Suppr超能文献

免疫检查点抑制剂治疗有无 PD-L1 选择的晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和安全性:系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced non-small cell lung cancer with or without PD-L1 selection: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy, Guangxi Academy of Medical Sciences and the People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi 530021, China.

Phase 1 Clinical Trial Laboratory, Guangxi Academy of Medical Sciences and the People's Hospital of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, Nanning, Guangxi 530021, China.

出版信息

Chin Med J (Engl). 2023 Sep 20;136(18):2156-2165. doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002750. Epub 2023 Aug 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard treatments for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, evidence regarding their relative efficacy and safety is lacking. This study compared the efficacy and safety of all currently available ICI treatments in patients with advanced NSCLC to identify optimal treatment regimens.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to August 8, 2022. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes included objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Forty RCTs involving 22,526 patients were selected, and a total of 26 treatment regimens were identified. Treatment with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1) provided superior OS compared with anti-programmed death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) treatment. ICIs plus platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC) were superior to ICIs treatment alone, although the addition of PBC increased treatment toxicity. Cemiplimab ranked first for OS and lowest for any-grade AEs in advanced NSCLC patients without PD-L1 selection. Regarding grade ≥3 AEs, the toxicity of ICI monotherapy or ICI-ICI combination was consistently lower than that of the other treatments. For patients without PD-L1 selection, cemiplimab showed the best OS, pembrolizumab plus docetaxel (Pem-DXT) showed the best PFS, and atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and PBC (Atezo-Beva-PBC) showed the best ORR. Pembrolizumab plus PBC and Atezo-Beva-PBC were the most likely optimal treatments for OS and PFS in patients with PD-L1 expression <1%, respectively. In patients with PD-L1 expression ≥1%, treatment regimens containing anti-PD-1 provided superior OS benefits compared with those of anti-PD-L1 treatment, and sintilimab plus PBC (Sint-PBC) provided the best OS benefit; as for PFS, ICI plus PBC consistently showed greater PFS benefits than ICI or PBC alone. For patients with anti-PD-L1 expression of 1-49%, camrelizumab plus PBC provided the best benefit for OS and PFS among included treatment. Durvalumab-tremelimumab-PBC and Atezo-Beva-PBC respectively presented the highest OS and PFS for patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. Moreover, cemiplimab and Atezo-Beva-PBC yielded the best OS and PFS benefits as first-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ICI plus PBC likely resulted in superior survival outcomes compared to ICI treatment alone, it did increase toxicity. Cemiplimab presented a well-balanced efficacy and safety profile in advanced NSCLC treatment. Our findings with the current ICIs comparisons will aid future trials for cancer immunotherapy.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ , CRD42022323879.

摘要

背景

免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)是晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的标准治疗方法;然而,缺乏关于其相对疗效和安全性的证据。本研究比较了所有目前可用于晚期 NSCLC 患者的 ICI 治疗的疗效和安全性,以确定最佳治疗方案。

方法

系统检索了截至 2022 年 8 月 8 日发表的 PubMed、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE 和 Embase 数据库中的随机对照试验(RCT)。主要结局是总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)。次要结局包括客观缓解率(ORR)和不良事件(AEs)。

结果

共纳入 40 项 RCT,涉及 22526 名患者,共确定了 26 种治疗方案。与抗程序性死亡配体 1(抗 PD-L1)治疗相比,抗程序性细胞死亡蛋白 1(抗 PD-1)治疗具有更好的 OS。ICI 联合铂类化疗(PBC)优于 ICI 单药治疗,尽管 PBC 的加入增加了治疗毒性。在没有 PD-L1 选择的晚期 NSCLC 患者中,西米普利单抗在 OS 方面排名第一,在任何级别 AEs 方面排名最低。关于≥3 级 AEs,ICI 单药或 ICI-ICI 联合治疗的毒性始终低于其他治疗。对于没有 PD-L1 选择的患者,西米普利单抗的 OS 最佳,帕博利珠单抗联合多西他赛(Pem-DXT)的 PFS 最佳,阿替利珠单抗联合贝伐珠单抗和 PBC(Atezo-Beva-PBC)的 ORR 最佳。对于 PD-L1 表达<1%的患者,帕博利珠单抗联合 PBC 和 Atezo-Beva-PBC 最有可能成为 OS 和 PFS 的最佳治疗方案。对于 PD-L1 表达≥1%的患者,抗 PD-1 治疗方案的 OS 获益优于抗 PD-L1 治疗方案,而 sintilimab 联合 PBC(Sint-PBC)的 OS 获益最佳;对于 PFS,ICI 联合 PBC 始终显示出比 ICI 或 PBC 单药治疗更大的 PFS 获益。对于 PD-L1 表达为 1-49%的患者,卡瑞利珠单抗联合 PBC 在纳入治疗中提供了最佳的 OS 和 PFS 获益。度伐利尤单抗-替西利珠单抗-PBC 和 Atezo-Beva-PBC 分别为 PD-L1 表达≥50%的患者提供了最佳的 OS 和 PFS。此外,西米普利单抗和 Atezo-Beva-PBC 分别作为晚期 NSCLC 患者的一线治疗,提供了最佳的 OS 和 PFS 获益。

结论

尽管 ICI 联合 PBC 可能比 ICI 单药治疗更能带来生存获益,但确实增加了毒性。西米普利单抗在晚期 NSCLC 治疗中具有良好的疗效和安全性。我们目前对 ICIs 比较的研究结果将有助于未来的癌症免疫治疗试验。

注册

PROSPERO,https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ,CRD42022323879。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b1d8/10508436/b76c4edabf01/cm9-136-2156-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验