Suppr超能文献

免疫化疗、免疫疗法、化疗及靶向疗法作为晚期和转移性食管癌一线治疗的疗效与安全性:一项系统评价和网状Meta分析

Efficacy and safety of immunochemotherapy, immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy as first-line treatment for advanced and metastatic esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

作者信息

Gao Zhen, Huang Shujie, Wang Sichao, Tang Dezhao, Xu Wei, Zeng Ruijie, Qiao Guibin

机构信息

Department of Thoracic Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital (Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences), Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China.

Centre of Cancer Cell and Molecular Biology, Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, John Vane Science Centre, Charterhouse Square, London, UK.

出版信息

Lancet Reg Health West Pac. 2023 Jul 6;38:100841. doi: 10.1016/j.lanwpc.2023.100841. eCollection 2023 Sep.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The treatment of esophageal cancer has entered a new phase with the development of immunotherapy. The current investigation purpose is to investigate and contrast the efficacy and safety of immunotherapy, immunochemotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy as first-line treatment for individuals suffering from advanced and metastatic esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Within the framework of this systematic review and network meta-analysis, clinical trials published or reported in English up until 01 May, 2022, were retrieved from Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the ClinicalTrials.gov databases, ESMO, and ASCO. The analysis incorporated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from phase 2 to 3 that evaluated a minimum of two first-line therapeutic regimens for metastatic esophageal cancer were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary clinical outcomes included the incidence of objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) of any grade and ≥3 grade. Relative summary data were extracted from included studies by GZ, HS, WS, and TD. For clear statistical analysis, chemotherapy was divided into two categories of fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (FbCT) and fluorouracil-free chemotherapy (FfCT). Bayesian frequentist approach was employed to conduct the network meta-analysis. The indirect intercomparison between regimens was presented with league tables (HRs and 95% CI for OS and PFS, ORs and 95% CI for ORR and AEs). A greater surface value under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) indicates a higher potential ranking for the corresponding treatment. A further calculation of relative results about esophageal squamous cell cancer was performed in the subgroup analysis. The current protocol for the systematic review has been properly registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021241145).

FINDINGS

The final analysis comprised 17 trials that involved 9128 patients and 19 distinct treatment regimens. Within the scope of investigated immunotherapy (IO) combinations, toripalimab + FfCT (tori + FfCT) demonstrated the best OS advantages (tori + FfCT vs. FbCT, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85; tori + FfCT vs. FfCT, HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). In terms of PFS, camrelizumab + FfCT (cam + FfCT) demonstrated the best PFS advantages (FbCT vs. cam + FfCT, HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.22-2.63; FfCT vs. cam + FfCT, HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.47-2.17). Nivolumab + FbCT (nivo + FbCT vs. FfCT, OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.43-7.56) showed the best objective responses. Compared to the conventional chemotherapy regimen, the toxicity was observed to be the slightest for the tori + FfCT (FbCT vs. tori + FfCT, OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.22-7.7) and sintilimab + FfCT (FbCT vs. sin + FfCT, OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.16-7.37). The results in this study were evaluated as having a low heterogeneity since the I value was ≤25% in all analyses.

INTERPRETATION

Compared to foreign IO combinations, sin + FfCT, tori + FfCT, cam + FfCT, and tisle + FbCT are superior first-line treatment options for patients with advanced and metastatic esophageal cancer. Although foreign IO combinations, such as pembro + FbCT and nivo + FbCT obtained better objective response rates than other IO combinations, the addition of chemotherapy to IO worsens the safety profiles. Our findings could provide complementary evidence for current guideline recommendations.

FUNDING

This work was supported by a grant from the Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou, China (202206010103); and Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2022A1515012469).

摘要

背景

随着免疫疗法的发展,食管癌治疗进入了新阶段。当前的研究目的是调查和对比免疫疗法、免疫化疗、化疗及靶向疗法作为晚期和转移性食管癌患者一线治疗的疗效与安全性。

方法

在本系统评价和网状Meta分析框架内,从Embase、PubMed、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、ClinicalTrials.gov数据库、欧洲肿瘤内科学会(ESMO)和美国临床肿瘤学会(ASCO)检索截至2022年5月1日以英文发表或报告的临床试验。分析纳入了2期至3期的随机对照试验(RCT),这些试验评估了至少两种用于转移性食管癌的一线治疗方案。主要结局为总生存期(OS)和无进展生存期(PFS)。次要临床结局包括客观缓解率(ORR)的发生率以及任何级别和≥3级不良事件(AE)。GZ、HS、WS和TD从纳入研究中提取相对汇总数据。为进行清晰的统计分析,化疗分为基于氟尿嘧啶的化疗(FbCT)和无氟尿嘧啶化疗(FfCT)两类。采用贝叶斯频率论方法进行网状Meta分析。各治疗方案间的间接比较通过联赛表呈现(OS和PFS的风险比[HR]及95%可信区间[CI],ORR和AE的比值比[OR]及95%CI)。累积排名曲线下面积(SUCRA)值越大,相应治疗的潜在排名越高。在亚组分析中对食管鳞状细胞癌的相关结果进行了进一步计算。本系统评价的当前方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO)妥善注册(注册号:CRD42021241145)。

结果

最终分析纳入17项试验,涉及9128例患者和19种不同治疗方案。在所研究的免疫疗法(IO)联合方案范围内,托瑞帕利单抗+无氟尿嘧啶化疗(托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗)显示出最佳的OS优势(托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗对比FbCT,HR 0.57,95%CI 0.38 - 0.85;托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗对比无氟尿嘧啶化疗,HR 0.58,95%CI 0.43 - 0.78)。在PFS方面,卡瑞利珠单抗+无氟尿嘧啶化疗(卡瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗)显示出最佳的PFS优势(FbCT对比卡瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗,HR 1.79,95%CI 1.22 - 2.63;无氟尿嘧啶化疗对比卡瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗,HR 1.79,95%CI 1.47 - 2.17)。纳武利尤单抗+FbCT(纳武+FbCT对比无氟尿嘧啶化疗,OR 3.29,95%CI 1.43 - 7.56)显示出最佳的客观缓解。与传统化疗方案相比,托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗(FbCT对比托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗,OR 3.07,95%CI 1.22 - 7.7)和信迪利单抗+无氟尿嘧啶化疗(FbCT对比信迪+无氟尿嘧啶化疗,OR 2.93,95%CI 1.16 - 7.37)的毒性最小。本研究结果在所有分析中I值≤25%,评估为异质性较低。

解读

与国外IO联合方案相比,信迪+无氟尿嘧啶化疗、托瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗、卡瑞+无氟尿嘧啶化疗及替雷利珠单抗+FbCT是晚期和转移性食管癌患者更优的一线治疗选择。尽管国外IO联合方案,如帕博利珠单抗+FbCT和纳武利尤单抗+FbCT比其他IO联合方案获得了更好的客观缓解率,但IO联合化疗会使安全性变差。我们的研究结果可为当前指南推荐提供补充证据。

资助

本研究得到中国广州科技计划项目(202206010103)及广东省自然科学基金(2022A1515012469)资助。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0821/10339186/b08ae10c1937/gr1.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