← 返回前沿论文

免疫治疗策略治疗表达 MART-1 的黑色素瘤的疗效与安全性:临床试验的系统评价

英文原题:Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapeutic Strategies for the Treatment of MART-1-Expressing Melanoma: Systematic Review of Clinical Trials.

查看英文原题

Efficacy and Safety of Immunotherapeutic Strategies for the Treatment of MART-1-Expressing Melanoma: Systematic Review of Clinical Trials.

PubMed 2026/09/17(内容时间) Cancers (Basel) Q2 · IF 4.8(JCR 2025)

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。

研究概要

背景/目的:黑色素瘤抗原 recognized by T cells 1 (MART-1) 是一种在黑色素瘤细胞中过表达的肿瘤抗原,可作为不同免疫治疗策略的靶点。

中文摘要

背景/目的:黑色素瘤抗原由T细胞1识别的抗原(MART-1)是一种在黑色素瘤细胞中过表达的肿瘤抗原,可作为不同免疫治疗策略的靶点。这些方法在疗效和安全性方面存在显著差异,并与各种免疫学挑战相关,包括自身免疫的发生。尽管多项临床试验评估了抗MART-1免疫疗法,但现有证据高度异质,需要系统评价。本研究旨在系统总结并描述性比较不同MART-1靶向免疫治疗策略的已报告疗效和安全性。方法:系统检索临床试验注册库和文献数据库,以识别研究抗MART-1免疫疗法的临床试验。

展开英文摘要原文

Background/Objectives : Melanoma antigen recognized by T cells 1 (MART-1) is a tumor-associated antigen overexpressed in melanoma cells that serves as a target for different immunotherapeutic strategies. These approaches differ substantially in their efficacy and safety and are associated with various immunologic challenges, including the incidence of autoimmunity. Although multiple clinical trials evaluated anti-MART-1 immunotherapies, the available evidence is highly heterogeneous and requires systematic evaluation. The present study aimed to systematically summarize and descriptively compare the reported efficacy and safety of different MART-1-targeted immunotherapeutic strategies. Methods : Clinical trial registries and bibliographic databases were systematically searched to identify clinical trials investigating anti-MART-1 immunotherapies. Data on the objective response rate (ORR), median relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and adverse effects were extracted and structured. Potential immunologic challenges underlying the observed outcomes were also discussed. Results : Fifty-four clinical trials comprising 1292 treated patients were included, of whom 517 entered their trial with measurable disease and were evaluable for an objective response by RECIST. Higher objective response rates were reported in the autologous cell transfer and TCR-T trials than in the peptide- and DNA-based vaccine trials, whereas the vaccine trials reported fewer immune-related adverse events. These are uncontrolled cross-trial observations. The cell-based regimens were administered after non-myeloablative lymphodepletion and usually with high-dose IL-2, whereas the vaccination protocols were not, so the differences between modalities cannot be attributed to MART-1 targeting alone. No meta-analysis and no formal comparative efficacy analysis were performed. Conclusions : Based on the available data, MART-1-targeted immunotherapeutic strategies showed distinct efficacy and safety profiles. Higher objective response rates were reported in some adoptive cell therapy trials, together with a higher frequency of immune-related adverse events; these are uncontrolled cross-trial observations, and the contribution of concomitant lymphodepletion and IL-2 cannot be separated from that of MART-1 targeting. Peptide- and DNA-based vaccine approaches were associated with fewer immune-related adverse events and may warrant further evaluation as components of combined regimens.

论文信息

作者
Alshevskaya A、Tsarikova S、Golikova E、Timashev P、Sennikov S
单位
Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation (Sechenov University), Moscow 119048, Russia.Russia
文献类型
综述
期刊
Cancers2026 Sep 17
原文标识
PubMed 42794983 · DOI 10.3390/cancers18183016