Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28658143›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-1 combined with anti-CTLA-4 immunotherapy to advanced melanoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Chunyan Hao, Jinhui Tian, Huiling Liu, Fei Li, Hongxia Niu, Bingdong Zhu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

62 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chunyan HaoGansu Provincial Key Laboratory of Evidence Based Medicine and Clinical Translation Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gansu Provincial People's Hospital Institute of Pathogen Biology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
Jinhui Tian
Huiling Liu
Fei Li
Hongxia Niu
Bingdong Zhu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, and anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab are being in clinic trials to treat melanoma. Here, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of them against advanced melanoma.

methodsEleven reports from 6 randomized control trials on treating metastatic melanoma, which were divided into 3 subgroups, nivolumab/pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, nivolumab versus ipilimumab, and nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab versus ipilimumab, were included and the meta-analysis was performed for each subgroup. The outcome measures were objective response rates (ORR), median progression free survival (PFS), 1-year overall survival rates (OS), and toxicity estimated by grade 3 to 4 adverse events.

resultsFor nivolumab/pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy, nivolumab versus ipilimumab, and nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab versus ipilimumab, the pooled risk ratios (RR) of the ORR were 3.43 (95% CI: 2.57-4.58), 2.51 (95% CI: 2.03-3.09), and 3.28 (95% CI: 2.58-4.17), respectively. The pooled HR of PFS were 0.42 (95% CI: 0.36-0.49), 0.58 (95% CI: 0.50-0.66), and 0.41 (95% CI: 0.30-0.52), respectively. The pooled RR of 1-year OS was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.08-1.74) and 1.54 (95% CI: 0.90-2.63) for nivolumab versus ipilimumab and nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab versus ipilimumab. These results suggested that anti-PD-1 monotherapy and nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab therapy had ORR and PFS benefit compared with the control group. Anti-PD-1 treatment increased 1-year OS for patients compared with ipililumab treatment. But there is no significantly difference on 1-year OS between the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab treatment and the ipilimumab treatment group. The toxicity analysis showed that there is less risk of adverse events in the anti-PD-1 treatment group compared with the chemotherapy and ipilimumab group. Combining nivolumab with ipilimumab increased the risk for high-grade adverse events compared with ipilimumab alone but the adverse events were generally manageable.

conclusionsAnti-PD-1 monotherapy and nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab therapy improved ORR and prolonged PFS of patients with advanced melanoma and the adverse events are generally manageable. The therapy is indeed a promising approach for treatment of advanced melanoma.

Indexed as

ImmunotherapyAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsCTLA-4 AntigenHumansIpilimumabMelanomaNivolumabProgrammed Cell Death 1 ReceptorRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsCTLA-4 AntigenCTLA4 protein, humanIpilimumabNivolumabPDCD1 protein, humanpembrolizumabProgrammed Cell Death 1 Receptor

Identifiers

PMID28658143
PMCPMC5500065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.