Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy is effective as first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with mutated EGFR: A meta-analysis from six phase III randomized controlled trials

Gefiinib and erlotinib are two similar small molecules of selective and reversible epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), which have been approved for second-line or third-line indication in previously treated advanced Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The results of comparing the EGFR-TKI with standard platinum-based doublet chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC patients with activated EGFR mutation were still controversial. A meta-analysis was performed to derive a more precise estimation of these regimens. Finally, six eligible trials involved 1,021 patients were identified. The patients receiving EGFR-TKI as front-line therapy had a significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than patients treated with chemotherapy [median PFS was 9.5 versus 5.9 months; hazard ratio (HR)=0.37; 95% confidence intervals (CI)=0.27-0.52; p<0.001]. The overall response rate (ORR) of EGFR-TKI was 66.60%, whereas the ORR of chemotherapy regimen was 30.62%, which was also a statistically significant favor for EGFR-TKI [relative risk (RR)=5.68; 95% CI=3.17-10.18; p<0.001]. The overall survival (OS) was numerically longer in the patients received EGFR-TKI than patients treated by chemotherapy, although the difference did not reach a statistical significance (median OS was 30.5 vs. 23.6 months; HR=0.94; 95% CI=0.77-1.15; p=0.57). Comparing with first-line chemotherapy, treatment of EGFR-TKI achieved a statistical significantly longer PFS, higher ORR and numerically longer OS in the advanced NSCLC patients harboring activated EGFR mutations, thus, it should be the first choice in the previously untreated NSCLC patients with activated EGFR mutation.     

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。     

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of EFGR TyrosineKinase Inhibitor Monotherapy with Standard Second-line Chemotherapy in Previously Treated Advanced Non-small-cell Lung Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinaseinhibitormonotherapy (EFGR-TKIs: gefitinib or erlotinib) with standard second-line chemotherapy (single agentdocetaxel or pemetrexed) in previously treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Wesystematically searched for randomized clinical trials that compared EGFR-TKI monotherapy with standardsecond-line chemotherapy in previously treated advanced NSCLC. The end points were overall survival (OS),progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), 1-year survival rate (1-year SR) and grade 3 or 4toxicities. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR), with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals(CI) were calculated employing fixed- or random-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the includedtrials. Results: Eight randomized controlled trials (totally 3218 patients) were eligible. Our meta-analysis resultsshowed that EGFR-TKIs were comparable to standard second-line chemotherapy for advanced NSCLC interms of overall survival (HR 1.00, 95%CI 0.92-1.10; p=0.943), progression-free survival (HR 0.90, 95%CI0.75-1.08, P=0.258) and 1-year-survival rate (RR 0.97, 95%CI 0.87-1.08, P=0.619), and the overall responserate was higher in patients who receiving EGFR-TKIs(RR 1.50, 95%CI 1.22-1.83, P=0.000). Sub-group analysisdemonstrated that EGFR-TKI monotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.73, 95%CI: 0.55-0.97, p=0.03)and ORR (RR 1.96, 95%CI: 1.46-2.63, p=0.000) in East Asian patients, but it did not translate into increase in OSand 1-year SR. Furthermore, there were fewer incidences of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, febrile neutropenia andneutrotoxicity in EGFR-TKI monotherapy group, excluding grade 3 or 4 rash. Conclusion: Both interventions hadcomparable efficacy as second-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC, and EGFR-TKI monotherapywas associated with less toxicity and better tolerability. Moreover, our data also demonstrated that EGFRTKImonotherapytended to be more effective in East Asian patients in terms of PFS and ORR compared withstandard second-line chemotherapy. These results should help inform decisions about patient management anddesign of future trials.     

The efficacy of combination of EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy versus EGFR TKIs monotherapy for first-line treatment of NSCLC with EGFR mutation: A Meta-analysis北大核心CSCD

Objective: To investigate the clinical value of epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation. Methods: Retrieval of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and other databases from the start of the database building to 2017 was conducted to search randomized controlled trial of EGFR-TKI combined with chemotherapy vs EGFR-TKI single drug first-line treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC. Meta-analysis was performed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS), the secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and safety. Results: A total of 4 articles were included in this analysis, with a total of 353 patients. Compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy, EGFR-TKI in combination with chemotherapy significantly prolonged PFS [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.84, P= 0.001], as well as in subgroups of EGFR 19 deletion, L858R point mutation, age 5=65 years, performance status (PS) score was 1, female and never smoker (all P < 0.05). However, the combination group did not show significant differences in ORR and DCR compared with EGFR-TKI monotherapy group [relative risk (RR) = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.94-1.22, P = 0.282; RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.96-1.08; P = 0.531]. The combined regimen caused more fatigue, nausea and leukopenia (RR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.32-5.25, P = 0.006; RR = 6.87, 95% CI: 3.06-15.45, P < 0.001; RR = 10.02, 95% CI: 3.18-31.55, P < 0.001). There were no differences in adverse reactions more than grade 3 between two groups (all P > 0.05). Conclusion: The combination of EGFR-TKI and chemotherapy can prolong the PFS compared with EGFR-TKI alone for the first-line treatment of NSCLC with EGFR mutation, and the adverse reactions were tolerable. Copyright © 2018 by TUMOR. All rights reserved.     

Efficacy of First-line Chemotherapy Affects the Second-Line Setting Response in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background: Chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for the majority of patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver mutations and many receive therapies beyond first-line. Secondline chemotherapy has been disappointing both in terms of response rate and survival and we know relatively little about the prognostic factors. Materials and Methods: One thousand and eight patients with advanced NSCLC who received second-line chemotherapy after progression were reviewed in Shanghai PulmonaryHospital, China, from September 2005 to July 2010. We analyzed the effects of potential prognostic factors on the outcomes of second-line chemotherapy (overall response rate, ORR; progression free survival, PFS; overall survival, OS). Results: The response and progression free survival of first-line chemotherapy affects the ORR, PFS and OS of second-line chemotherapy (ORR: CR/PR 15.4%, SD 10.1%, PD2.3%, p<0.001; PFS: CR/PR 3.80 months, SD 2.77 months, PD 2.03 months, p<0.001; OS: CR/PR 11.60 months, SD 10.33 months, PD 6.57 months, p=0.578, p<0.001, p<0.001, respectively). On multivariate analysis, better response to first-line therapy (CR/PR: HR=0.751, p=0.002; SD: HR=0.781, p=0.021) and progression within 3-6 months (HR=0.626, p<0.001), together with adenocarcinoma (HR=0.815, p=0.017), without liver metastasis (HR=0.541, p=0.001), never-smoker(HR=0.772, p=0.001), and ECOG PS 0-1 (HR=0.745, p=0.021) were predictors for good OS following secondline chemotherapy. Conclusions: Patients who responded to first-line chemotherapy had a better outcome after second-line therapy for advanced NSCLC, and the efficacy of first-line chemotherapy, period of progression, histology, liver metastasis, smoking status and ECOG PS were independent prognostic factors for OS.     

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。     

Intercalated Chemotherapy and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors for Patients With Advanced Non–Small-cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of concurrent epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) plus chemotherapy for unselected patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) produced negative results. Intercalated administration could avoid the reduction of chemotherapy activity due to G₁ cell-cycle arrest from EGFR-TKIs. A PubMed search was performed in December 2015 and updated in February 2016. The references from the selected studies were also checked to identify additional eligible trials. Furthermore, the proceedings of the main international meetings were searched from 2010 onward. We included RCTs comparing chemotherapy intercalated with an EGFR-TKI versus chemotherapy alone for patients with advanced NSCLC. Ten RCTs were eligible (6 with erlotinib, 4 with gefitinib): 39% of patients had a known EGFR mutational status, 43% of whom EGFR mutation positive. The intercalated combination was associated with a significant improvement in overall survival (OS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.95; P = .01), progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.53-0.68; P < .00001), and objective response rate (ORR; odds ratio [OR], 2.70; 95% CI, 2.08-3.49; P < .00001). Considering only first-line trials, similar differences were found in OS (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-1.00; P = .05), PFS (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.55-0.73; P < .00001), and ORR (OR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.65-2.95; P < .00001). In EGFR mutation-positive patients, the addition of an intercalated EGFR-TKI produced a significant benefit in PFS (129 patients; HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16-0.37; P < .00001) and ORR (168 patients; OR, 11.59; 95% CI, 5.54-24.25; P < .00001). In patients with advanced NSCLC, chemotherapy plus intercalated EGFR-TKIs was superior to chemotherapy alone, although a definitive interpretation was jeopardized by the variable proportion of patients with EGFR mutation-positive tumors included.     

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。     

EGFR-TKI一线治疗不同EGFR突变状态晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效分析

目的：分析表皮生长因子受体酪氨酸酶抑制剂（EGFR-TKI）一线治疗不同EGFR突变状态（外显子19缺失、21突变）晚期非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）的疗效。方法收集徐州市肿瘤医院经组织病理学证实的EGFR突变阳性晚期NSCLC患者72例,分析两种不同EGFR突变状态与一线EGFR-TKI治疗的客观缓解率（ORR）、疾病控制率（DCR）、无进展生存期（PFS）以及总生存期（OS）之间的关系。结果72例患者均进行EGFR基因检测,其中37例为EGFR19外显子缺失,35例为EGFR21外显子突变。72例患者均可评价疗效,其中EGFR19外显子缺失的患者ORR 75．7％,DCR 89．2％;EGFR21外显子突变的患者ORR 51．4％,DCR 68．6％,差异均有统计学意义（χ2＝4．583,P＝0．032;χ2＝4．636,P＝0．031）。EGFR19外显子缺失和21外显子突变的患者校正后的中位PFS分别为13．2个月、10．8个月,差异有统计学意义（χ2＝4．700,P＝0．030）;中位OS分别为30．2个月、25．6个月,差异有统计学意义（χ2＝4．686,P＝0．030）。两组间不良反应无明显差别,皮疹最为常见,两组差异无统计学意义（48．7％∶48．6％,χ2＝0．000,P＝0．995）。结论 EGFR突变状态是晚期NSCLC患者一线EGFR-TKI治疗疗效和OS的预测因素,EGFR19外显子缺失患者的疗效优于EGFR21外显子突变患者。     

培美曲塞维持治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌临床疗效的Meta分析

目的 本研究对培美曲塞维持治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床疗效进行Meta分析。方法 计算机检索Cochrane、Pubmed、Web of science、Embase、临床试验等数据库,同时追溯参考文献。收集培美曲塞维持治疗和最佳支持治疗(Best supportive care,BSC)对非小细胞肺癌相关指标进行随机对照试验(Randomized controlled trial,RCT),根据Cochrane系统评价手册5.3质量评价标准评价,采用Stata 12.0软件和Revman5.3进行Meta分析及GRADEpro软件进行证据的评级。结果 共纳入3篇随机对照试验,共1257名研究对象,Meta分析结果显示,与BSC相比培美曲塞可以延长无进展生存期(Pogression free survival,PFS)(HR=0.55,95%CI:0.48~0.64),以及总生存期(Overall survival,OS)(HR=0.76,95%CI:0.65~0.88),但客观缓解率(Objective response rate,ORR)无统计学意义(RR=0.97,95%CI:0.86~1.10)。结论 与BSC相比,培美曲塞组可明显延长非小细胞肺癌的无进展生存期、总生存期,但在客观缓解率上影响并不显著。     

PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂与化疗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌疗效的Meta分析

目的:本文旨在系统评价PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂对比化疗治疗非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的有效性和安全性,采用Meta分析方法.方法:计算机检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、EM-Base、CNKI、万方数据库、VIP数据库,两名评价者独立评价纳入研究的质量、提取资料并交叉核对,运用Co-chrane量表评价纳入文献的方法学质量同质研究采用RevMan 5.3软件进行Meta分析.结果:共纳入5个随机对照试验,包括3042例病例.Meta分析结果显示:PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂相比较于对照组在总有效率[OR=1.58,95%CI(1.27,1.97),P<0.0001]、总生存期[HR=0.68,95%CI(0.62,0.75),P<0.00001]、无进展生存期[HR=0.79,95%CI(0.72,0.86),P<0.00001]高于对照组.在亚组分析中,PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂相比较于对照组在EGFR突变型的肺癌[HR=0.91,95%CI(0.76,1.11),P=0.35]中无明显差异,在EGFR野生型的肺癌[HR=0.67,95%CI(0.60,0.76),P<0.00001]中有差异.任何级别不良反应事件[OR=0.32,95%CI(0.27,0.39),P<0.00001]和3、4、5级不良反应事件[OR=0.18,95%CI(0.11,0.30),P<0.00001]低于对照组.结论:PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂方案治疗晚期NSCLC患者的疗效高于以多西他赛为主的化疗方案,且安全性优于后者.     

培美曲塞单药或联合吉非替尼治疗EGFR-TKI耐药后晚期非小细胞肺癌临床观察

背景与目的:生长因子受体-酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor,EGFR-TKI)治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)获得性耐药后尚无标准的治疗方案,亟待探寻有效的后续治疗方法.为临床应用提供指导,该研究旨在比较后续治疗采用培美曲塞单药或联合吉非替尼治疗EGFR-TKI获得性耐药的晚期NSCLC的临床疗效及安全性.方法:入组既往接受过EGFR-TKI治疗后进展的晚期NSCLC患者62例.其中32接受培美曲塞联合吉非替尼治疗,设为联合组;30例单用培美曲塞治疗,设为化疗组.评价临床疗效及不良反应.结果:联合组客观有效率(objective response rate,ORR)为46.9%,高于化疗组的20%,差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.933,P<0.05);两组疾病控制率(disease control rate,DCR)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);联合组的中位无病生存期(progression-free survival,PFS)为8.0个月,化疗组中位PFS为6.3个月,差异有统计学意义(χ2=8.063,P<0.05),两组总生存期(overall survival,OS)差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).联合组中性粒细胞减少、皮疹的发生率高于化疗组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),Ⅲ~Ⅳ不良反应两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论:晚期NSCLC患者EGFR-TKI获得性耐药后,采用培美曲塞联合吉非替尼较单用培美曲塞显示出更优势临床有效率和中位PFS,不良反应可耐受,值得临床推广运用.     

VEGF抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂一线治疗EGFR突变晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效和安全性

目的:探讨血管内皮生长因子(vascular endothelial growth factor,VEGF)抑制剂联合酪氨酸激酶抑制剂(tyrosine kinase inhibitors,TKI)一线治疗表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)突变晚期非小细胞肺癌...     

Combined treatment for non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer patients with brain metastases with whole brain radiotherapy and temozolomide: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Brain metastasis is the leading cause of death among advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and breast cancer patients. The standard treatment for brain metastases is radiotherapy. The combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy has been tested. However, the management of brain metastases has yet to be successful. Here, we aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) alone or in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) in NSCLC and breast cancer patients with brain metastases. A systematic review of PubMed, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and WANFANG (WANGFANG data) involving 870 patients were conducted. Fourteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were independently identified by two reviewers. The primary outcome measures were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and toxicity. The ORR was better with combination therapy of WBRT and TMZ than with WBRT alone (RR?=?1.34, p?<?0.00001) and subgroup analysis showed a significantly superior ORR in NSCLC patients (RR?=?1.38, p?<?0.00001), but not in breast cancer patients (RR?=?1.03, p?=?0.86). OS and PFS did not significantly differ between combination therapy and WBRT alone. A higher rate of toxicity was observed in combination therapy than in WBRT alone (RR?=?1.83, p?=?0.0006). No advantages of concurrent WBRT and TMZ were observed in breast cancer patients with brain metastases. Combination therapy was associated with improved ORR in NSCLC patients, especially in Chinese patients. As a “surrogate endpoint” for OS, ORR may allow a conclusion to be made about the management of NSCLC with brain metastases with the combination of WBRT and TMZ. However, it needs to be validated to show that improved ORR predicts the treatment effects on the clinical benefit. The ORR may be valid for a particular indication such as status of MGMT promoter methylation.     

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。     

免疫检查点抑制剂联合治疗实体瘤的疗效和安全性的Meta分析

目的:旨在评价免疫检查点抑制剂（immune checkpoint inhibitor,ICI）联合治疗在实体瘤患者中的安全性和有效性,为临床实践提供参考依据。方法:计算机检索 PubMed,EMBASE,Cochrane Library数据库和ClinicalTrials.gov网站符合条件的随机对照试验（randomized controlled trials,RCTs）。根据PICOS（患者类型,干预,对照,结果和研究设计）原则确定纳入标准。结果:包含6 616名患者的17项随机对照试验纳入此项Meta分析。结果显示,ICI联合治疗可显著改善实体瘤患者的总体反应率（overall response rate,ORR）［RR=1.56（95％CI 1.24,1.96）,P=0.000 1］,延长无进展生存期（progression free survival,PFS）［HR=0.69（95％CI 0.59,0.81）,P<0.000 01］和总生存期（overall survival,OS）［HR=0.76（95％CI 0.67,0.87）,P<0.000 1］。亚组分析结果表明,接受ICI联合治疗的黑色素瘤患者的OS［HR=0.64（95％CI 0.58,0.72）,P<0.000 01］显著延长,但小细胞肺癌（small cell lung cancer,SCLC）［HR=0.94（95％CI 0.82,1.08）,P=0.40］和非小细胞肺癌（non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC）［HR=0.92（95％CI 0.79,1.07）,P=0.26］患者OS无显著改善。此外,ICI联合治疗可增加疲劳、皮疹、腹泻和转氨酶升高等不良反应发生风险。结论:本研究结果表明,ICI联合治疗在未来的临床实践和研究设计中极具前景。ICI联合治疗在恶性黑色素瘤患者中有临床应用价值。然而,目前的研究结果暂不支持ICI联合治疗在NSCLC和SCLC患者中大规模临床应用。     

Are VEGFR-TKIs effective or safe for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer?

Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) might be new therapeutic strategies for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Here a total of 12,520 patients from 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were enrolled to evaluate the efficacy and safety of VEGFR-TKIs quantitatively in advanced NSCLC. Compared with non-VEGFR-TKIs, VEGFR-TKIs regimen significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) [hazard ratio (HR): 0.839, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.805-0.874, P < 0.001], objective response rates (ORR) [relative risk (RR): 1.374, 95% CI: 1.193-1.583, P < 0.001] and disease control rates (DCR) (RR: 1.113, 95% CI: 1.027-1.206, P = 0.009), but not overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.960, 95% CI: 0.921-1.002, P = 0.060) for NSCLC patients. The RR of all-grade neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, hemorrhage, fatigue, anorexia, stomatitis, diarrhea, rash, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) were increased in patients received VEGFR-TKIs. As for high-grade (≥ 3) adverse events (AEs), VEGFR-TKIs were associated with higher RR of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, hypertension, fatigue, stomatitis, diarrhea, rash and HFSR. This study demonstrates VEGFR-TKIs improve PFS, ORR and DCR, but not OS in advanced NSCLC patients. VEGFR-TKIs induce more frequent and serious AEs compared with control therapies.     

Efficacy of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with wild-type EGFR: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials

Background

EGFR mutation status is closely related to the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). EGFR-TKIs have become the standard first-line treatment for advanced EGFR-mutation NSCLC, while for EGFR wild-type tumors, the preferred first-line treatment is chemotherapy. However, the efficacy of EGFR-TKIs as second-line treatment in EGFR wild-type NSCLC remains controversial. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of EGFR-TKI as second-line treatment in EGFR wild-type NSCLC.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials that compared EGFR-TKIs with chemotherapy in previously treated advanced NSCLC with wild-type EGFR were included. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of EGFR-TKIs compared with standard chemotherapy. The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR).

Results

Six randomized controlled trials with a total of 990 patients with wild-type EGFR were included: 499 in the EGFR-TKIs group and 491 in the chemotherapy group. The results indicated that in the second-line treatment of EGFR wild-type advanced NSCLC, PFS was significantly inferior in the EGFR-TKIs group versus the chemotherapy group (HR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.20–1.56, P < 0.00001). However, this significant difference did not translate into OS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.87–1.20, P = 0.81). ORR tended to favor chemotherapy but there was no significant difference compared with EGFR-TKI (RR = 1.77, 95% CI = 0.90–3.50, P = 0.10).

Conclusions

Chemotherapy improves PFS significantly but not OS, compared with EGFR-TKIs as a second-line treatment in advanced NSCLC with wild-type EGFR. Whether EGFR-TKIs should be used in EGFR wild-type patients should be considered carefully.     

恩度静脉持续泵入与滴注联合含铂双药方案化疗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的疗效与安全性比较

目的 探讨恩度静脉持续泵入与滴注联合含铂双药方案一线化疗治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌(Non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的临床疗效与安全性.方法 选取武汉大学人民医院2011年12月—2020年12月收治的100例病理分型为腺癌的晚期NSCLC患者作为研究对象,观察组为恩度静脉持续泵入(CIV)...     

Efficacy and safety of capecitabine-based first-line chemotherapy in advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine-based therapy as first-line chemotherapy in advanced breast cancer. Randomised controlled trials of capecitabine monotherapy or combined treatment were included in the meta-analysis. PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library database and important meeting summaries were searched systematically. Outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and grades 3–4 drug-related adverse events.Nine trials with 1798 patients were included. The results indicated a significant improvement with capecitabine-based chemotherapy compared with capecitabine-free chemotherapy in ORR (relative risk [RR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03 to 1.26, P = 0.013) and PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87, P < 0.0001). Overall survival favoured capecitabine-based chemotherapy, but this was not significant. There were more incidences of neutropenia and neutropenic fever in the capecitabine-free chemotherapy group and more vomiting, diarrhoea and hand–foot syndrome in the capecitabine-based chemotherapy group. There were no significant differences in nausea, fatigue, cardiotoxicity or mucositis/stomatitis between the two treatment regimens.Capecitabine-based chemotherapy significantly improves ORR and PFS in patients with advanced breast cancer, but has no demonstrable impact on OS. Capecitabine-based regimens are suitable as first-line treatment for patients with advanced breast cancer.