Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Beijing, China.
Department of Pathology, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Beijing, China.
Ann Diagn Pathol. 2024 Apr;69:152268. doi: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2024.152268. Epub 2024 Jan 30.
Major pathological response (MPR) is proposed as a surrogate endpoint for survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. However, the criteria for estimating MPR differ between the recommendations of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) and the immune-related pathologic response criterion (irPRC). IASLC's criteria focus solely on evaluating the primary tumor, while irPRC's criteria encompass both the primary tumor and lymph node metastasis. Our objective is to compare the prognostic value of different criteria for estimating MPR.
We conducted a retrospective study on a cohort of 235 patients with NSCLC after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy. The survival endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). The MPR status of each patient was evaluated using both IASLC's criteria and irPRC's criteria. The prognostic value was compared using the Area Under Curve (AUC).
The MPR rates were 63.4 % (149/235) and 57.4 % (135/235) according to IASLC's and irPRC's criteria, respectively. Inconsistent cases, characterized by MPR status according to IASLC's criteria but non-MPR status according to irPRC's criteria, constituted 6.0 % (14/235) of the overall cohort and 15.2 % (14/92) of patients with pretreatment N positive disease. Interestingly, all inconsistent patients showed no recurrence during the study period. Although both MPR statuses according to IASLC (p = 0.00039) and irPRC (p = 0.0094) were associated with improved EFS, IASLC's criteria (AUC = 0.65) were superior to irPRC's criteria (AUC = 0.62) with a higher AUC value.
IASLC's criteria for estimating MPR were superior to irPRC's criteria in predicting EFS for NSCLC after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy.
新辅助化疗免疫治疗后,主要病理反应(MPR)被提议作为非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者生存的替代终点。然而,国际肺癌研究协会(IASLC)和免疫相关病理反应标准(irPRC)的建议中,估计 MPR 的标准有所不同。IASLC 的标准仅专注于评估原发性肿瘤,而 irPRC 的标准则涵盖了原发性肿瘤和淋巴结转移。我们的目标是比较不同估计 MPR 的标准的预后价值。
我们对新辅助化疗免疫治疗后的 235 例 NSCLC 患者进行了回顾性研究。生存终点是无事件生存(EFS)。使用 IASLC 的标准和 irPRC 的标准评估每位患者的 MPR 状态。使用曲线下面积(AUC)比较预后价值。
根据 IASLC 的标准和 irPRC 的标准,MPR 率分别为 63.4%(149/235)和 57.4%(135/235)。不一致的病例,根据 IASLC 的标准为 MPR 状态,但根据 irPRC 的标准为非 MPR 状态,占总队列的 6.0%(14/235)和预处理 N 阳性疾病患者的 15.2%(14/92)。有趣的是,所有不一致的患者在研究期间均未复发。尽管 IASLC(p=0.00039)和 irPRC(p=0.0094)标准的 MPR 状态均与 EFS 改善相关,但 IASLC 标准(AUC=0.65)优于 irPRC 标准(AUC=0.62),AUC 值更高。
在预测新辅助化疗免疫治疗后 NSCLC 的 EFS 方面,IASLC 估计 MPR 的标准优于 irPRC 的标准。