4.7 Review

A systematic review of immune-related adverse event reporting in clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitorsaEuro

Journal

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 9, Pages 1824-1829

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdv182

Keywords

adverse event; immune checkpoint inhibitors; quality control; systematic review

Categories

Funding

  1. Astra Zeneca
  2. Bristol Myers Squibb
  3. Genetech/Roche
  4. GlaxoSmithKline
  5. Novartis
  6. Oncothyreon
  7. Sanofi
  8. Servier
  9. SignalChem
  10. Roche/Genentech
  11. Pfizer
  12. Bayer
  13. Karyopharm Therapeutics
  14. Boehringer-Ingelheim
  15. AstraZeneca/MedImmune
  16. Merck
  17. Regeneron

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There are limited data about the quality of immune-related adverse event (irAE) reporting in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) clinical trial publications. A systematic search of citations from Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases identified prospective clinical trials involving ICIs in advanced solid tumors from 2003 to 2013. A 21-point quality score (QS) was adapted from the CONSORT harms extension statement. Linear regression was used to identify factors associated with quality reporting. After a review of 2628 articles, 50 trial reports were included, with ICIs as either monotherapy (54%) or part of a combination regimen (46%). The mean QS was 11.21 points (range 3.50-17.50 points). The median grade 3/4 AE rate reported was 21% (range 0%-66%) and 29/50 (58%) trials concluded that irAEs were tolerable. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that year of publication (within last 5 years, P = 0.01) and journal impact factor > 15 (P = 0.004) were associated with higher QS. Complete reporting of specific characteristics of irAEs including onset, management and reversibility were reported by 14%, 8% and 6% of studies, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events was higher for inhibitors against CTLA-4 compared with other immune checkpoints (P < 0.001). The reporting of irAEs is suboptimal. A standardized reporting method of irAEs that accounts for tolerability, management and reversibility is needed and would enable a more precise evaluation of the therapeutic risk benefit ratio of ICIs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available