Yang Yong-Liang, Li Zhi-Qiang, Wang Qiu-Lu, Gu Jing-Jing, Fang Xin-Jian, Huang Guan-Hong
The Second People's Hospital of Lianyungang, The Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Lianyungang, Jiangsu, China.
The Second People's Hospital of Lianyungang, The Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College, Lianyungang, Jiangsu, China.
Clin Ther. 2021 Nov;43(11):1997-2012. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2021.09.018. Epub 2021 Nov 15.
With programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) inhibitors approved for second-line treatment of advanced esophageal cancer, immunotherapy and chemotherapy have gradually become the main treatments for second-line treatment of patients with advanced esophageal cancer (AEC). This meta-analysis and systematic review were conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors monotherapy versus chemotherapy in second-line treatment of AEC.
Eligible randomized controlled trials were searched in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology or European Society of Medical Oncology were reviewed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of PD-1/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors relative to chemotherapy for AEC from January 2016 to October 2020. Patients diagnosed with AEC and progressing after first-line therapy were included in this study. Hazard ratios (HRs) of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), risk ratios (RRs) of objective response rate (ORR), and the odds ratios (ORs) of adverse effects (AEs) were calculated.
The study included 4 randomized controlled trials with 1683 patients. The results indicated that PD-1 inhibitors prolonged the OS (HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.88; P < 0.01) and improved the ORR (RR = 3.00; 95% CI, 2.36-3.82; P = 0.01) but did not improve the PFS (HR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76-1.20; P = 0.692) compared with chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of AEC. PD-1 inhibitors alone were associated with a lower incidence of all treatment-related AEs (OR = 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.89; P = 0.03) and grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs (OR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.16-0.44; P < 0.01) versus chemotherapy. PD-1 inhibitors prolonged OS mainly in the following patient groups: male, age <65 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1, or PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥10%. Asian patients had a longer OS than non-Asian patients (P = 0.01).
The available evidence indicates that the efficacy and tolerability of PD-1 inhibitors were better than chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of AEC, and the benefiting population of these patients was limited to males, those <65 years of age, those with a Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1, or those with a PD-L1 tumor proportion score ≥10%. Notably, Asian patients receiving immune monotherapy had longer OS than non-Asian patients.
随着程序性细胞死亡蛋白1(PD-1)抑制剂被批准用于晚期食管癌的二线治疗,免疫疗法和化疗已逐渐成为晚期食管癌(AEC)患者二线治疗的主要手段。本荟萃分析和系统评价旨在评估PD-1抑制剂单药治疗与化疗在AEC二线治疗中的疗效和安全性。
在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆中检索符合条件的随机对照试验,并对在美国临床肿瘤学会或欧洲医学肿瘤学会上发表的摘要进行综述,以评估2016年1月至2020年10月期间PD-1/程序性细胞死亡配体1(PD-L1)抑制剂相对于化疗治疗AEC的疗效和耐受性。本研究纳入了一线治疗后进展的AEC患者。计算无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)的风险比(HR)、客观缓解率(ORR)的风险比(RR)以及不良反应(AE)的比值比(OR)。
该研究纳入了4项随机对照试验,共1683例患者。结果表明,在AEC的二线治疗中,与化疗相比,PD-1抑制剂延长了总生存期(HR = 0.79;95%CI,0.71-0.88;P < 0.01),提高了客观缓解率(RR = 3.00;95%CI,2.36-3.82;P = 0.01),但未改善无进展生存期(HR = 0.96;95%CI,0.76-1.20;P = 0.692)。与化疗相比,单独使用PD-1抑制剂时,所有治疗相关AE的发生率较低(OR = 0.29;95%CI,0.09-0.89;P = 0.03),3至5级治疗相关AE的发生率也较低(OR = 0.26;95%CI,0.16-0.44;P < 0.01)。PD-1抑制剂主要在以下患者群体中延长了总生存期:男性、年龄<65岁、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态为1或PD-L1肿瘤比例评分≥10%。亚洲患者的总生存期长于非亚洲患者(P = 0.01)。
现有证据表明,在AEC的二线治疗中,PD-1抑制剂的疗效和耐受性优于化疗,这些患者的受益人群仅限于男性、年龄<65岁、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态为1或PD-L1肿瘤比例评分≥10%的患者。值得注意的是,接受免疫单药治疗的亚洲患者的总生存期长于非亚洲患者。