Autores
Raquel Oliveira de Sousa Silva , João Luís Reis Freitas , Victor Gonçalves Soares , Miguel Henrique Pereira de Paiva , Laynara Vitoria da Silva Vieira , Ocilio de Deus da Rocha Ribeiro Gonçalves , Patricia Viana , Camila Mariana de Paiva Reis , Jordana Fonseca Reis Portela , Gabriele Eckerdt Lech , Bernard Giancristoforo Campos , Joao Marcos Escorcio de Aguiar Portela , Edgar Paulo da Silva Neto , Ana Paula Valério Alves , Bárbara Vieira Lima Aguiar Melão , Caio Leonardo dos Santos Saggin , Rafael Morriello
Instituições dos autores (EM ordem)
Universidade federal do Piauí , Universidade de São Paulo , Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri , Universidade Federal do Piauí , Universidade Federal do Piauí , Universidade Federal do Piauí , Universidade do Extremo Sul Catarinense , Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora Juiz de Fora , Universidade Federal do Piauí , Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul , Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro , Hospital Santa Maria , Universidade Católica de Pernambuco , Centro Universitário Barão de Mauá , Hospital Adventista de Manaus , Centro Universitário de Várzea Grande , Hospital Federal dos Servidores do Estado
Resumo
Introduction: Melanoma recurrence rates remain high despite complete resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Different types of melanoma vaccines have emerged as complementary treatment to reduce recurrence. However, their effectiveness in preventing recurrence and improving survival remains debatable. Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of different melanoma vaccines (TLPLDC, TLPLDC+G, and TLPO) compared to standard treatment, determine their impact on Disease-Free Survival (DFS) and Overall Survival (OS), and provide quantitative evidence on the effectiveness of these vaccines through a meta-analysis. Methods: We searched in Pubmed, Cochrane, and Embase in April 2024 for studies comparing different types of melanoma vaccines against standard treatment. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cells (TLPLDC), TLPLDC+granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G), and tumor lysate particle only (TLPO) vaccines against control on the recurrence and survival of patients with completely resected melanoma. Outcomes of interest included DFS and OS. Hazard ratios were pooled using random-effects models in R software version 4.3.2. Risk-of-bias assessment was conducted using RoB 2. Results: We included 7 randomized controlled trials comprising 1,211 patients. At the 3-year follow-up, TLPLDC favored DFS over control (HR=0.66 [0.47,0.93], p=0.02, I²=49%), although the 2-year follow-up was not statistically significant (HR=0.78,CI[0.59,1.03],p=0.07,I²=0%). At 3 years follow-up, TLPLDC+G (HR=1.31,CI[0.93,1.84],p=0.12,I²=0%) and TLPO (HR=0.71, CI[0.44,1.12],p=0.14,I²=74%) were not statistically significant. TLPLDC showed improved OS at both 3-year (HR=0.18, CI[0.07,0.48], p<0.01, I² =0%) and 2-year follow-ups (HR=0.28,CI[0.12,0.67],p<0.01,I²=36%). TLPO at 36-months (HR=0.55,CI[0.29,1.03],p=0.06,I²=35%) was not significant, while at 24-months (HR=0.41, CI[0.21,0.82],p=0.01,I²=0%) it was significant. TLPLDC+G could only be analyzed at the 3-year follow-up, showing no difference (HR=1.04,CI[0.6,1.8],p=0.88,I²=0%). Conclusion: TLPLDC vaccines consistently improved DFS and OS in the 3-year follow-up analysis. Therefore, TLPLDC vaccines could be an effective addition to resectable melanoma treatment.