Efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors as second-line treatment for advanced squamous esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis with a focus on PD-L1 expression levels

被引:0
作者
Yang, Fei [1 ]
Dan, Min [1 ]
Shi, Jindan [1 ]
Fan, Ling [1 ]
Zhang, Haoluo [1 ]
Jian, Tiantian [1 ]
Lei, Kelu [1 ]
Wang, Yue [1 ]
Xin, Juan [1 ]
Yu, Zhigang [1 ]
Chen, Wei [2 ]
机构
[1] Yaan Peoples Hosp, Dept Pharm, Yaan, Peoples R China
[2] Emergency Gen Hosp, Dept Pharm, Beijing, Peoples R China
关键词
esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC); immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs); network meta-analysis; efficacy; safety; CELL CARCINOMA; OPEN-LABEL; DOCETAXEL;
D O I
10.3389/fimmu.2024.1510145
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background PD-1 inhibitors have shown promising efficacy in enhancing OS and AEs as second-line therapies for patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). However, there remains no clear consensus on which PD-1 inhibitor provides the best balance between efficacy and safety. To address this key issue in the second-line treatment of ESCC, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) with a focus on OS benefits, particularly in patients with different levels of PD-L1 expression. Methods A systematic search of relevant literature was conducted in Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library, covering publications from the inception of these database to June 2024. The evaluated endpoints included OS, progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), AEs, and Grade >= 3 adverse events (Grade >= 3 AEs). A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed to assess the efficacy and safety of various immunotherapy regimens in patients with advanced ESCC. To ensure transparency, novelty, and reliability, this study was prospectively registered in the systematic review registry (CRD42024540581). Results Five randomized controlled trials (RCTs), encompassing 2,078 patients and six treatment regimens, were included in this study. Among advanced ESCC patients not selected based on PD-L1 expression, Sintilimab demonstrated the greatest OS benefit (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50-0.98). Camrelizumab showed the most favorable improvement in PFS compared to chemotherapy (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.47-0.87) and also achieved the best ORR benefit (OR = 3.72, 95% CI: 1.98-6.99). In terms of safety, Nivolumab (OR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.05-0.19) and Tislelizumab (OR = 0.18, 95% CI: 0.10-0.33) exhibited significant safety advantages over chemotherapy concerning AEs. Moreover, Nivolumab (OR = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.08-0.20) was associated with a markedly lower risk of Grade >= 3 AEs compared to chemotherapy. Subgroup analysis based on PD-L1 expression revealed that Tislelizumab (HR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.76) offered the greatest OS benefit for patients with PD-L1 >= 10%, while Camrelizumab (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.89) was the most likely regimen to provide an OS advantage for patients with PD-L1 < 10%. Conclusion Compared to chemotherapy, PD-1 inhibitors may provide improved survival outcomes for patients with advanced ESCC. Among patients not selected based on PD-L1 expression, Sintilimab is most likely to deliver the best survival benefit. For patients with PD-L1 expression >= 10%, Tislelizumab is expected to offer the greatest efficacy, while Camrelizumab appears to be the most effective for those with PD-L1 < 10%. Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024540581.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 58 条
[1]   Epidemiology of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma [J].
Abnet, Christian C. ;
Arnold, Melina ;
Wei, Wen-Qiang .
GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2018, 154 (02) :360-373
[2]   Tislelizumab versus chemotherapy as second-line treatment for European and North American patients with advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a subgroup analysis of the randomized phase III RATIONALE-302 study [J].
Ajani, J. ;
El Hajbi, F. ;
Cunningham, D. ;
Alsina, M. ;
Thuss-Patience, P. ;
Scagliotti, G. V. ;
Van den Eynde, M. ;
Kim, S-b. ;
Kato, K. ;
Shen, L. ;
Li, L. ;
Ding, N. ;
Shi, J. ;
Barnes, G. ;
Van Cutsem, E. .
ESMO OPEN, 2024, 9 (01)
[3]   Tumor immune microenvironment and immune checkpoint inhibitors in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [J].
Baba, Yoshifumi ;
Nomoto, Daichi ;
Okadome, Kazuo ;
Ishimoto, Takatsugu ;
Iwatsuki, Masaaki ;
Miyamoto, Yuji ;
Yoshida, Naoya ;
Baba, Hideo .
CANCER SCIENCE, 2020, 111 (09) :3132-3141
[4]   Molecular and Biochemical Aspects of the PD-1 Checkpoint Pathway [J].
Boussiotis, Vassiliki A. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2016, 375 (18) :1767-1778
[5]   Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries [J].
Bray, Freddie ;
Laversanne, Mathieu ;
Sung, Hyuna ;
Ferlay, Jacques ;
Siegel, Rebecca L. ;
Soerjomataram, Isabelle ;
Jemal, Ahmedin .
CA-A CANCER JOURNAL FOR CLINICIANS, 2024, 74 (03) :229-263
[6]   Targeted therapies and immunotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer [J].
Cortinovis, D. ;
Abbate, M. ;
Bidoli, P. ;
Capici, S. ;
Canova, S. .
ECANCERMEDICALSCIENCE, 2016, 10
[7]   Advances in diagnosis and management of cancer of the esophagus [J].
Deboever, Nathaniel ;
Jones, Christopher M. ;
Yamashita, Kohei ;
Ajani, Jaffer A. ;
Hofstetter, Wayne L. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2024, 385
[8]   Radiation dose and fraction in immunotherapy: one-size regimen does not fit all settings, so how does one choose? [J].
Demaria, Sandra ;
Guha, Chandan ;
Schoenfeld, Jonathan ;
Morris, Zachary ;
Monjazeb, Arta ;
Sikora, Andrew ;
Crittenden, Marka ;
Shiao, Stephen ;
Khleif, Samir ;
Gupta, Seema ;
Formenti, Silvia Chiara ;
Vikram, Bhadrasain ;
Coleman, C. Norman ;
Ahmed, Mansoor M. .
JOURNAL FOR IMMUNOTHERAPY OF CANCER, 2021, 9 (04)
[9]   Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 2: A Generalized Linear Modeling Framework for Pairwise and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials [J].
Dias, Sofia ;
Sutton, Alex J. ;
Ades, A. E. ;
Welton, Nicky J. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2013, 33 (05) :607-617
[10]  
Dmitriy S., 2024, Cancer Genetics, P286, DOI [10.1016/j.cancergen.2024.06.002, DOI 10.1016/J.CANCERGEN.2024.06.002]