immune checkpoint inhibition | nivolumab | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy | 1 trial | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
ATTRACTION-2, 2017 | nivolumab vs placebo | OS 0.63 [0.51; 0.78] median 5.26 vs. 4.14 | | |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
ATTRACTION-2, 2017 | nivolumab at 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=330) vs. placebo (n=163) | patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal
junction cancer who had been previously been treated with two or more chemotherapy regimens | double blind Parallel groups Sample size: 330/163 Primary endpoint: OS FU duration: |
|
immune checkpoint inhibition | pembrolizumab | versus No demonstrated result for efficacy pembrolizumab inferior to paclitaxel in terms of PFS in Keynote 061, 2018 (2L patients) | 2 trials | meta-analysis | | Trial | control | p<0.05 | harm | NS |
---|
KEYNOTE-059 | pembrolizumab vs nil | | | | Keynote 061, 2018 | pembrolizumab vs paclitaxel | | PFS 1.27 [1.03; 1.57] median 1.5 mo vs. 4.1 mo | OS 0.82 [0.66; 1.02] median 9.1 mo vs. 8.3 mo |
Trial | Treatments | Patients | Method |
---|
KEYNOTE-059 | (n=-9) vs. (n=-9) | | Single-arm study Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: | Keynote 061, 2018 | pembrolizumab (n=-9) vs. paclitaxel (n=-9) | patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer that progressed on first-line chemotherapy with a platinum and fluoropyrimidine and who had a PD-L1 CPS of 1 or higher | open label Sample size: -9/-9 Primary endpoint: FU duration: |
|