Comparison analysis of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib or gemcitabine/cisplatin as first-line treatment for patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Background

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a highly aggressive primary liver cancer, with increasing incidence worldwide. Effective first-line treatments for advanced ICC patients are currently limited. Therefore, our study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors in combination with gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) and lenvatinib as first-line treatment in advanced ICC patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 51 advanced ICC patients, among whom 25 patients were administered with PD-1/PD-L1 plus lenvatinib and 26 patients were administered with PD-1/PD-L1 plus GC. Baseline characteristics including demographic information, medical history, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, and imaging examination were collected. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and sixth- and ninth-month overall survival (OS) rate. Survival curve was plotted by the Kaplan-Meier method. A Cox proportion risk model was performed to investigate independent risk factors of PFS and OS. The secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events.

Results

The median age of advanced ICC patients in our study was 58.0 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] = 48.0-72.4) years, with 33 male and 18 female patients. Patients in the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib group were more likely to be in ECOG grade above 1, develop ascites, and have an elevated level of ALT. The ORR was 16.0% in the PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib group and 23.1% in the GC group (p = 0.777). The DCR was 52.0% in the lenvatinib group and 46.2% in the GC group (p = 0.676). The combination treatment of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors plus lenvatinib was associated with longer PFS than the GC group; however, it was not statistically significant (lenvatinib: 9.5 months, GC: 5.1 months, p = 0.454). The sixth-month and ninth-month OS rates were 82.0% and 76.9% in the lenvatinib group and 87.4% and 71.5% in the GC group. After adjusting for confounders, multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that ECOG grade above 1 was an independent risk factor for PFS (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.388, 95% CI = 1.312-8.746, p = 0.012) and OS (HR = 4.220, 95% CI = 1.131-15.742, p = 0.032).

Conclusion

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in combination with lenvatinib or GC all demonstrated significant efficacy and safety as first-line treatment in patients with advanced ICC. As for patients who refuse or are intolerant to chemotherapy, PD-1/PD-L1 plus lenvatinib would be recommended.

Are there differences in the characteristics of patients who respond to gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy and those who respond to pembrolizumab therapy for metastatic urothelial carcinoma? Multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate factors to predict overall survival of metastatic urothelial carcinoma patients treated with gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy or pembrolizumab therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated two metastatic urothelial carcinoma cohorts treated with (i) gemcitabine plus cisplatin or (ii) pembrolizumab. The gemcitabine plus cisplatin cohort was treated from December 2005 through December 2014 while the pembrolizumab cohort was treated from January 2018 through December 2020. Using multivariate analyses, we evaluated the risk factors for overall survival in each cohort and compared them. None of the gemcitabine plus cisplatin cohort patients were treated with pembrolizumab. All patients in the pembrolizumab cohort were treated with prior platinum-based chemotherapy.

RESULTS

There were 184 patients in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin cohort and 91 in the pembrolizumab cohort. The mean follow-up periods were 714 and 284 days, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the risk factors for overall survival in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin cohort were liver metastasis, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (1 or more), no primary site resection, and a high prognostic index (1 or more). In the pembrolizumab cohort, liver metastasis, bone metastasis, and worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-performance status (1 or more), and high prognostic index (1 or more) were the risk factors for overall survival. In the pembrolizumab cohort, patients with a complete response or partial response during prior platinum-based chemotherapy had better overall survival with the following pembrolizumab treatment than those with stable or progressive disease (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the similarity of these risk factors in two sequential treatments, it may be possible to predict the response to pembrolizumab according to the response to prior chemotherapy.

Curative Effect and Survival Assessment Comparing Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin and Cisplatin as Neoadjuvant Therapy for Bladder Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been accepted as an effective curative treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients and has resulted in better survival outcomes than radical cystectomy or a cisplatin-based regimen. In the present study, we aimed to compare the two most commonly used cisplatin-based neoadjuvant chemotherapies, gemcitabine plus cisplatin and methotrexate plus vinblastine plus doxorubicin plus cisplatin, by summarizing and analyzing clinical data and outcomes of published research.

Methods

We searched for qualified studies that compared these two types of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, including 4 randomized controlled trials and 14 retrospective studies. Data and information on pathological responses and long-term survival studies were extracted and analyzed separately.

Results

A total of 18 studies with 3116 patients were selected from 1188 studies, which contained data on pathological complete response, pathological partial response, and overall survival. In contrast to the results of previous studies, there was no significant difference in pathological complete response (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-1.15), pathological partial response (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.14), and overall survival (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.17) between GC and MVAC in this meta-analysis.

Conclusion

No significant differences were observed between GC and MVAC in the muscle-invasive bladder cancer treatment due to the similar curative effect and parallel long survival outcomes due to the similar curative effect and parallel long survival outcomes. The priority selection of GC or MVAC in the clinic should be guided by further investigation, and the clinical standard strategy still counts on the results of more randomized controlled trials in the future.

Management of first-line palliative chemotherapy for post-treatment metastasis after gemcitabine plus cisplatin induction chemotherapy: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin and non-gemcitabine plus cisplatin chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate whether patients with post-treatment metastasis are suitable for GP first-line palliative chemotherapy (PCT) after undergoing GP IC.

METHODS

Seven hundred and forty-six patients with post-treatment metastasis after undergoing GP IC were eligible. Survival outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Significant differences in survival rates were observed between patients treated with GP and non-GP chemotherapy (2-year progression-free survival [PFS]: 0.7% vs. 9.7%). We investigated survival outcomes of patients treated with GP PCT within 2 years after undergoing GP IC, treated with GP PCT 2 years after undergoing GP IC, and those of non-GP PCT patients (2-year PFS: 0.0%, 2.3%, 9.7%). However, there was no difference in the 2-year PFS between the patients that received GP PCT 2 years after undergoing GP IC and the non-GP PCT treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

GP is not recommended for patients that have received GP IC within 2 years. Two years after undergoing GP IC, GP can be considered.

Efficacy and Feasibility of Adjuvant Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Chemotherapy After Major Hepatectomy for Biliary Tract Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

The efficacy and feasibility of gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) chemotherapy in an adjuvant setting is unclear in patients with biliary tract cancer (BTC) undergoing major hepatectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with BTC who underwent major hepatectomy between 2008 and 2018 were included. Patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) were then divided into two groups: a GC group and a gemcitabine (GEM) alone group. AC-related factors and patient outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

Fifty (GC: 28, GEM: 22) patients received AC, and 33 patients did not. No difference in completion rate, relative dose intensity, or adverse events was seen between the two AC groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that AC with GC was an independent predictor of improved survival and reduction of early recurrence.

CONCLUSION

AC with GC is tolerable and associated with better outcomes in patients with BTC who have undergone major hepatectomy.

A Multidimensional Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis of Chinese Herbal Injections for Treating Non-small Cell Lung Cancer With Gemcitabine and Cisplatin

Introduction: As non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) seriously threatens human health, several clinical studies have reported that Chinese herbal injections (CHIs) in combination with and gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GP) are beneficial. This multidimensional network meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of different CHIs in combination with GP against NSCLC.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the treatment of NSCLC were retrieved from seven electronic databases from inception to April 30, 2020. Study selection and data extraction were based on a priori criteria. Data analysis was performed using Stata 13.0, WinBUGS 14.0 software. Multidimensional cluster analysis was performed using the “scatterplot3d” package in R 3.6.1 software.

Results: This network meta-analysis included 71 eligible RCTs and 10 Chinese herbal injections. Delisheng injection and Kangai injection had the highest probability in terms of clinical effectiveness rate (94.60%) and gastrointestinal reactions (82.62%) when combined with GP compared with the other interventions. Compound Kushen injection combined with GP ranked ahead of the other interventions in terms of performance status (73.36%) and abnormal liver function (87.17%). Shenmai injection combined with GP had the highest probability in terms of leukopenia (94.59%) and thrombocytopenia (99.18%).

Conclusion: The current evidence revealed that CHIs combined with GP have a better impact on patients with NSCLC than GP alone. Aidi injection, Compound kushen injection, and Kanglaite injection deserve more attention of clinicians when combined with GP in patients with NSCLC. Additionally, due to the limitations of this network meta-analysis, further well-designed, large-sample, multicenter RCTs are required to support our findings adequately.