Larroquette Mathieu, Domblides Charlotte, Lefort Félix, Lasserre Matthieu, Quivy Amandine, Sionneau Baptiste, Bertolaso Pauline, Gross-Goupil Marine, Ravaud Alain, Daste Amaury
Department of Medical Oncology, Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux University Hospital-CHU, Bordeaux, France; Bordeaux University, Bordeaux, France.
Department of Medical Oncology, Hôpital Saint-André, Bordeaux University Hospital-CHU, Bordeaux, France.
Eur J Cancer. 2021 Oct 13;158:47-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.09.013.
The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), especially anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), has changed practices in oncology, becoming a new standard of care in first or subsequent lines for several cancer subtypes. Recent data have highlighted the ability of standard chemotherapy to enhance immunogenicity and/or to break immunoresistance of the tumour and its microenvironment, leading to a rationale for the use of ICIs in combination with the standard chemotherapy regimen to improve efficacy of cancer treatment. Here, we propose to review randomised clinical trials evaluating concomitant administration of ICIs and chemotherapy, to assess clinical efficacy and safety profiles in advanced solid tumours. Association of these two modes of action on treatments has shown improved overall survival and better objective response rates than standard chemotherapy, especially in first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and for PD1/PD-L1 enriched tumours, highlighting a potential synergistic effect of this treatment combination in certain tumour types. However, improved survival results with the use of anti-PD-L1 avelumab as a maintenance schedule for bladder cancer raises the question of the most appropriate approach between sequential and concomitant administration of chemoimmunotherapy. To date, no trials have compared in a head-to-head protocol the administration of concomitant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy, used for tumour debulking, followed by administration of ICIs. Regarding the tolerance profile, no new safety signals were found with the combination tested to date. Interestingly, recent results have shown an improved Progression Free survival 2 (PFS2) (defined as the progression after the next line of therapy) in head-and-neck cancers or NSCLC after a first-line pembrolizumab-chemotherapy combination, suggesting a potential long-lasting effect of ICIs when used in combination in the first-line setting.
免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)的使用,尤其是抗程序性细胞死亡蛋白1(PD1)和抗程序性细胞死亡配体1(PD-L1),已经改变了肿瘤学的治疗方式,成为几种癌症亚型一线或后续治疗的新标准。最近的数据强调了标准化疗增强肿瘤及其微环境免疫原性和/或打破免疫抗性的能力,这为ICI与标准化疗方案联合使用以提高癌症治疗疗效提供了理论依据。在此,我们建议回顾评估ICI与化疗联合给药的随机临床试验,以评估晚期实体瘤的临床疗效和安全性。这两种治疗方式联合使用已显示出比标准化疗有更好的总生存期和客观缓解率,特别是在非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的一线治疗以及PD1/PD-L1富集的肿瘤中,突出了这种联合治疗在某些肿瘤类型中的潜在协同效应。然而,使用抗PD-L1阿维鲁单抗作为膀胱癌维持治疗方案可改善生存结果,这引发了化疗免疫疗法序贯给药和联合给药哪种方法最合适的问题。迄今为止,尚无试验采用直接比较的方案,将化疗免疫联合疗法与用于肿瘤减瘤的化疗进行比较,然后再给予ICI。关于耐受性,迄今测试的联合用药未发现新的安全信号。有趣的是,最近的结果显示,在一线使用帕博利珠单抗联合化疗后,头颈癌或NSCLC患者的无进展生存期2(PFS2,定义为下一线治疗后进展)有所改善,这表明ICI在一线联合使用时可能具有持久的疗效。