一种用于克服非小细胞肺癌治疗中抗原异质性的多靶向 CAR-T 细胞平台
A Multi-Targeting Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T Cell Platform to Overcome Antigen Heterogeneity in the Treatment of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.
这些发现支持采用多靶点CAR-T 策略来应对NSCLC及可能其他实体瘤中的抗原异质性。
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:Disparities in positive results and dissemination of randomized controlled trials in immuno-oncology.
Disparities in positive results and dissemination of randomized controlled trials in immuno-oncology.
分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。
在 IO RCT 中,阳性结果传播的不均衡现象普遍存在,并受试验特征影响。我们提出在未来综述中改进前期注册、程序完整性,并在前两年内充分纳入报告阴性结果的竞争性试验。免疫肿瘤学(IO)是一种利用人体免疫系统天然抗癌能力的新型治疗模式。公认的提供最佳医学证据以证明新干预措施疗效的标准方法是随机对照试验(RCT),而通过期刊文章发表试验结果通常会影响医疗决策。被标记为阴性的试验意味着未达到预设目标,但它值得更多关注,而不是简单地解释为科学失败。既往关于肿瘤学试验的研究表明,阴性和阳性试验在结果发表模式上存在差异,且试验特征各不相同。
这项横断面和纵向分析旨在展示全球免疫肿瘤学(IO)领域随机对照试验(RCT)阳性结果及传播模式方面的差异。
纳入2007-2018年在ClinicalTrials.gov注册、通过文章发表报告结果的II-IV期RCT,研究免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)、过继性细胞转移、癌症疫苗和免疫调节剂。
28%的试验为阳性(258项中的72项),其中大多数由药企资助,聚焦于肺癌、黑色素瘤和多种癌症类型中的ICI及多种IO疗法。试验启动年份较近、预先注册、大样本量、对皮质类固醇/感染相关标准的高严格性评分以及生存终点与阳性结果相关。与美国的试验和多国试验相比,来自中国大陆的试验阳性结果发表时间线更快,但缺乏研究多样性或阴性结果的完整报告。与II期试验相比,III-IV期试验的阳性结果平均比例更高(28.9% vs. 22.2%),且在过去十年中变化更稳定(23.65% vs. 49.24%)。与阴性试验相比,阳性试验产生了更多次要论文(10 vs. 4),发表流程缩短约两年(P < 0.001),并且在h-index >90的期刊传播方面具有优势(P < 0.001)。
This cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis aimed to demonstrate the disparities in positive results and dissemination patterns of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in global immuno-oncology (IO).
Phase II-IV RCTs with results reported by article publications registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in 2007-2018 studying immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), adoptive cell transfer, cancer vaccines, and immune modulators were included.
Twenty-eight percent of trials were positive (72 of 258), most of which were pharma-sponsored and focused on ICI and multiple IO therapies in lung cancer, melanoma, and multiple cancer types. The recent period of trial start year, upfront registration, large sample size, high strictness score on corticosteroid/infection-related criteria, and survival endpoints were associated with positive results. Trials from Mainland China had a faster publication timeline of positive results but lacked study diversity or full reporting of negative results compared with US and multinational trials. Compared with phase II trials, phase III-IV trials had a higher average proportion of positive results (28.9% vs. 22.2%) and a more stable change over the past decade (23.65% vs. 49.24%). Positive trials yielded more secondary manuscripts (10 vs. 4), a shorter publication process of approximately two years ( P < 0.001), and a superiority in the dissemination of journals with an h-index >90 ( P < 0.001) compared with negative trials.
Disparities in positive result dissemination are widespread in IO RCTs and affected by trial features. We proposed improvements in upfront registration, procedural integrity, and adequate inclusion of rival trials reporting negative results within the earlier two years in future reviews. Immuno-oncology (IO) is a novel treatment modality utilizing the natural ability of body’s immune system to fight against cancer. The acknowledged standard method to confer the best medical evidence for showing the efficacy of a new intervention is randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and the publication of trial results via journal articles usually modifies medical decisions. A trial labeled negative means that the pre-specified goal was not met, but it deserves more attention rather than a simple interpretation of scientific failure. Previous studies on oncology trials indicated that negative and positive trials have different patterns of result publication and varied trial features. Although IO-related RCTs obtain a continuously increasing number, the extent and tendencies (positive or negative) of their results have not been assessed. To conduct a timely summary and a comprehensive analysis focusing on the publication details and its relationship with the properties of IO trials, we included phase II–IV IO RCTs with results reported by article publications registered on ClinicalTrials.gov in 2007–2018. We found that disparities in positive results and publication are widespread in IO RCTs and severely affected by IO category, cancer type, sponsorship, trial phase, and geographic origin. Positive trials had a significantly shorter publication timeline of approximately two years, more secondary manuscripts, and a superiority in high-quality publications over negative trials. We propose that investigators should complete registration before trial launch, improve procedural integrity, and allow an adequate inclusion of rival trials reporting negative results within the earlier two years in future IO-related reviews.
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。