安罗替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效与安全性的Meta分析

目的:采用Meta分析方法对安罗替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效与安全性进行系统评价。方法:检索Pubmed、EMbase、Cochrane Library、中国知网、万方、维普和中国生物医学文献数据库,查阅自建库至2020年1月公开发表的研究安罗替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的文献。按照纳入与排除标准选择文献,质量评估,资料提取,采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入4篇中文RCT文献,均为高质量研究。Meta分析结果显示,安罗替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的有效率［OR=2.03,95%CI（1.04,3.96）,P=0.04］、控制率［OR=7.56,95%CI（5.21,10.97）,P＜0.000 01］、无进展生存期［HR=0.26,95%CI（0.21,0.33）,P＜0.000 01］和总体生存期［HR=0.72,95%CI（0.58,0.89）,P=0.002］均优于安慰剂组。高血压、手足综合征、甲减、咯血和腹泻在安罗替尼组发生率更高（P均<0.05）。结论:安罗替尼可提高晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效,延长生存期,且安全性可控。     

比较吉非替尼与化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

目的 评价吉非替尼对比以铂类为基础的联合化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效与安全性。方法 检索PubMed、EMbase、中国生物医学文献数据库和中国知网等数据库,纳入吉非替尼对比铂类联合第3代化疗药物一线治疗晚期NSCLC的随机对照研究,检索时间截止于2012年3月,采用Stata 10.0软件进行Meta分析。结果 最终纳入4项研究,共1926例患者。在表皮生长因子受体（EGFR）突变阳性的人群中,吉非替尼在无进展生存期（HR=0.43,95％CI：0.32～0.58,P＜0.001）和有效率（71.5％ vs.38.1％,OR=4.04,95％CI：2.90～5.61,P＜0.001）方面均优于化疗组,在总生存期方面两组差异无统计学意义（HR=0.93,95％CI：0.75～1.15,P=0.492）。在安全性方面,吉非替尼主要为皮疹、腹泻和肝功能损害;化疗为中性粒细胞减少、血小板减少和贫血。结论 吉非替尼一线治疗晚期NSCLC具有一定优势,可作为EGFR敏感突变者的一线用药选择。     

阿法替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

目的:评价阿法替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的疗效及安全性.方法:通过PubMed、The Cochrane Library、Web of Science、EMbase、万方数据库和中国期刊全文数据库,检索阿法替尼治疗晚期NSCLC的随机临床对照试验.提取资料,采用RevMan5.3进行Meta分析.结果:纳入6项RCT研究,2 610例患者,荟萃分析显示阿法替尼治疗可显著延长晚期NSCLC的无进展生存期(progression-free survival,PFS)(HR=0.59,95%CI:0.46~0.74,P<0.000 1).亚组分析示阿法替尼组较传统化疗组(HR=0.54,95%CI:0.45~0.64,P<0.000 01)及一代EGFR-TKI组(HR=0.79,95%CI:0.67~0.92,P=0.002)PFS改善更加明显,差异有统计学意义.同时,阿法替尼治疗亦可延长患者的总生存期(overall survival,OS)(HR=0.90,95%CI:0.82~0.99,P=0.03).亚组分析示阿法替尼组较一代EGFR-TKI组(HR=0.82,95%CI:0.72~0.95,P=0.006)OS改善更加明显,差异有统计学意义;而与传统化疗组(HR=0.93,95%CI:0.78~1.10,P=0.38)相比,OS改善未显示出明显优势.安全性方面,阿法替尼治疗最主要的不良反应为腹泻(RR=9.99,95%CI:5.61~17.78,P<0.000 01)和口腔炎(RR=14.67,95%CI:4.72~45.56,P<0.000 01)而皮疹、乏力、食欲下降、恶心、呕吐不良反应,两组差异均无统计学意义.结论:阿法替尼治疗可延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS及OS,与传统化疗及一代EGFR-TKI相比有明显优势.并具有良好安全性,可作为药物治疗晚期NSCLC的优先选择.     

阿帕替尼联合替吉奥治疗晚期胃癌的疗效及安全性的Meta分析

目的:总结阿帕替尼联合替吉奥治疗晚期胃癌的疗效及安全性,以期为临床提供更多的循证医学证据。方法:通过计算机文献检索中英文数据库,收集国内外公开发表的阿帕替尼联合替吉奥（试验组）对比替吉奥（对照组）治疗晚期胃癌的随机对照试验,检索时间截止于2019年8月21日,由两名研究者独立地筛选文献、提取资料并使用Cochrane风险偏倚评估工具评价文献质量后,主要采用Review Manager 5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入20篇文献,合计1 150名患者。Meta分析结果显示,阿帕替尼联合替吉奥组患者客观缓解率［OR=2.02,95%CI（1.56,2.63）,P<0.000 01］、疾病控制率［OR=3.10,95%CI（2.30,4.17）,P<0.000 01］、中位总生存期［MD=3.99,95%CI（3.56,4.43）,P<0.000 01］均高于替吉奥组,两者中位无进展生存期无显著性差异［MD=1.24,95%CI（-1.19,3.67）,P=0.32］,不良反应中仅阿帕替尼联合替吉奥组的高血压发生率［OR=6.19,95%CI（1.89,20.23）,P=0.003］及蛋白尿发生率［OR=4.02,95%CI（1.11,14.62）,P=0.03］高于替吉奥组,其余不良反应间亦无显著性差异,另外阿帕替尼联合替吉奥组的IFN-γ、TNF-α水平高于替吉奥组,IL-10、IL-4、TSGF、CA199、CEA水平则低于替吉奥组。结论:当前证据显示,阿帕替尼联合替吉奥较单药替吉奥可获得更高的客观缓解率、疾病控制率、中位总生存期,不良反应较少,免疫功能有所提高,能有效降低肿瘤标志物水平。但受纳入研究数量及质量的限制,上述结论尚需开展更多高质量研究予以验证。     

雷莫芦单抗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌有效性及安全性的Meta分析

[摘要] 目的: Meta分析雷莫芦单抗（ramucirumab）治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer, NSCLC）的有效性及安全性。方法: 计算机检索Cochrane 图书馆（2017 年第8 期）、Web of Science、Pubmed、EMbase、万方数据库、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库（CBM）、中国科技期刊数据库和ASCO、ESMO主要会议数据库,检索时限均从建库至2017 年9 月1 日。收集雷莫芦单抗治疗晚期NSCLC的临床随机对照试验, 由2 位评价员独立筛选文献、提取数据并评估纳入研究的质量后,采用RevMan5.3 软件进行的实验组与对照组雷莫芦单抗治疗后NSCLC患者的无进展生存期（PFS）、总生存期（OS）、客观反应率（ORR）及不良反应等Meta 分析。结果：最终纳入3 项RCT进行Meta 分析,共计1 545 例NSCLC患者,其中雷莫芦单抗组777例,对照组768 例。试验组NSCLC患者的PFS 和OS均优于对照组[HR=0.77, 95%CI(0.69~0.85), P<0.01; HR=0.88, 95%CI(0.78~0.99), P<0.05];但雷莫芦单抗组和对照组ORR比较差异无统计学意义[RR=1.33, 95%CI(0.68~2.61), P>0.05]。雷莫芦单抗联合多西他赛对比多西他赛单药二线治疗可延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS 和OS [HR=0.77, 95%CI(0.69~0.86), P<0.01 ; HR=0.86, 95%CI(0.76, 0.98), P<0.05];雷莫芦单抗试验组最严重的不良反应为高血压[RR=3.33,95%CI(1.83~6.05), P<0.01], 而恶心、呕吐、腹泻、食欲减退、疲劳、蛋白尿、中性粒细胞减少、白细胞减少、血小板减少、出血事件等两组差异均无统计学意义（均P>0.05）。结论：雷莫芦单抗治疗可延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS和OS,其最主要的不良反应为高血压。     

PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂联合化疗对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效及安全性的Meta分析

目的：系统评价PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂联合化疗对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌（non-small lung cancer,NSCLC）的疗效及安全性。方法：检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、EMbase、EBSCO循证医学数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库（Chinese Biomedical Literature Database,CBM）、中国知网（Chinese Journal Full-text Database,CNKI）、中文科技期刊全文数据库（VIP）中收录的PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂联合化疗对比化疗一线治疗晚期NSCLC 的随机对照试验（randomized controlled trials,RCTs）,采用RevMan 5.2 软件进行Meta 分析。结果：纳入6 个临床RCTs 共3 238 例晚期NSCLC。Meta 分析结果显示,PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂联合化疗与化疗相比可显著延长OS（HR=0.86,95%CI=0.79~0.94,P=0.0006）和PFS（HR=0.81,95%CI=0.78~0.84,P<0.00001）;1~5 级血小板计数减少、呕吐、腹泻、甲状腺功能减低或亢进、皮疹、肺炎、结肠炎、肝炎、味觉障碍,3~5 级肝炎的不良反应发生率较化疗组高,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.01 或P<0.05）。结论：PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂联合化疗较单独化疗一线治疗晚期NSCLC可显著延长患者OS和PFS,但不良反应发生率较化疗高。     

厄洛替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的系统评价

背景与目的 厄洛替尼是新型、高效的抗肿瘤靶向治疗药物,于2006年在中国上市用于非小细胞肺癌的治疗,本研究旨在系统评价厄洛替尼治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的有效性与安全性.方法 检索Cochrane图书馆临床对照试验库、Pubmed、Embase、CBM、CNKI、Wanfang Date等电子数据库.对符合纳入标准的随机对照试验(RCT),采用RevMan 4.2软件进行统计分析.对于国内无对照临床研究资料,采用同质合并分析.结果 纳入4个RCT和8个国内无对照的临床研究.RCT结果表明,厄洛替尼与安慰剂相比,治疗组的无进展生存期、总体中位生存期、反应率和1年生存率均优于对照组,反应率(OR=10.21,95%CI:2.44-42.73)、1年生存率(OR=1.67,95%CI:1.13-2.46);厄洛替尼与卡铂和紫杉醇联合化疗相比,化疗组总体生存期优于厄洛替尼组(HR=1.73,95%CI:1.09-2.73;P=0.018),其他疗效指标无统计学差异;厄洛替尼联合化疗与单独化疗比较,两组各疗效指标均无统计学差异;厄洛替尼引起的副反应主要是皮疹和腹泻,且以轻度为主,与化疗联合使用耐受性较好.8篇国内无对照临床研究总体结果表明,总反应率为27.27%,平均1年生存率为56.196.结论 厄洛替尼单药治疗非小细胞肺癌有明确的临床疗效,女性、不吸烟者、亚洲人、腺癌患者也许是优势人群;与化疗联合用药获益并不明确,应注意选择优势人群和给药时机.但目前纳入研究尚不能为厄洛替尼的临床应用提供循证医学证据,需要设计严密、实施科学的大样本研究进一步证实.     

欧盟批准纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗用于晚期肾细胞癌一线治疗

<正>2019年1月15日,欧盟批准百时美施贵宝(BMS)公司纳武利尤单抗(nivolumab)联合低剂量伊匹单抗(ipilimumab)用于中或低风险未经治疗的晚期肾细胞癌(RCC)患者的一线治疗。纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗治疗晚期肾细胞癌在欧盟的获批,依据于Ⅲ期临床CheckMate-214试验结果,该研究评估了纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗方案对比舒尼替尼用于初治晚期或转移性肾细胞癌患者的情况。中期分析结果显示,与舒尼替尼相比,纳武利尤单抗联合伊匹单抗可显著提高患者的总生存期,将患者的死亡风险降低37%(HR=0. 63; 99. 8%CI,0. 44～0. 89; P <0. 0001)。同时免疫联合疗法客观缓解率为41. 6%,高于舒尼替尼的     

PD-1抑制剂治疗晚期黑色素瘤疗效的Meta分析

目的:本文旨在系统评价PD-1抑制剂对比化疗及CTLA-4抑制剂治疗晚期黑色素瘤（advanced melanoma）的有效性和安全性,采用Meta分析方法。方法:计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、Pubmed、Embase、CNKI、CBM、万方数据库、维普数据库,作者独立提取资料,并反复核对,运用Cochrane量表评价纳入文献的方法学质量,同时采用RevMan5.3软件进行Meta分析。结果:本文共纳入8个随机对照试验,包括5 533例病例。Meta分析结果显示:PD-1抑制剂相比较于化疗在无进展生存期［HR=0.54,95%CI（0.48,0.60）,P<0.000 01］、总生存期［HR=0.78,95%CI（0.65,0.93）,P=0.005］、客观缓解率［RR=3.60,95%CI(2.70,4.80),P<0.000 01］高于对照组,任何级别不良反应事件［RR=0.90,95%CI(0.86,0.95),P<0.000 1］,3,4,5级不良反应事件［RR=0.50,95%CI(0.42,0.60),P<0.000 01］低于对照组。PD-1抑制剂相比较于CTLA-4抑制剂在无进展生存期［HR=0.59,95%CI(0.52,0.66),P<0.000 01］、总生存期［HR=0.67,95%CI(0.58,0.76),P<0.000 01］、客观缓解率［RR=2.49,95%CI(2.15,2.88),P<0.000 01］高于对照组,任何级别不良反应事件［RR=0.99,95%CI(0.91,1.07),P=0.80］,3,4,5级不良反应事件［RR=0.63,95%CI(0.42,0.96),P=0.03］低于对照组。结论:PD-1抑制剂方案治疗晚期黑色素瘤患者的疗效高于化疗及CTLA-4抑制剂,且安全性优于后者。     

辅助化疗联合拉帕替尼治疗HER-2阳性晚期或转移性乳腺癌的Meta分析

目的:应用Meta分析的方法系统评价联合拉帕替尼的辅助化疗治疗HER-2阳性晚期或转移性乳腺癌疗效的有效性和安全性.方法:计算机检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane(2010年第2期)图书馆和CBM、CNKI、VIP、万方等数据库.收集HER-2阳性晚期或转移性乳腺癌患者联合拉帕替尼辅助化疗的随机和半随机对照试验,采用Stata 10.0软件对资料进行Meta分析.结果:共纳入4个研究,1028例患者.Meta分析结果显示,拉帕替尼联合辅助化疗与单纯辅助化疗相比,乳腺癌患者肿瘤的至疾病进展时间(TTP)显著性提高(HR=0.54,95%CI:0.44～0.66,P<0.001);肿瘤的无进展生存期(PFS)明显延长(HR=0.51,95%CI:0.34～0.76,P=0.001);总有效率(ORR)显著高于单纯化疗组(RR=1.69,95%CI:1.33～2.14,P<0.001);临床获益率(CBR)与单纯化疗组比较也较高(RR=1.63,95%CI:1.34～1.99,P<0.001).拉帕替尼联合辅助化疗与单纯辅助化疗组在腹泻(RR=2.07,95%CI:1.42～3.02,P<0.001)和皮疹(RR=2.31,95%CI:1.64～3.25,P=0.007)发生率差异有统计学意义.结论:与单纯辅助化疗相比较,联合拉帕替尼辅助化疗可以显著提高至TTP、PFS、ORR和CBR,同时也会显著的提高腹泻和皮疹的发生率.     

PD-(L)1 inhibitors vs. chemotherapy vs. their combination in front-line treatment for NSCLC: An indirect comparison

We comprehensively compared the therapeutic effects and safety of PD-1/L1 antibodies (I), chemotherapy (C) or their combination (I + C) as first-line treatments for advanced NSCLC. Online databases were searched to identify RCTs. Survival outcomes and safety events were pooled by indirect treatment comparison. Main subgroup analyses were conducted according to PD-L1 expression. A total of 11 RCTs involving 6,731 patients were included. Overall, PD-1/L1 inhibitors showed no difference to chemotherapy in PFS (HR 0.90, 0.65–1.24) and OS (HR 0.84, 0.64–1.09), while I + C was superior to chemotherapy both in PFS (HR 0.64, 0.58–0.71) and OS (HR 0.74, 0.62–0.89). I + C also showed advantages over PD-1/L1 in PFS (HR 0.71, 0.51–0.99) but not OS (HR 0.88, 0.64–1.22). In the PD-L1 < 1% subgroup, I + C was beneficial both in OS (HR 0.78, 0.67–0.90) and PFS (HR 0.72, 0.65–0.80) than chemotherapy. In PD-L1 ≥ 50% population, PD-1/L1 had longer OS than chemotherapy (HR 0.71, 0.60–0.84); I + C also had longer OS (HR 0.61, 0.49–0.77) and PFS (HR 0.41,0.34–0.49) than chemotherapy. In indirect analysis (PD-L1 ≥ 50%), I + C was superior to PD-1/L1 in terms of PFS (HR 0.54, 0.35–0.82), but not OS (HR 0.86, 0.65–1.14). Both treatment-related and immune-mediated adverse events occurred most frequently in the combination therapy group. We suggest that a combination regimen is preferable as first-line treatment for NSCLC patients with different PD-L1 expression, in the meanwhile, in cautious of side effects.     

PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的Meta分析

 目的 系统评价PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比化疗一线治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效及安全性。方法 通过Web of science等国内外数据库，ASCO会议摘要及杂志筛选文献，进行Meta分析。结果 纳入7项RCT研究，4 101例患者，荟萃分析显示抑制剂联合化疗对比化疗可显著延长患者的PFS（HR=0.59, 95%CI: 0.50~0.70, P<0.00001）、OS（HR=0.65, 95%CI: 0.46~0.92, P=0.02）及ORR（RR=1.72, 95%CI: 1.13~2.62, P=0.01）。亚组分析显示，抑制剂联合化疗可显著延长PFS及OS，且PD-L1表达程度越高，疗效获益越显著。而单药抑制剂对比化疗在延长晚期NSCLC患者的PFS（HR=0.87, 95%CI: 0.57~1.31, P=0.50）、OS（HR=0.82, 95%CI: 0.65~1.03, P=0.09）及提高ORR（RR=1.12, 95%CI: 0.55~2.28, P=0.76）方面两组差异无统计学意义。与化疗相比，单药抑制剂一线治疗PD-L1高表达的晚期NSCLC患者可显著延长OS，但在延长PFS方面未见明显优势。与化疗组相比，抑制剂联合化疗组3~4级不良反应发生率无明显改善（HR=1.09，95%CI: 0.99~1.20, P=0.09），而单药PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂组3~4级不良反应发生率低（RR=0.43, 95%CI: 0.36~0.52, P<0.00001）。 结论 PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂联合化疗一线治疗晚期NSCLC患者疗效优于化疗方案；PD-L1高表达者单药PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂可作为一线治疗的优先选择，且具有良好的安全性。     

化疗联合PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗三阴性乳腺癌有效性和安全性的Meta分析

目的:利用循证医学手段,通过Meta分析评估化疗联合PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂与单纯化疗治疗三阴性乳腺癌的安全性和有效性,从而为临床诊疗提供指导意见。方法:检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、知网、万方、维普和CBM数据库从建库到2021年08月以来有关化疗联合PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂治疗三阴性乳腺癌的文献。由两位研究者独立完成筛选文献、提取资料以及评估偏倚风险后,采用RevMan 5.3和STATA 15.1软件进行统计分析。结果:本次研究共纳入8篇文献。汇总结果表明联合治疗组患者的总生存期（overall survival,OS）和无进展生存期（progression-free survival,PFS）明显长于仅接受化疗的患者（HR=0.85,95%CI:0.75~0.96;HR=0.84,95%CI:0.73~0.97）。结果还表明联合治疗组患者的(complete remission rate,CRR)也显著高于仅接受化疗治疗的患者（RR=1.44,95%CI:1.10~1.89）。此外,联合治疗组的不良反应发生率高于单纯化疗组（RR=1.08,95%CI:1.03~1.14）。亚组分析的结果显示接受Atezolizumab联合化疗的患者的 OS 明显长于单独接受化疗的患者（HR=0.85,95%CI:0.75~0.96）,接受Atezolizumab或Pembrolizumab与化疗的联合治疗显著延长了患者的PFS（HR=0.80,95%CI:0.73~0.89;HR=0.79,95%CI:0.67~0.92）,然而接受Durvalumab联合化疗的患者OS和PFS较单纯化疗并无显著差异。结论:化疗联合 PD-1/PD-L1 抑制剂治疗三阴性乳腺癌比单独化疗更有效,但联合治疗有着更高的不良反应发生率。此外,Durvalumab与化疗药的联合使用并不能增加患者的OS和PFS。     

Pembrolizumab in advanced renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis providing level 1a evidence

The recent introduction of immunotherapy in the first line setting of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC) has dramatically improved patients’ prognosis. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to provide level 1a evidence supporting the use of pembrolizumab plus tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) as first-line treatment for advanced RCC. All published randomized prospective trials including patients with advanced RCC treated with pembrolizumab in combination with TKIs vs Sunitinib were included in this meta-analysis. An algorithm was used to reconstruct survival data from the published Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and duration of response (DoR) from the included trials. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for comparison among the different regimens was calculated. Main outcomes were differences in RMST for OS, PFS and DoR for pembrolizumab plus TKIs vs sunitinib arm. Reconstructed survival data from 1,573 patients were retrieved from 2 trials (KEYNOTE-581 and KEYNOTE-426) comparing pembrolizumab plus TKI (lenvatinib or axitinib, respectively) to sunitinib. Patients who received pembrolizumab-lenvatinib or pembrolizumab-axinitinib had better OS (24-month ΔRMST of 1.79 months [95% CI: 0.12-2.50; P < 0.001]), PFS (24-month ΔRMST of 3.83 months [95% CI: 2.93-4.74; P < 0.001]) and DoR (24-month ΔRMST of 2.32 months [95% CI: 0.97-3.67; P < 0.001]) relative to sunitinib. Pembrolizumab-lenvatinib combination gave a marginal benefit in terms of OS, PFS and DoR relative to pembrolizumab-axitinib group. By relying on individual survival data, we provided a level-1a evidence supporting the use of pembrolizumab plus TKI for first-line aRCC treatment.     

Classification of Tumor Immune Microenvironment According to Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression and Immune Infiltration Predicts Response to Immunotherapy Plus Chemotherapy in Advanced Patients With NSCLC

IntroductionAccording to mechanisms of adaptive immune resistance, tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) is classified into four types: (1) programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)–negative and tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL)–negative (type I); (2) PD-L1–positive and TIL-positive (type II); (3) PD-L1–negative and TIL-positive (type III); and (4) PD-L1–positive and TIL-negative (type IV). However, the relationship between the TIME classification model and immunotherapy efficacy has not been validated by any large-scale randomized controlled clinical trial among patients with advanced NSCLC.MethodsOn the basis of RNA-sequencing and immunohistochemistry data from the ORIENT-11 study, we optimized the TIME classification model and evaluated its predictive value for the efficacy of immunotherapy plus chemotherapy.ResultsPD-L1 mRNA expression and immune score calculated by the ESTIMATE method were the strongest predictors for the efficacy of immunotherapy plus chemotherapy. Therefore, they were determined as the optimized definition of the TIME classification system. When compared between combination therapy and chemotherapy alone, only the type II subpopulation with high immune score and high PD-L1 mRNA expression was significantly associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.06–0.25, p < 0.001) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 0.27, 95% confidence interval: 0.13–0.55, p < 0.001). In the combination group, the type II subpopulation had a much longer survival time, not even reaching the median PFS or overall survival, but the other three subpopulations were susceptible to having similar PFS. In the chemotherapy group, there was no marked association between survival outcomes and TIME subtypes.ConclusionsOnly patients with both high PD-L1 expression and high immune infiltration could benefit from chemotherapy plus immunotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. For patients lacking either PD-L1 expression or immune infiltration, chemotherapy alone might be a better treatment option to avoid unnecessary toxicities and financial burdens.     

KEYNOTE-033: Randomized phase 3 study of pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated,PD-L1-positive,advanced NSCLC

KEYNOTE-033 (NCT02864394) was a multicountry, open-label, phase 3 study that compared pembrolizumab vs docetaxel in previously treated, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive, advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with most patients enrolled in mainland China. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg or docetaxel 75 mg/m² every 3 weeks. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival and were evaluated sequentially using stratified log-rank tests, first in patients with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50% and then in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1% (significance threshold: P < .025, one-sided). A total of 425 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab (N = 213) or docetaxel (N = 212) between 8 September 2016 and 17 October 2018. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥50% (n = 227), median OS was 12.3 months with pembrolizumab and 10.9 months with docetaxel; the hazard ratio (HR) was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61-1.14; P = .1276). Because the significance threshold was not met, sequential testing of OS and PFS was ceased. In patients with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, the HR for OS for pembrolizumab vs docetaxel was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.60-0.95). In patients from mainland China (n = 311) with a PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, HR for OS was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.51-0.89). Incidence of grade 3 to 5 treatment-related AEs was 11.3% with pembrolizumab vs 47.5% with docetaxel. In summary, pembrolizumab improved OS vs docetaxel in previously treated, PD-L1-positive NSCLC without unexpected safety signals; although the statistical significance threshold was not reached, the numerical improvement is consistent with that previously observed for pembrolizumab in previously treated, advanced NSCLC.     

Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression combined with CD8 tumor infiltrating lymphocytes density in non-small cell lung cancer patients

Cancer immunotherapy targeting programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) pathway has shown promising results in treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. T cells play a major role in tumor-associated immune response. This study aimed to investigate PD-L1 expression alone and combined with CD8 tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) density in relation to clinicopathologic parameters and survival in NSCLC patients. Immunohistochemical analysis was used to evaluate PD-L1 expression and CD8 TILs density in 55 NSCLC patients. PD-L1 immunopositivity was detected in 36 (65.5%) of NSCLC cases. PD-L1 expression was significantly related to high tumor grade (p value?=?0.038) and low CD8 TILs density (p value?=?0.004), whereas no significant relations were detected between PD-L1 expression and tumor stage (p value?=?0.121), overall survival (OS) (p value?=?0.428) and progression-free survival (PFS) (p value?=?0.439). Among PD-L1/CD8 TILs density groups, PD-L1⁺/CD8^Low group was significantly associated with high tumor grade compared to PD-L1^?/CD8^high group (pairwise p?=?0.016). PD-L1⁺/CD8^Low group was significantly related to advanced tumor stage compared to PD-L1⁺/CD8^high and PD-L1^?/CD8^Low groups (pairwise p?=?0.001 and 0.013 respectively). PD-L1^?/CD8^high group exhibited the best OS and PFS whereas PD-L1⁺/CD8^low group had the poorest OS and PFS (p value?=?0.032 and 0.001 respectively). Assessment of PD-L1 combined with CD8 TILs density, instead of PD-L1 alone, suggested important prognostic relevance in NSCLC patients.     

二甲双胍辅助治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效的Meta分析

目的:系统评价二甲双胍联合标准一线方案治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效,为非小细胞肺癌的临床合理用药提供循证参考。方法:计算机检索Pubmed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、中国生物医学文献、中国知网、万方、维普等数据库,收集关于二甲双胍对晚期非小细胞肺癌患者临床疗效影响的文献,采用Review Manager 5.3软件对结局指标总生存期（overall survival,OS）、无进展生存期（progression free survival,PFS）和客观缓解率（objective response rate,ORR）进行统计分析。结果:共纳入6篇随机对照研究和8篇队列研究,包含5 030例患者。Meta分析结果显示,二甲双胍辅助治疗组的OS（HR=0.77,95％CI:0.69～0.86,P＜0.000 1）、PFS（HR=0.83,95％CI:0.72～0.96,P=0.01）以及ORR（RR=1.19,95％CI:1.04～1.35,P=0.008）均高于对照组。结论:二甲双胍对晚期非小细胞肺癌患者预后有积极作用,可提高患者的ORR,延长患者的PFS和OS时间。     

Different interventional time of hepatic arterial infusion with PD-1 inhibitor for advanced biliary tract cancer: a multicenter retrospective study

This study investigated the efficacy and safety of hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC) combined with PD-1 immunotherapy for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) and evaluated the optimal timing of HAIC. A total of 36 unresectable BTC patients treated with HAIC and PD-1 inhibitors between September 2019 and July 2021 were included in this study. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), tumor response, and adverse events (AEs) were investigated. Overall, 52.8% patients with advanced BTC were in stage IV, 23 patients who progressed after receiving PD-1 inhibitor had undergone HAIC, and 23 patients have received 2 or more lines of therapy. The median OS was 8.8 months (range: 4.0-24.0 months), and the median PFS was 3.7 months. The objective response rate and disease control rate were 11.5% and 76.9%, respectively. In the subgroup analysis, patients who treated with HAIC early without progression after immunotherapy were associated with a trend toward better OS (median 13.0 vs. 7.6 months; P = 0.004) and PFS (median 7.9 vs. 3.6 months; P = 0.09) compared to with HAIC with progression after PD-1 treatment. No treatment-related deaths occurred. A total of 44.4% of the patients experienced grade 3 or 4 AEs. We conclude that the combination of HAIC and PD-1 inhibitors is safe and effective. Early HAIC combined with immunotherapy can effectively prolong the overall survival of patients with advanced BTC.