Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1001
DC Field | Value | |
---|---|---|
dc.title | A systematic review and network meta-analysis of immunotherapy and targeted therapy for advanced melanoma | |
dc.contributor.author | da Silveira Nogueira Lima, J.P | |
dc.contributor.author | Georgieva, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Haaland, B | |
dc.contributor.author | de Lima Lopes, G | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-10-21T07:52:04Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-10-21T07:52:04Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.identifier.citation | da Silveira Nogueira Lima, J.P, Georgieva, M, Haaland, B, de Lima Lopes, G (2017). A systematic review and network meta-analysis of immunotherapy and targeted therapy for advanced melanoma. Cancer Medicine 6 (6) : 1143-1153. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.1001 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 20457634 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/178675 | |
dc.description.abstract | Immune and BRAF-targeted therapies have changed the therapeutic scenario of advanced melanoma, turning the clinical decision-making a challenging task. This Bayesian network meta-analysis assesses the role of immunotherapies and targeted therapies for advanced melanoma. We retrieved randomized controlled trials testing immune, BRAF- or MEK-targeted therapies for advanced melanoma from electronic databases. A Bayesian network model compared therapies using hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and odds ratio (OR) for response rate (RR), along with 95% credible intervals (95% CrI), and probabilities of drugs outperforming others. We assessed the impact of PD-L1 expression on immunotherapy efficacy. Sixteen studies evaluating eight therapies in 6849 patients were analyzed. For OS, BRAF-MEK combination and PD-1 single agent ranked similarly and outperformed all other treatments. For PFS, BRAF-MEK combination surpassed all other options, including CTLA-4-PD-1 dual blockade hazard ratio (HR: 0.56; 95% CrI: 0.33–0.97; probability better 96.2%), whereas BRAF single agent ranked close to CTLA-4-PD-1 blockade. For RR, BRAF-MEK combination was superior to all treatments including CTLA-4-PD-1 (OR: 2.78; 1.18–6.30; probability better 97.1%). No OS data were available for CTLA-4-PD-1 blockade at the time of systematic review, although PFS and RR results suggested that this combination could also bring meaningful benefit. PD-L1 expression, as presently defined, failed to inform patient selection to PD-1-based immunotherapy. BRAF-MEK combination seemed an optimal therapy for BRAF-mutated patients, whereas PD-1 inhibitors seemed optimal for BRAF wild-type patients. Longer follow-up is needed to ascertain the role of CTLA-4-PD-1 blockade. Immunotherapy biomarkers remain as an unmet need. © 2017 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. | |
dc.rights | Attribution 4.0 International | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | |
dc.source | Unpaywall 20201031 | |
dc.subject | B Raf kinase | |
dc.subject | carboplatin | |
dc.subject | cobimetinib | |
dc.subject | cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 | |
dc.subject | dabrafenib | |
dc.subject | dacarbazine | |
dc.subject | ipilimumab | |
dc.subject | mitogen activated protein kinase | |
dc.subject | nivolumab | |
dc.subject | paclitaxel | |
dc.subject | pembrolizumab | |
dc.subject | placebo | |
dc.subject | programmed death 1 ligand 1 | |
dc.subject | selumetinib | |
dc.subject | temozolomide | |
dc.subject | ticilimumab | |
dc.subject | trametinib | |
dc.subject | vemurafenib | |
dc.subject | immunological antineoplastic agent | |
dc.subject | Article | |
dc.subject | cancer immunotherapy | |
dc.subject | dosage schedule comparison | |
dc.subject | drug dose comparison | |
dc.subject | drug efficacy | |
dc.subject | gene mutation | |
dc.subject | human | |
dc.subject | melanoma | |
dc.subject | meta analysis | |
dc.subject | molecularly targeted therapy | |
dc.subject | overall survival | |
dc.subject | priority journal | |
dc.subject | progression free survival | |
dc.subject | qualitative analysis | |
dc.subject | randomized controlled trial (topic) | |
dc.subject | systematic review | |
dc.subject | disease free survival | |
dc.subject | immunotherapy | |
dc.subject | melanoma | |
dc.subject | treatment outcome | |
dc.subject | Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological | |
dc.subject | Disease-Free Survival | |
dc.subject | Humans | |
dc.subject | Immunotherapy | |
dc.subject | Melanoma | |
dc.subject | Molecular Targeted Therapy | |
dc.subject | Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic | |
dc.subject | Treatment Outcome | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.contributor.department | DUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL | |
dc.description.doi | 10.1002/cam4.1001 | |
dc.description.sourcetitle | Cancer Medicine | |
dc.description.volume | 6 | |
dc.description.issue | 6 | |
dc.description.page | 1143-1153 | |
Appears in Collections: | Elements Staff Publications |
Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | Access Settings | Version | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10_1002_cam4_1001.pdf | 730.98 kB | Adobe PDF | OPEN | None | View/Download |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License