|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | Sintilimab versus docetaxel as second-line treatment in advanced or metastatic squamous non-small-cell lung cancer:an open-label,randomized controlled phase 3 trial(ORIENT-3)显示文摘Background:Treatment options for Chinese patients with locally advanced or metastatic squamous-cell non-small-cell lung cancer(sqNSCLC)after failure of first-line chemotherapy are limited.This study(ORIENT-3)aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sintilimab versus docetaxel as second-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic sqNSCLC.Methods:ORIENT-3 was an open-label,multicenter,randomized controlled phase 3 trial that recruited patients with stage IIIB/IIIC/IV sqNSCLC after failure with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy.Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either 200 mg of sintilimab or 75 mg/m^(2) of docetaxel intravenously every 3 weeks,stratified by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status.The primary endpoint was overall survival(OS)in the full analysis set(FAS).Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival(PFS),objective response rate(ORR),disease control rate(DCR),duration of response(DoR)and safety.Results:Between August 25,2017,and November 7,2018,290 patients were randomized.For FAS,10 patients fromthe docetaxel armwere excluded.Themedian OS was 11.79(n=145;95%confidence interval[CI],10.28-15.57)months with sintilimab versus 8.25(n=135;95%CI,6.47-9.82)months with docetaxel(hazard ratio[HR]:0.74;95%CI,0.56-0.96;P=0.025).Sintilimab treatment significantly prolonged PFS(median 4.30 vs.2.79 months;HR:0.52;95%CI,0.39-0.68;P<0.001)and showed higher ORR(25.50%vs.2.20%,P<0.001)and DCR(65.50%vs.37.80%,P<0.001)than the docetaxel arm.The median DoRwas 12.45(95%CI,4.86-25.33)months in the sintilimab arm and 4.14(95%CI,1.41-7.23)months in the docetaxel arm(P=0.045).Treatment-related adverse events of grade≥3were reported in 26(18.1%)patients in the sintilimab arm and 47(36.2%)patients in the docetaxel arm.Exploratory biomarker analysis showed potential predictive values of expression levels of two transcription factors,including OVOL2(HR:0.35;P<0.001)and CTCF(HR:3.50;P<0.001),for sintilimab treatment.Conclusions:Compared with docetaxel,sintilimab significantly improved the OS,PFS,and ORR of Chinese patients with previously treated locally advanced or metastatic sqNSCLC. | Yuankai Shi Lin Wu Xinmin Yu Puyuan Xing Yan Wang Jianying Zhou Airong Wang Jianhua Shi Yi Hu Ziping Wang Guangyu An Yong Fang Sanyuan Sun Caicun Zhou Changli Wang Feng Ye Xingya Li Junye Wang Mengzhao Wang Yunpeng Liu Yanqiu Zhao Ying Yuan Jifeng Feng Zhendong Chen Jindong Shi Tao Sun Gang Wu Yongqian Shu Qisen Guo Yi Zhang Yong Song Shucai Zhang Yuan Chen Wei Li Hongrui Niu Wenwei Hu Lijun Wang Jianan Huang Yang Zhang Ying Cheng Zhengdong Wu Bo Peng Jiya Sun Christoph Mancao Yanqi Wang Luyao Sun | 2022 | Cancer Communications2022，42，12： | 8 |
| 2 | Bevacizumab biosimilar LY01008 compared with bevacizumab(Avastin)as first-line treatment for Chinese patients with unresectable,metastatic,or recurrent non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer:A multicenter,randomized,double-blinded,phase Ⅲ trial显示文摘Background:Previous studies have demonstrated the preclinical pharmacological and toxicological consistency,and clinical pharmacokinetic equivalence of bevacizumab biosimilar LY01008 with reference bevacizumab(Avastin).This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LY01008 with Avastin in first-line treatment of Chinese patients with advanced or recurrent non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC).Methods:StageⅢB-ⅣNSCLC patients with evaluable lesions,good physical status,and adequate organ functions from 67 centers across China were randomized in a ratio of 1:1 to receive LY01008 or Avastin 15 mg/kg intravenously in combination with paclitaxel/carboplatin(combined treatment)for 4-6 cycles,followed by maintenance monotherapy with LY01008 until disease progression,intolerable toxicity,or death.The primary endpoint was objective response rate(ORR)in accordance with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors(RECIST)version 1.1 confirmed by independent radiological review committees(IRRC).Secondary endpoints included disease control rate(DCR),duration of response(DoR),progression-free survival(PFS),overall survival(OS),and safety.This study was registered in Clinical Trials.gov(NCT03533127).Results:Between December 15^(th),2017,and May 15^(th),2019,a total of 649 patients were randomized to the LY01008(n=324)or Avastin(n=325)group.As of September 25th,2019 for primary endpoint analysis,589 patients received ORR evaluation,with a median number of combined treatment cycles of 5(range 1-6)andmedian duration of treatment of 3.0(range 0.0-5.1)months.ORRof responseevaluable patients in the LY01008 and Avastin groups were 48.5% and 53.0%,respectively.The stratified ORR ratio was 0.91(90%CI 0.80-1.04,within the prespecified equivalence margin of 0.75-1.33).Up to May 15^(th),2020,with a median follow-up of 13.6(range 0.8-28.4)months,no notable differences in DCR,median DoR,median PFS,median OS,and 1-year OS rate were observed between the LY01008 and Avastin groups.There were no clinically meaningful differences in safety and immunogenicity across treatment groups.Conclusions:LY01008 demonstrated similarity to Avastin in terms of efficacy and safety in Chinese patients with advanced or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC.LY01008 combined with paclitaxel/carboplatin is expected to become a new treatment option for unresectable,metastatic,LY01008 and Avastin groups.There were no clinically meaningful differences in safety and immunogenicity across treatment groups.Conclusions:LY01008 demonstrated similarity to Avastin in terms of efficacy and safety in Chinese patients with advanced or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC.LY01008 combined with paclitaxel/carboplatin is expected to become a new treatment option for unresectable,metastatic,or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC patients in the first-line setting. | Yuankai Shi Kaijian Lei Yuming Jia Bingqiang Ni Zhiyong He Minghong Bi Xicheng Wang Jianhua Shi Ming Zhou Qian Sun Guolei Wang Dongji Chen Yongqian Shu Lianke Liu Zhongliang Guo Yong Liu Junquan Yang Ke Wang Ke Xiao LinWu Tienan Yi Debin Sun Mafei Kang Tianjiang Ma Yimin Mao Jinsheng Shi Tiegang Tang Yan Wang Puyuan Xing Dongqing Lv Wangjun Liao Zhiguo Luo Bin Wang Xiaohong Wu Xiaoli Zhu Shuhua Han Qisen Guo Rongyu Liu Zhiwei Lu Jianyong Zhang Jian Fang Changlu Hu Yinghua Ji Guolong Liu Hong Lu Dedong Wu Junhong Zhang Shuyang Zhu Zheng Liu Wensheng Qiu Feng Ye Yan Yu Yanqiu Zhao Qinhong Zheng Jun Chen Zhanyu Pan Yiping Zhang Wenjuan Lian Bo Jiang Bo Qiu Guojun Zhang Hua Zhang Yanju Chen Yuan Chen Hongbing Duan Manxiang Li Shengming Liu Lijun Ma Hongming Pan Xia Yuan Xueli Yuan Yulong Zheng Emei Gao Li Zhao Shumin Wang Can Wu | 2021 | Cancer Communications2021，41，9： | 5 |
| 3 | Equivalent efficacy study of QL1101 and bevacizumab on untreated advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer patients: a phase 3 randomized, double-blind clinical trial显示文摘Objective:This phase 3 study aimed to test equivalence in efficacy and safety for QL1101,a bevacizumab analogue in Chinese patients with untreated locally advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC).Methods:Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive carboplatin and paclitaxel in combination with either QL1101 or bevacizumab,15 mg/kg every 3-week for 6 cycles.This was followed by maintenance treatment with single agent QL1101 every 3-week.The primary end-point was objective response rate(ORR),with secondary end-points being progression-free survival(PFS),overall survival(OS),disease control rate(DCR),and adverse events(AEs).Results:Of 675 patients,535 eligible patients were randomized to the QL1101 group(n=269)and bevacizumab group(n=266).ORRs were 52.8%and 56.8%,respectively,for the QL1101 and bevacizumab groups,with an ORR hazard ratio 0.93(95%confidence interval:0.8-0131.1).The PFS,OS,DCR,and AEs were comparable between the 2 groups,which remained the same after stratification according to epidermal growth factor receptor mutation or smoking history.Conclusions:QL1101 showed similar efficacy and safety profiles as compared to bevacizumab among Chinese patients with untreated locally advanced non-squamous NSCLC. | Tianqing Chu Jun Lu Minghong Bi Helong Zhang Wu Zhuang Yan Yu Jianhua Shi Zhendong Chen Xiaochun Zhang Qisen Guo Quan Liu Huijuan Wu Jian Fang Yi Hu Xiuwen Wang Cuicui Han Kai Li Baohui Han | 2021 | Cancer Biology & Medicine2021，18，3： | 4 |
| 4 | Serum vascular endothelial growth factor?C levels: A possible diagnosticmarker for lymph node metastasis in patients with primary non?small cell lungcancer显示文摘 | Yakun Zhang Xue Meng Hongsheng Zeng Yan Guan Qiong Zhang Shen Guo Xiujiu Liu Qisen Guo | 2013 | Oncology Letters2013，，2： | 1 |
| 5 | Paclitaxel liposome for injection (Lipusu) plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine plus cisplatin in the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic lung squamous cell carcinoma: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel controlled clinical study显示文摘Background:Lipusu is the first commercialized liposomal formulation of pacli-taxel and has demonstrated promising efficacy against locally advanced lung squamous cell carcinoma(LSCC)in a small-scale study.Here,we conducted a multicenter,randomized,phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of cis-platin plus Lipusu(LP)versus cisplatin plus gemcitabine(GP)as first-line treat-ment in locally advanced or metastatic LSCC.Methods:Patients enrolled were aged between 18 to 75 years,had locally advanced(clinical stage IIIB,ineligible for concurrent chemoradiation or surgery)or metastatic(Stage IV)LSCC,had no previous systemic chemother-apy and at least one measurable lesion as per the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors(version 1.1)before administration of the trial drug.The primary endpoint was progression-free survival(PFS).The secondary endpoints included objective response rate(ORR),disease control rate(DCR),overall survival(OS),and safety profiles.To explore the possible predictive value of plasma cytokines for LP treatment,plasma samples were collected from the LP group at baseline and first efficacy evaluation time and were then subjected to analysis by 45-Plex ProcartaPlex Panel 1 to detect the presence of 45 cytokines using the Luminex xMAP technology.The correlation between treatment outcomes and dynamic changes in the levels of cytokines were evaluated in preliminary analyses.Results:The median duration of follow-up was 15.4 months.237 patients in the LP group and 253 patients in the GP group were included in the per protocol set(PPS).In the PPS,the median PFS was 5.2 months versus 5.5 months in the LP and GP group(hazard rtio[HR]:1.03,P=0.742)respectively.The median OS was 14.6 months versus 12.5 months in the LP and GP group(HR:0.83,P=0.215).The ORR(41.8%versus 45.9%,P=0.412)and DCR(90.3%versus 88.1%,P=0.443)were also similar between the LP and GP group.A significantly lower proportion of patients in the LP group experienced adverse events(AEs)leading to treatment interruptions(10.9%versus 26.4%,P<0.001)or treatment termination(14.3%versus 23.1%,P=0.011).The analysis of cytokine levels in the LP group showed that low baseline levels of 27 cytokines were associated with an increased ORR,and 15 cytokines were associated with improved PFS,with 14 cytokines,including TNF-a,IFN-y,IL-6,and IL-8,demonstrating an overlapping trend.Conclusion:The LP regimen demonstrated similar PFS,OS,ORR and DCR as the GP regimen for patients with locally advanced or metastatic LSCC but had more favorable toxicity profiles.The study also identified a spectrum of different cytokines that could be potentially associated with the clinical benefit in patients who received the LP regimen. | Jie Zhang Yueyin Pan Qin Shi Guojun Zhang Liyan Jiang Xiaorong Dong Kangsheng Gu Huijuan Wang Xiaochun Zhang Nong Yang Yuping Li Jianping Xiong Tienan Yi Min Peng Yong Song Yun Fan Jiuwei Cui Gongyan Chen Wei Tan Aimin Zang Qisen Guo Guangqiang Zhao Ziping Wang Jianxing He Wenxiu Yao Xiaohong Wu Kai Chen Xiaohua Hu Chunhong Hu Lu Yue Da Jiang Guangfa Wang Junfeng Liu Guohua Yu Junling Li Jianling Bai Wenmin Xie Weihong Zhao Lihong Wu Caicun Zhou | 2022 | Cancer Communications2022，42，1： | 1 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员