Start Your Search
Poster Display Session (ID 63)
- Event: ELCC 2017
- Type: Poster Display Session
- Presentations: 1
- Coordinates: 5/07/2017, 12:30 - 13:00, Hall 1
53P - Systematic literature reviews of second and third-line treatments used for small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) (ID 246)
12:30 - 13:00 | Author(s): S. Bobiak
While SCLC is initially sensitive to first-line chemotherapy and radiotherapy, most patients relapse, and outcomes with second-line treatments remain bleak. The purpose of this study was to gather evidence and assess appropriate methodologies for evidence synthesis of the following clinically relevant outcomes: efficacy, safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients treated with existing second and third-line SCLC treatments, including immunotherapy, which was recently recommended in the NCCN SCLC treatment guidelines.
A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, and carried out by 2 independent reviewers. Manual searches of clinicaltrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and 5 relevant conferences (ASCO, AACR, ESMO, WCLC, and ELCC) were performed to identify unpublished randomized clinical trials (RCTs) potentially eligible for inclusion. RCTs that reported outcomes of interest, including overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response rate, and/or HRQoL, for the treatments and population of interest, were identified for this review. Corresponding trial, patient baseline characteristics, and outcome data were extracted for all included studies.
17,550 citations were identified, including 970 conference abstracts and 25 clinical trial registry entries. Nine SCLC RCTs were identified studying treatments of interest, including cisplatin, carboplatin, etoposide, amrubicin, irinotecan, gemcitabine, and topotecan; however, there were a lack of RCTs for innovative treatments including nivolumab.
A lack of RCT evidence for all relevant treatments in the target population may result in disconnected treatment networks, such that trial comparisons involving all treatments of interest may not be feasible using the standard network meta-analysis methodology. Alternative methods that incorporate single-arm evidence may be required to estimate the relative clinical efficacy, safety, and HRQoL outcomes of second- and third-line treatments of relevant SCLC comparators.
Clinical trial identification:
Legal entity responsible for the study:
Bristol-Myers Squibb and Precision Health Economics
R. Goulding: Employee of Precision Health Economics, funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb for the work on the abstract. Y. Yuan, S. Bobiak, N. Hertel, B. Korytowsky, J.R. Penrod: Employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb with stock/ownership options. J. Jansen: Employee of Precision Health Economics and reports that Precision Health Economics received funding for this work. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.