Background <p>The efficacy and safety of pemigatinib in advanced cholangiocarcinoma (aCCA) were presented in phase I–II trials and retrospective reports, with small sample sizes and variable results.</p> Methods <p>A systematic literature search included studies investigating the efficacy/safety of pemigatinib in aCCA harboring <i>FGFR</i> fusions/rearrangements. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A pooled proportion meta-analysis was performed.</p> Results <p>Three hundred and twenty-seven patients in eight studies were included (three phase-II, one phase-I/II, two phase-I, and two retrospective). In the pooled analyses, the median age was 58.9 years (95% confidence interval (CI): 51.9–65.8); 33.4% (95% CI: 28.1–39.0) were male. Pemigatinib was the second-line treatment in 58.5% (95% CI: 52.7–64.1) and was beyond second-line in the remaining. ORR was 42.2% (95% CI: 35.9–48.7) (<i>I</i><sup>2</sup>:48.4%) and disease control rate (DCR) was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.6–90.5) (<i>I</i><sup>2</sup>: 58.8%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.2–9.4) (<i>I</i><sup>2</sup>: 11.6%). Two studies reported overall survival (OS) (median 17.5 and 17.1 months). The most common AEs (any grade) were hyperphosphatemia (46%), dysgeusia (33.2%), alopecia (31.4%), fatigue (30.9%), stomatitis (28.5%), and diarrhea (27.5%). Cumulative eye and nail toxicities were observed in 32.5% and 40.9%, and retinal detachment in 5.5%.</p> Conclusion <p>This analysis emphasizes the <i>FGFR</i> alteration testing and pemigatinib use in the second-line and beyond treatment of aCCA.</p> Registration ID (PROSPERO) <p>CRD42024627459.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Efficacy and Toxicity of Pemigatinib in Advanced Cholangiocarcinoma Harboring FGFR Fusions or Rearrangements: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • Erman Akkus,
  • Hatime Arzu Yasar,
  • Lorenza Rimassa,
  • Angela Lamarca

摘要

Background

The efficacy and safety of pemigatinib in advanced cholangiocarcinoma (aCCA) were presented in phase I–II trials and retrospective reports, with small sample sizes and variable results.

Methods

A systematic literature search included studies investigating the efficacy/safety of pemigatinib in aCCA harboring FGFR fusions/rearrangements. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR) and treatment-related adverse events (AEs). A pooled proportion meta-analysis was performed.

Results

Three hundred and twenty-seven patients in eight studies were included (three phase-II, one phase-I/II, two phase-I, and two retrospective). In the pooled analyses, the median age was 58.9 years (95% confidence interval (CI): 51.9–65.8); 33.4% (95% CI: 28.1–39.0) were male. Pemigatinib was the second-line treatment in 58.5% (95% CI: 52.7–64.1) and was beyond second-line in the remaining. ORR was 42.2% (95% CI: 35.9–48.7) (I2:48.4%) and disease control rate (DCR) was 86.5% (95% CI: 81.6–90.5) (I2: 58.8%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.2–9.4) (I2: 11.6%). Two studies reported overall survival (OS) (median 17.5 and 17.1 months). The most common AEs (any grade) were hyperphosphatemia (46%), dysgeusia (33.2%), alopecia (31.4%), fatigue (30.9%), stomatitis (28.5%), and diarrhea (27.5%). Cumulative eye and nail toxicities were observed in 32.5% and 40.9%, and retinal detachment in 5.5%.

Conclusion

This analysis emphasizes the FGFR alteration testing and pemigatinib use in the second-line and beyond treatment of aCCA.

Registration ID (PROSPERO)

CRD42024627459.