Efficacy and safety of first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor in combination with CTLA-4 inhibitor in the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

The combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor with CTLA-4 inhibitor for advanced non-small cell lung cancer(NSCLC) is presently a significant area of research, however its clinical application remains contentious. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor in combination with CTLA-4 inhibitor (CP) in the treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. A systemic search was conducted in four databases (PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, and Web of Science) from their establishment until January 17, 2024, for randomized controlled trials that investigated the use of the first-line PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor plus CTLA-4 inhibitor in patients with advanced NSCLC. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse events (AEs) were subjected to meta-analyses. Totally 7 eligible randomized controlled trials including 4682 people were included. Two comparative analyses were performed: CP versus chemotherapy, CP versus PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor (P). Compared with the chemotherapy group, CP improved OS (HR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75-0.94, p<0.05) but not PFS (HR: 0.94, 95%CI: 0.73-1.20, p = 0.63) or ORR (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.79-1.71, p = 0.45). In terms of toxicity, CP had slightly fewer any AEs compared to chemotherapy (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.91-0.97; p<0.05). Compared to the P group, there was no significant difference in OS (MD: -0,25, 95% CI: -2.47-1.98, p = 0.83), PFS (MD: -0.91, 95% CI: -3.19-1.36, p = 0.43), and ORR (OR:1.05, 95% CI. 0.80-1.36, p = 0.73). Subgroup analysis revealed that CP provided superior OS compared with P in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1%. CP was a feasible and safe first-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC. Specifically, CP may function as a therapeutic alternative for individuals with low or negative PD-L1 expression, resulting in enhanced long-term outcomes compared to chemotherapy or P. Further randomized controlled trials with prolonged follow-up periods are necessary to validate these results, particularly focusing on efficacy in patients with differing PD-L1 expression levels, to improve the stratified implementation of immunotherapy. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024621116, identifier CRD42024621116.

Zhao H ，Huang S ，Wu J ，Lu Y ，Zou Y ，Zeng H ，Li C ，Wang J ，Zhang X ，Duan S ，Liang W ... -  《Frontiers in Immunology》

Comparison of efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapy in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to an increase in randomized controlled trials exploring various first-line combination treatment regimens. With the introduction of new PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, there are now more clinical options available. For the first time, the AK105 monoclonal antibody Penpulimab, developed in China, was included. The AK105-302 Phase III trial studied the efficacy and safety of Penpulimab combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. To determine the optimal treatment options, we conducted an updated network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of these regimens. The system retrieves data from Chinese and English electronic databases, Clinical Trials, and the gov Clinical Trial Registration website up to September 6, 2023. The study indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination regimens, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), all-grade adverse events, and above-grade III adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) level, histological type, ECOG score, sex, and smoking history. Nineteen RCTS were included, with a total of ten thousand eight hundred patients. Penpulimab plus chemotherapy (Pen + CT) provided the best OS (HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81) for PD-L1 patients with non-selective advanced NSCLC. Except Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab (Niv + Ipi), other PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapies significantly extended PFS compared with CT, and Nivolumab plus Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (Niv + Bev + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.26-0.74) provided the best PFS benefit and was comparable to Pen + CT (HR = 1.0) for PFS prolongation. For ORR, except Niv + Ipi, all the other regimens significantly improved ORR compared with CT. In terms of safety, except Tor + CT, the incidence of any-grade AEs or grade ≥ 3 adverse events may be higher than those of chemotherapy. The subgroup analysis revealed that for patients with PD-L1 levels below 1%, treatment with Tor + CT resulted in the best progression-free survival (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.86). For patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% or higher, Sintilimab plus chemotherapy (Sin + CT) (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-0.99) and Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy (Cam + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.64) were associated with the best overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. For patients with SqNSCLC, combined immunotherapy may provide greater survival benefits. For patients with Non-sqNSCLC, Niv + Bev + CT and Tor + CT were associated with optimal PFS and OS, respectively. Cam + CT provided the best PFS in male patients with a history of smoking and an ECOG score of 0. In both female and non-smoking patient subgroups, Pem + CT was associated with the best PFS and OS benefits. For patients with advanced non-selective PD-L1 NSCLC, two effective regimens are Pen + CT and Niv + Bev + CT, which rank first in OS and PFS among all patients. Cam + CT and Tor + CT have advantages for OS in patients with SqNSCLC and Non-sqNSCLC, respectively. Niv + Ipi + CT provided the best OS benefit for patients with an ECOG score of 0, while Pem + CT may be the most effective treatment for patients with an ECOG score of 1. Pem + CT has a better effect on female patients and non-smokers. Sin + CT was found to be the most effective treatment for male patients and the smoking subgroup, while Cam + CT was found to be the most effective for PFS. In addition, Tor + CT was associated with the best PFS for patients with negative PD-L1 expression. Pem + CT was found to significantly improve both PFS and OS compared to CT alone. For patients with positive PD-L1 expression, Sin + CT and Cam + CT were found to be optimal for OS and PFS, respectively. It is important to note that, with the exception of Tor + CT, the toxicity of the other combinations was higher than that of CT alone.

Yang Y ，Chen W ，Dong L ，Duan L ，Gao P ... -  《-》

Efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors as second-line treatment for advanced squamous esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis with a focus on PD-L1 expression levels.

PD-1 inhibitors have shown promising efficacy in enhancing OS and AEs as second-line therapies for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, there remains no clear consensus on which PD-1 inhibitor provides the best balance between efficacy and safety. To address this key issue in the second-line treatment of ESCC, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) with a focus on OS benefits, particularly in patients with different levels of PD-L1 expression. A systematic search of relevant literature was conducted in Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, covering publications from the inception of these database to June 2024. The evaluated endpoints included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), AEs, and Grade ≥ 3 adverse events (Grade ≥ 3 AEs). A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and safety of various immunotherapy regimens in patients with advanced ESCC. To ensure transparency, novelty, and reliability, this study was prospectively registered in the systematic review registry (CRD42024540581). Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing 2,078 patients and six treatment regimens, were included in this study. Among advanced ESCC patients not selected based on PD-L1 expression, Sintilimab demonstrated the greatest OS benefit (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50-0.98). Camrelizumab showed the most favorable improvement in PFS compared to chemotherapy (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.87) and also achieved the best ORR benefit (OR = 3.72, 95% CI: 1.98-6.99). In terms of safety, Nivolumab (OR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.05-0.19) and Tislelizumab (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10-0.33) exhibited significant safety advantages over chemotherapy concerning AEs. Moreover, Nivolumab (OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.20) was associated with a markedly lower risk of Grade ≥ 3 AEs compared to chemotherapy. Subgroup analysis based on PD-L1 expression revealed that Tislelizumab (HR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.76) offered the greatest OS benefit for patients with PD-L1 ≥ 10%, while Camrelizumab (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.89) was the most likely regimen to provide an OS advantage for patients with PD-L1 < 10%. Compared to chemotherapy, PD-1 inhibitors may provide improved survival outcomes for patients with advanced ESCC. Among patients not selected based on PD-L1 expression, Sintilimab is most likely to deliver the best survival benefit. For patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 10%, Tislelizumab is expected to offer the greatest efficacy, while Camrelizumab appears to be the most effective for those with PD-L1 < 10%. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024540581.

Yang F ，Dan M ，Shi J ，Fan L ，Zhang H ，Jian T ，Lei K ，Wang Y ，Xin J ，Yu Z ，Chen W ... -  《Frontiers in Immunology》

Immune checkpoint inhibitors plus platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of older people with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

Lung cancer is a cancer of the elderly, with a median age at diagnosis of 71. More than one-third of people diagnosed with lung cancer are over 75 years old. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are special antibodies that target a pathway in the immune system called the programmed cell death 1/programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway. These antibodies help the immune system fight cancer cells by blocking signals that cancer cells use to avoid being attacked by the immune system. ICIs have changed the treatment of people with lung cancer. In particular, for people with previously-untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), current first-line treatment now comprises ICIs plus platinum-based chemotherapy, rather than platinum-based chemotherapy alone, regardless of their PD-L1 expression status. However, as people age, their immune system changes, becoming less effective in its T cell responses. This raises questions about how well ICIs work in older adults. To assess the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy (with or without bevacizumab) in treatment-naïve adults aged 65 years and older with advanced NSCLC. We searched the Cochrane Lung Cancer Group Trial Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other trial registers, and the websites of drug regulators. The latest search date was 23 August 2023. We also checked references and searched abstracts from the meetings of seven cancer organisations from 2019 to August 2023. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the efficacy and safety of adding ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone for people 65 years and older who had not previously been treated. All data emanated from international multicentre studies involving adults with histologically-confirmed advanced NSCLC who had not received any previous systemic anticancer therapy for their advanced disease. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were overall survival and treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). Our secondary outcomes were progression-free survival, objective response rate, time to response, duration of response, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). We included 17 primary studies, with a total of 4276 participants, in the review synthesis. We identified nine ongoing studies, and listed one study as 'awaiting classification'. Twelve of the 17 studies included people older than 75 years, accounting for 9% to 13% of their participants. We rated some studies as having 'some concerns' for risk of bias arising from the randomisation process, deviations from the intended interventions, or measurement of the outcome. The overall GRADE rating for the certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to low because of the risk of bias, imprecision, or inconsistency. People aged 65 years and older The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably increased overall survival compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (hazard ratio (HR) 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 0.88; 8 studies, 2093 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported data for treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events may not differ between the two treatment groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.09, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.32; 1 study, 127 participants; low-certainty evidence). The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improves progression-free survival (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.68; 7 studies, 1885 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People aged 65 to 75 years, inclusive The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improved overall survival compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87; 6 studies, 1406 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Only one study reported data for treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher). The frequency of treatment-related adverse events probably increased in people treated with ICIs plus platinum-based chemotherapy compared to those treated with platinum-based chemotherapy alone (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.13; 1 study, 97 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The addition of ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.73; 8 studies, 1466 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). People aged 75 years and older There may be no difference in overall survival in people treated with ICIs combined with platinum-based chemotherapy compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.16; 4 studies, 297 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data on treatment-related adverse events were available in this age group. The effect of combination ICI and platinum-based chemotherapy on progression-free survival is uncertain (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.36; 3 studies, 226 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Only three studies assessed the objective response rate. For time to response, duration of response, and health-related quality of life, we do not have any evidence yet. Compared to platinum-based chemotherapy alone, adding ICIs to platinum-based chemotherapy probably leads to higher overall survival and progression-free survival, without an increase in treatment-related adverse events (grade 3 or higher), in people 65 years and older with advanced NSCLC. These data are based on results from studies dominated by participants between 65 and 75 years old. However, the analysis also suggests that the improvements reported in overall survival and progression-free survival may not be seen in people older than 75 years.

Orillard E ，Adhikari A ，Malouf RS ，Calais F ，Marchal C ，Westeel V ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

Comparative long-term outcomes of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus pembrolizumab monotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

This systematic review and network meta-analysis(NMA) was designed to compare the long-term outcomes of pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer(NSCLC). Four databases(Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched published from establishment of database to August 17, 2023, for articles studying pembrolizumab monotherapy or pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Network meta-analyses of progression-free survival(PFS), overall survival(OS), objective response rate(ORR), treatment-related adverse events(trAEs) and immune-related adverse events(irAEs) were performed. A total of five studies were considered for NMA. This NMA includes a cohort of 2878 patients diagnosed with advanced NSCLC. Among them, 791 patients received pembrolizumab monotherapy, 1337 patients received chemotherapy, and 748 patients received pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy. The IPDformKM software was utilized to reconstruct Kaplan-Meier curves for OS and PFS, offering a lucid and intuitive depiction of oncological outcomes. For patients who have high levels of programmed death-ligand 1(PD-L1) expression (≥50%), pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was more effective than using pembrolizumab alone as first-line therapy in terms of PFS (median survival time: 10.41 months versus 7.41 months, HR: 0.81, 95%CI 0.67 to 0.97, P=0.02) and ORR (RR:1.74, 95% CI: 1.25-2.43). Nevertheless, there was no statistically significant difference observed between the two groups in terms of OS (median survival time: 22.54 months versus 22.62 months, HR: 0.89, 95%CI 0.73 to 1.08, P=0.24). Furthermore, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy provided a more advantageous long-term survival advantage in terms of OS (median survival time: 20.88 months versus 13.60 months, HR: 0.77, 95%CI: 0.62 to 0.95, P=0.015) compared to pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with low PD-L1 expression levels (1% to 49%). With regards to safety, there was no statistically significant disparity between the two groups in relation to any irAEs (RD=0.02, 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.16) or Grade≥ 3 irAEs (RD=0.01, 95% CI: -0.10 to 0.12). Nevertheless, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy exhibited a greater likelihood of encountering any trAEs (RD=0.23, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.30) and Grade≥ 3 trAEs (RD=0.28, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.35) in comparison to pembrolizumab monotherapy. The present network meta-analysis reported comparative long-term outcomes of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus pembrolizumab monotherapy as first-line therapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy led to improved PFS and ORR in patients with advanced NSCLC who had a PD-L1 expression level of 50% or above. However, there was no noticeable benefit in terms of OS when pembrolizumab was paired with chemotherapy compared to utilizing pembrolizumab alone. In addition, pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy offered a greater long-term survival benefit in terms of OS when compared to utilizing pembrolizumab alone in patients with PD-L1 expression levels ranging from 1% to 49%. Furthermore, the increased effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy was accompanied by an increase in adverse side effects. https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024501740.

Huang S ，Huang Z ，Huang X ，Luo R ，Liang W ，Qin T ... -  《Frontiers in Immunology》