The efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Wang, Xing-Hui [1 ]
Wang, Zhi-Qiang [2 ]
Mu, Zhen-Yu [3 ]
Zhu, Li-Ping [4 ]
Zhong, Chong-Fu [5 ]
Guo, Shanchun [6 ]
机构
[1] Peoples Hosp Shouguang, Dept Pathol, Shouguang, Shandong, Peoples R China
[2] Shouguang Hosp Tradit Chinese Med, Dept Urol, Shouguang, Shandong, Peoples R China
[3] Shouguang Hosp Tradit Chinese Med, Dept Neurol, Shouguang, Shandong, Peoples R China
[4] Shouguang Hosp Tradit Chinese Med, Dept Oncol, Shouguang, Shandong, Peoples R China
[5] Shandong Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Affiliated Hosp, Dept Androl, Jinan, Shandong, Peoples R China
[6] Xavier Univ Louisiana, RCMI Canc Res Ctr, 1 Drexel Dr, New Orleans, LA 70125 USA
关键词
immune checkpoint inhibitor; immunotherapy; meta-analysis; metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; prostate cancer; oncology; PHASE-III TRIAL; IPILIMUMAB; THERAPY; IMMUNOTHERAPY; RADIOTHERAPY; GENERATION; ANTIGEN; PLACEBO; MEN;
D O I
10.1097/MD.0000000000029715
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: We aim to assess the efficacy and safety profiles of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer using a meta-analysis. Methods: We extracted and examined data from phase I, II and III clinical trials from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, which included patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. We performed a meta-analysis to investigate several indexes of efficacy and safety, including the objective response rate, 1-year overall survival (OS) rate, prostate-specific antigen response rate, and adverse event rate of immune checkpoint inhibitors. The material data were calculated and pooled using The R Project for Statistical Computing and STATA 12.0 software. Results: We identified 12 clinical trials in our study. We assessed the pooled frequencies of all-grade AEs and grade >= 3 AEs first and showed 0.82 (95% CI: 0.74-0.91, I-2 = 94%, P < .01) and 0.42 (95% CI: 0.33-0.54, I-2 = 96%, P < .01), respectively. The objective response rate was 0.10 (95% CI: 0.04-0.19, I-2 = 70%, P < .01), and the 1-year OS and prostate-specific antigen response rate were 0.55 (95% CI: 0.45-0.67, I-2 = 93%, P < .01) and 0.18 (95% CI: 0.16-0.20, I-2 = 43%, P = .03), respectively. Conclusion: The immune checkpoint inhibitors therapy was well tolerated and showed potential to improve tumor responses in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials
    Iannantuono, Giovanni Maria
    Chandran, Elias
    Floudas, Charalampos S.
    Choo-Wosoba, Hyoyoung
    Butera, Gisela
    Roselli, Mario
    Gulley, James L.
    Karzai, Fatima
    [J]. CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS, 2023, 120
  • [2] Efficacy and safety of PARP inhibitors (PARPi) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis
    Gazzoni, Gabriela
    Oliveira, Joao Pedro
    Abrahao Reis, Pedro Cotta
    Bittar, Vinicius
    Carvalho, Bruno Murad
    Vilbert, Maysa
    Stecca, Carlos Eduardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2024, 42 (16)
  • [3] Evaluation of the Efficacy of PARP Inhibitors in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Wu, Kan
    Liang, Jiayu
    Shao, Yanxiang
    Xiong, Sanchao
    Feng, Shuyang
    Li, Xiang
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PHARMACOLOGY, 2021, 12
  • [4] Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and immune checkpoint inhibitors
    Pavlov, A. Yu.
    Dzidzaria, A. G.
    Gafanov, R. A.
    Samusevich, V. A.
    Mirzoev, E. E.
    Kortyshkova, A. O.
    Aivazov, M. T.
    Mirzoev, F. E.
    [J]. ONKOUROLOGIYA, 2024, 20 (01): : 153 - 163
  • [5] Oncological Response and Predictive Biomarkers for the Checkpoint Inhibitors in Castration-Resistant Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Fahmy, Omar
    Alhakamy, Nabil A.
    Khairul-Asri, Mohd G.
    Ahmed, Osama A. A.
    Fahmy, Usama A.
    Fresta, Claudia G.
    Caruso, Giuseppe
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2022, 12 (01):
  • [6] Comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of abiraterone and enzalutamide in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Xin
    Yang, Hui
    Hu, Xiaopeng
    Wang, Wei
    Yu, Xiaojia
    Wang, Shihui
    Zhang, Xiaodong
    Liu, Lihong
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY PHARMACY PRACTICE, 2021, 27 (03) : 614 - 622
  • [7] Efficacy and Safety of Abiraterone Acetate and Enzalutamide for the Treatment of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Wei, ZhenHeng
    Chen, ChuXin
    Li, BoWen
    Li, YongYue
    Gu, Hong
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2021, 11
  • [8] Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer, Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, and Beyond
    Lanka, Sree M.
    Zorko, Nicholas A.
    Antonarakis, Emmanuel S.
    Barata, Pedro C.
    [J]. CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (04) : 4246 - 4256
  • [9] Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of custirsen in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer
    Zhang, Xuebao
    Liu, Chu
    Li, Kui
    Wang, Ke
    Zhang, Qiqiang
    Cui, Yuanshan
    [J]. MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (06)
  • [10] A Systematic Review of the Emerging Role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: Will Combination Strategies Improve Efficacy?
    Heidegger, Isabel
    Necchi, Andrea
    Pircher, Andreas
    Tsaur, Igor
    Marra, Giancarlo
    Kasivisvanathan, Veeru
    Kretschmer, Alexander
    Mathieu, Romain
    Ceci, Francesco
    Bergh, Roderick C. N. van den
    Thibault, Constance
    Tilki, Derya
    Valerio, Massimo
    Surcel, Christian
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    [J]. EUROPEAN UROLOGY ONCOLOGY, 2021, 4 (05): : 745 - 754