What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Purpose The optimum systemic therapies for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of favourable, intermediate and poor risk have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank the effects associated with systemic therapies in the first-line setting.Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane da...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Guanghui Cao, Xiaoqiang Wu, Zhiwei Wang, Xiangyong Tian, Chan Zhang, Xuan Wu, Haotian Zhang, Gaopeng Jing, Tianzhong Yan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2020-08-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/8/e034626.full
id doaj-3b22b9731a3243df8258956dfc360cce
record_format Article
spelling doaj-3b22b9731a3243df8258956dfc360cce2021-05-28T12:32:12ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552020-08-0110810.1136/bmjopen-2019-034626What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysisGuanghui Cao0Xiaoqiang Wu1Zhiwei Wang2Xiangyong Tian3Chan Zhang4Xuan Wu5Haotian Zhang6Gaopeng Jing7Tianzhong Yan8Department of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaDepartment of Urology, Henan Provincial People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou University People’s Hospital, Zhengzhou, ChinaPurpose The optimum systemic therapies for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of favourable, intermediate and poor risk have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank the effects associated with systemic therapies in the first-line setting.Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane databases, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCT) published up to February 2020 of all available treatments for advanced/metastatic RCC. Analysis was done on a Bayesian framework.Results 15 unique RCTs including 8995 patients were identified. For advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk, avelumab plus axitinib was associated with a significantly higher improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96). For intermediate-risk patients, cabozantinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib and avelumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.80; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.83, respectively); pembrolizumab plus axitinib and nivolumab plus ipilimumab were associated with significantly higher improvement in overall survival (OS) than sunitinib (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.81; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.87, respectively). For poor-risk patients, nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.76; HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.82, respectively); nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were significantly more efficacious for OS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.883; HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80, respectively). For OS, there were 81% and 78% probabilities that pembrolizumab plus axitinib was the best option for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients, respectively.Conclusion Avelumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/8/e034626.full
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Guanghui Cao
Xiaoqiang Wu
Zhiwei Wang
Xiangyong Tian
Chan Zhang
Xuan Wu
Haotian Zhang
Gaopeng Jing
Tianzhong Yan
spellingShingle Guanghui Cao
Xiaoqiang Wu
Zhiwei Wang
Xiangyong Tian
Chan Zhang
Xuan Wu
Haotian Zhang
Gaopeng Jing
Tianzhong Yan
What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
BMJ Open
author_facet Guanghui Cao
Xiaoqiang Wu
Zhiwei Wang
Xiangyong Tian
Chan Zhang
Xuan Wu
Haotian Zhang
Gaopeng Jing
Tianzhong Yan
author_sort Guanghui Cao
title What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_short What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_fullStr What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed What is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
title_sort what is the optimum systemic treatment for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma of favourable, intermediate and poor risk, respectively? a systematic review and network meta-analysis
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
series BMJ Open
issn 2044-6055
publishDate 2020-08-01
description Purpose The optimum systemic therapies for advanced/metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) of favourable, intermediate and poor risk have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank the effects associated with systemic therapies in the first-line setting.Methods We searched PubMed, Cochrane databases, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials (RCT) published up to February 2020 of all available treatments for advanced/metastatic RCC. Analysis was done on a Bayesian framework.Results 15 unique RCTs including 8995 patients were identified. For advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk, avelumab plus axitinib was associated with a significantly higher improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96). For intermediate-risk patients, cabozantinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib and avelumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.81; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.80; HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.83, respectively); pembrolizumab plus axitinib and nivolumab plus ipilimumab were associated with significantly higher improvement in overall survival (OS) than sunitinib (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.81; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.87, respectively). For poor-risk patients, nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were associated with significantly higher improvement in PFS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.76; HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.82, respectively); nivolumab plus ipilimumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib were significantly more efficacious for OS than sunitinib (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.883; HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.80, respectively). For OS, there were 81% and 78% probabilities that pembrolizumab plus axitinib was the best option for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients, respectively.Conclusion Avelumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for advanced/metastatic RCC of favourable risk. Pembrolizumab plus axitinib might be the optimum treatment for intermediate-risk and poor-risk patients.
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/8/e034626.full
work_keys_str_mv AT guanghuicao whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT xiaoqiangwu whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT zhiweiwang whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT xiangyongtian whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT chanzhang whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT xuanwu whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT haotianzhang whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT gaopengjing whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
AT tianzhongyan whatistheoptimumsystemictreatmentforadvancedmetastaticrenalcellcarcinomaoffavourableintermediateandpoorriskrespectivelyasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis
_version_ 1721424091426062336