Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Standard-Dose and Low-Dose Pembrolizumab in Patients with Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Multi-Institutional Cohort Study in Taiwan
Abstract
Simple Summary The comparative effectiveness and safety of the standard dose and lower doses of pembrolizumab in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients still remains limited. We conducted a retrospective multi-institutional cohort study of patients newly initiating pembrolizumab in Taiwan. We found that the median overall survival (OS) and rate for all classes of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were similar for both the standard-dose and low-dose pembrolizumab groups. Moreover, we found that patients with a pembrolizumab dose ≥1.8 mg/kg were associated with better OS than those receiving <1.8 mg/kg. Our findings suggested that a pembrolizumab dose ≥1.8 mg/kg may be the clinically minimally efficient dose. Abstract Fixed doses at 200 mg of pembrolizumab or 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks are the standard dosages for first- and second-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, in clinical practice, patients with NSCLC may receive lower doses of pembrolizumab due to drug product availability or economic factors. To date, the comparative effectiveness and safety of the standard dose and lower doses of pembrolizumab in these patients still remains limited. We conducted a retrospective cohort study by analyzing electronic medical records data from the largest multi-institutional hospital system in Taiwan. Advanced NSCLC patients newly receiving pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy were included. Patients were classified into: (1) the standard-dose group…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 147 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019
- A meta‐analysis of anal cancer incidence by risk group: Toward a unified anal cancer risk scale
- Global fertility in 204 countries and territories, 1950–2021, with forecasts to 2100: a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021
- Exercise interventions in Alzheimer's disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
- Prognostic Significance of Carbonic Anhydrase IX Expression in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis
- Glucocorticoid Resistance: Is It a Requisite for Increased Cytokine Production in Depression? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.