Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitors or PD-L1 inhibitors for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

View through CrossRef
IntroductionThis meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitors or PD-L1 inhibitors [PD-(L)1 inhibitors] for muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (MIBC).Materials and methodsFour databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and 21 CENTRAL) were searched for articles studying neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors for MIBC. The search time period was from the establishment of each database to 21 July 2023. Meta-analyses of pCR, pPR, Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate, RFS, and OS were performed.ResultsIn total, 22 studies were included for meta-analysis. The overall pooled pCR of neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.36 (95%CI=0.30–0.42, p=0.00). In subgroup meta-analysis, the pooled PCR of PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.27 (95%CI=0.19–0.35, p=0.1), 0.41 (95%CI=0.21–0.62, p=0.01), 0.43 (95%CI=0.35–0.50, p=0.06), respectively. The overall pooled pPR of neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.53 (95%CI=0.46–0.60, p=0.00). In subgroup meta-analysis, the pooled pPR of PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.36 (95%CI=0.22–0.51, p=0.01), 0.51 (95%CI=0.39–0.62, p=0.43), and 0.61 (95%CI=0.53–0.69, p=0.01), respectively. Kaplan–Meier curves for OS and RFS were reconstructed, but there was no significant difference among three groups in terms of OS or RFS. The pooled result of Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate for neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.15 (95%CI=0.09–0.22, p=0.00%). In subgroup analysis, the pooled result of Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate for PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.07 (95%CI=0.04–0.11, p=0.84), 0.31 (95%CI=0.16–0.47, p=0.06), and 0.17 (95%CI=0.06–0.31, I2 = 71.27%, p=0.01), respectively.ConclusionNeoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors were feasible and safe for muscle invasive bladder cancer. Compared with PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy were associated with higher pCR and pPR, but higher Grade≥3 irAEs. Kaplan–Meier curves for OS and RFS indicated that neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors had an acceptable long-term prognostic, but it was not possible to discern statistical differences between the three neoadjuvant subgroups.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023452437, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42023452437).
Title: Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitors or PD-L1 inhibitors for muscle invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Description:
IntroductionThis meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant PD-1 inhibitors or PD-L1 inhibitors [PD-(L)1 inhibitors] for muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (MIBC).
Materials and methodsFour databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and 21 CENTRAL) were searched for articles studying neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors for MIBC.
The search time period was from the establishment of each database to 21 July 2023.
Meta-analyses of pCR, pPR, Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate, RFS, and OS were performed.
ResultsIn total, 22 studies were included for meta-analysis.
The overall pooled pCR of neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.
36 (95%CI=0.
30–0.
42, p=0.
00).
In subgroup meta-analysis, the pooled PCR of PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.
27 (95%CI=0.
19–0.
35, p=0.
1), 0.
41 (95%CI=0.
21–0.
62, p=0.
01), 0.
43 (95%CI=0.
35–0.
50, p=0.
06), respectively.
The overall pooled pPR of neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.
53 (95%CI=0.
46–0.
60, p=0.
00).
In subgroup meta-analysis, the pooled pPR of PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.
36 (95%CI=0.
22–0.
51, p=0.
01), 0.
51 (95%CI=0.
39–0.
62, p=0.
43), and 0.
61 (95%CI=0.
53–0.
69, p=0.
01), respectively.
Kaplan–Meier curves for OS and RFS were reconstructed, but there was no significant difference among three groups in terms of OS or RFS.
The pooled result of Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate for neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors was 0.
15 (95%CI=0.
09–0.
22, p=0.
00%).
In subgroup analysis, the pooled result of Grade≥ 3 irAEs rate for PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI, and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy was 0.
07 (95%CI=0.
04–0.
11, p=0.
84), 0.
31 (95%CI=0.
16–0.
47, p=0.
06), and 0.
17 (95%CI=0.
06–0.
31, I2 = 71.
27%, p=0.
01), respectively.
ConclusionNeoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors were feasible and safe for muscle invasive bladder cancer.
Compared with PD-(L)1 inhibitors alone, PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus other ICI and PD-(L)1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy were associated with higher pCR and pPR, but higher Grade≥3 irAEs.
Kaplan–Meier curves for OS and RFS indicated that neoadjuvant PD-(L)1 inhibitors had an acceptable long-term prognostic, but it was not possible to discern statistical differences between the three neoadjuvant subgroups.
Systematic review registrationhttps://www.
crd.
york.
ac.
uk/prospero/display_record.
php?ID=CRD42023452437, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42023452437).

Related Results

Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy and Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer
Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy and Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer
Objectives: To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). ...
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Small Cell Lung Cancer and Tarlatamab: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract Introduction Tarlatamab is a Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) -directed bispecific T-cell engager recently approved for use in patients with advanced small cell lung cancer (SCL...
Breast Carcinoma within Fibroadenoma: A Systematic Review
Breast Carcinoma within Fibroadenoma: A Systematic Review
Abstract Introduction Fibroadenoma is the most common benign breast lesion; however, it carries a potential risk of malignant transformation. This systematic review provides an ove...
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Evaluating the Science to Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans Midcourse Report
Abstract The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (Guidelines) advises older adults to be as active as possible. Yet, despite the well documented benefits of physical a...
Poster 247: Muscle ERRγ Overexpression Mitigates the Muscle Atrophy after ACL injury
Poster 247: Muscle ERRγ Overexpression Mitigates the Muscle Atrophy after ACL injury
Objectives: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is the 6th most common orthopedic procedure performed in the United States (1,2). There is substantial evidence to sugge...
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Pembrolizumab and Sarcoma: A meta-analysis
Abstract Introduction: Pembrolizumab is a monoclonal antibody that promotes antitumor immunity. This study presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety...
Abstract 4948: Bladder cancer incidence: A systematic review and meta-analysis in SSA
Abstract 4948: Bladder cancer incidence: A systematic review and meta-analysis in SSA
Abstract Introduction: Bladder Cancer shows a substantial geographic disparity worldwide (1-3). The highest incidence rates are ...
Edoxaban and Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials
Edoxaban and Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract Introduction Cancer patients face a venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk that is up to 50 times higher compared to individuals without cancer. In 2010, direct oral anticoagul...

Back to Top