, Salvatore Battaglia, Giacomo Emanuele Maria Rizzo, Paolo Giuffrida, Carmelo Marco Giacchetto, Gabriele Rancatore, Maria Vittoria Grassini, Calogero Cammà","doi":"10.1159/000531744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.</p>","PeriodicalId":18156,"journal":{"name":"Liver Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":11.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11095611/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Balancing Efficacy and Tolerability of First-Line Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ciro Celsa, Giuseppe Cabibbo, David James Pinato, Gabriele Di Maria, Marco Enea, Marco Vaccaro, Salvatore Battaglia, Giacomo Emanuele Maria Rizzo, Paolo Giuffrida, Carmelo Marco Giacchetto, Gabriele Rancatore, Maria Vittoria Grassini, Calogero Cammà\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000531744\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Liver Cancer\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11095611/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Liver Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531744\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Liver Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531744","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Balancing Efficacy and Tolerability of First-Line Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Background: Atezolizumab + bevacizumab represent the current standard of care for first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, direct comparison with other combination treatments including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) + tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are lacking.
Objectives: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to indirectly compare the efficacy and the safety of first-line systemic therapies for unresectable advanced HCC.
Method: A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and SCOPUS databases was conducted up to October 31, 2022. Phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing TKIs, including sorafenib and lenvatinib, or ICIs reporting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were included. Individual survival data were extracted from OS and PFS curves to calculate restricted mean survival time. A Bayesian NMA was performed to compare treatments in terms of efficacy (15- and 30-month OS, 6-month PFS) and safety, represented by grade ≥3 (severe) adverse events (SAEs). The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio as measure of net health benefit was calculated as the difference in SAE probability divided by survival difference between the 2 most effective treatments.
Results: Nine RCTs enrolling 6,600 patients were included. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the highest probability (88%) of achieving the 30-month OS landmark. Lenvatinib showed a probability of 86% of achieving best PFS outcomes. ICI monotherapies ranked as most tolerable. Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab showed the best net health benefit for OS, compared to durvalumab plus tremelimumab. When evaluating the net health benefit for PFS, at a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for life-month gained, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab was favoured in 78% of cases, while at threshold of 30% of SAEs for life-month gained, lenvatinib was favoured in 76% of cases.
Conclusions: Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab is the best treatment in terms of net benefit and therefore it should be recommended as standard of care. Compared to atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, lenvatinib monotherapy had the best net benefit for PFS when physicians and patients are available to accept a higher risk of toxicity.
期刊介绍:
Liver Cancer is a journal that serves the international community of researchers and clinicians by providing a platform for research results related to the causes, mechanisms, and therapy of liver cancer. It focuses on molecular carcinogenesis, prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, and treatment, including molecular targeted therapy. The journal publishes clinical and translational research in the field of liver cancer in both humans and experimental models. It publishes original and review articles and has an Impact Factor of 13.8. The journal is indexed and abstracted in various platforms including PubMed, PubMed Central, Web of Science, Science Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, Google Scholar, DOAJ, Chemical Abstracts Service, Scopus, Embase, Pathway Studio, and WorldCat.