• Qingbo Zhou, Jianjiang Liu, and Shaoqin Xie.
• Internal Medicine Department, Shaoxing Yuecheng People's Hospital, Shaoxing City, Zhejiang Province, China.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 May 31; 103 (22): e38329e38329.

BackgroundTo date, no meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the effectiveness and safety of adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) and adjuvant immunotherapies (IMTs) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients using reconstructed individual patient data (IPD). This study aims to fill that gap by assessing the efficacy and safety profiles of these treatments in such patients.MethodsThis study employed a systematic approach for identifying relevant literature from the PubMed and EMBASE databases. We included articles published in English from the inception of these databases until November 11, 2023, focusing specifically on appropriate phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To reconstruct survival curves, we utilized a semiautomated tool, WebPlotDigitizer, in conjunction with a novel shiny application integrated with R software. For adverse events (AEs), the summary measures were incidences, expressed as a 95% confidence interval (CI), calculated using a random-effects model with a logit transformation.ResultsThe analysis included 8 RCTs with a total of 9119 patients. Compared to adjuvant TKIs, adjuvant IMTs showed a similar disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.03, 95% CI [0.98-1.09], P = .281). However, the overall survival (OS) rates between the 2 groups couldn't be directly compared due to unmatched control groups in the IMT and TKI studies. Against placebo, adjuvant IMTs demonstrated superior DFS (HR 0.82, 95% CI [0.71-0.94], P = .004) but comparable OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI [0.59-1.06], P = .120). Against placebo, adjuvant TKIs showed superior DFS (HR 0.85, 95% CI [0.79-0.92], P < .0001) and marginally better OS (HR 0.89, 95% CI [0.80-0.996], P = .042). Regarding severe AEs and discontinuation rates due to AEs, adjuvant IMTs had a significantly lower incidence of severe AEs (25% [320/1282] vs 59% [2192/3716], odds ratio [OR] 0.23, 95% CI [0.20-0.27], P < .0001) and a markedly better discontinuation rate (39% [499/1282] vs 52% [2068/4018], OR 0.60, 95% CI [0.53-0.68], P < .0001) compared to TKIs.ConclusionThis paper presents a thorough analysis of DFS, OS, and treatment-related AEs across various groups in RCC patients, offering a valuable resource for clinicians in everyday practice. Our findings indicate that while adjuvant IMTs and adjuvant TKIs demonstrate similar DFS, IMTs are notably superior in terms of safety and compliance.Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

20 keywords...

hide…