Table 3.
Summary of real-life studies evaluating ICI monotherapy for metastatic pleural mesothelioma.
| 1st Author [Reference] | Country | Line | Agent | N | DCR, % | ORR, % | mPFS (Months) | mOS (Months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metaxas [30] |
Switzerland/ Australia |
1st & 2L+ | Pembro | 93 | 48 | 18 | 3.1 | 7.2 |
| Ahmadzada [31] |
Australia | 1st: 4 2L+: 94 |
Pembro | 98 | 56 | 18 | 4.8 | 9.5 |
| Cantini [26] |
The Netherlands | 2nd/3rd | Nivo | 107 | 37 | 10 | 2.4 | 6.7 |
| Nakamura [32] |
Japan | Recurrence post-op | Nivo | 35 | 77.1 | 20 | 4.4 | 13.1 |
| Hamad (abstract) [33] |
USA | 1st 2nd |
Nivo | 25 | 60 | 24 | 5 | NR |
| Mikami (abstract) [34] |
Japan | 2L+ | Nivo | 66 | 66 | 24 | 4.1 | 13.3 |
| Kim [27] |
USA | 2nd | Nivo with/without IPI or Pembro | 115 | NR | NR | NR | 8.7 |
2L+, 2nd line and more; DCR, disease control rate; IPI, ipilimumab; mPFS, median progression-free survival (months); mOS, median overall survival; N, number of patients included; Nivo, nivolumab; ORR, objective response rate; Pembro, pembrolizumab; NR, not reported.