Outcomes and Prognostic Factors of Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Immunotherapy- Versus Chemotherapy-Based Regimens: Systematic Review and Pooled Analyses.
{"title":"Outcomes and Prognostic Factors of Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Immunotherapy- Versus Chemotherapy-Based Regimens: Systematic Review and Pooled Analyses.","authors":"Giuseppe A Colloca, Antonella Venturino","doi":"10.1007/s12029-024-01100-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Immunotherapy-based regimens (IMT) versus cytotoxic chemotherapy (CHT) improved overall survival (OS) of patients with unresectable or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (mESCC), but the role of prognostic variables is unclear. The study aims to explore the interaction of prognostic factors with survival after IMT or CHT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was performed to select trials comparing IMT and CHT regimens in mESCC patients. A meta-analysis of upfront IMT + CHT vs. CHT trials evaluated the overall effect size and heterogeneity between studies. In view of the expected differences between chemotherapy and immunotherapy on the survival curve, to better explore the effect of any prognostic variables on OS, before and after progression, the treatment arms were evaluated as independent cohorts, and ten baseline variables were extracted and assessed by linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen trials were identified. Seven studies compared upfront CHT + IMT vs. CHT documenting longer OS for CHT + IMT (HR 0.69, CI 0.65-0.72), without heterogeneity (Q = 1.43, p value = 0.968) or differences in the most represented subgroups. Twenty-nine study cohorts were selected from the 14 trials. Median OS and PPS, but not PFS, were significantly increased after IMT compared with CHT. The analysis of baseline variables after CHT documented a favorable prognostic effect for advanced age (β = 0.768, p value = 0.016), involvement of 0-1 metastasis sites (β = 0.943, p value = 0.005), and absence of previous radiation therapy (β = - 0.939, p value = 0.006), while none of them influenced prognosis after IMT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The introduction of upfront IMT prolonged mESCC patients OS, mostly improving the outcomes of young patients, with multiple metastasis sites and without previous radiotherapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":" ","pages":"1541-1550"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-024-01100-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Immunotherapy-based regimens (IMT) versus cytotoxic chemotherapy (CHT) improved overall survival (OS) of patients with unresectable or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (mESCC), but the role of prognostic variables is unclear. The study aims to explore the interaction of prognostic factors with survival after IMT or CHT.
Methods: A systematic review was performed to select trials comparing IMT and CHT regimens in mESCC patients. A meta-analysis of upfront IMT + CHT vs. CHT trials evaluated the overall effect size and heterogeneity between studies. In view of the expected differences between chemotherapy and immunotherapy on the survival curve, to better explore the effect of any prognostic variables on OS, before and after progression, the treatment arms were evaluated as independent cohorts, and ten baseline variables were extracted and assessed by linear regression.
Results: Fourteen trials were identified. Seven studies compared upfront CHT + IMT vs. CHT documenting longer OS for CHT + IMT (HR 0.69, CI 0.65-0.72), without heterogeneity (Q = 1.43, p value = 0.968) or differences in the most represented subgroups. Twenty-nine study cohorts were selected from the 14 trials. Median OS and PPS, but not PFS, were significantly increased after IMT compared with CHT. The analysis of baseline variables after CHT documented a favorable prognostic effect for advanced age (β = 0.768, p value = 0.016), involvement of 0-1 metastasis sites (β = 0.943, p value = 0.005), and absence of previous radiation therapy (β = - 0.939, p value = 0.006), while none of them influenced prognosis after IMT.
Conclusion: The introduction of upfront IMT prolonged mESCC patients OS, mostly improving the outcomes of young patients, with multiple metastasis sites and without previous radiotherapy.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer is a multidisciplinary medium for the publication of novel research pertaining to cancers arising from the gastrointestinal tract.The journal is dedicated to the most rapid publication possible.The journal publishes papers in all relevant fields, emphasizing those studies that are helpful in understanding and treating cancers affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas, small bowel, large bowel, rectum, and anus. In addition, the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer publishes basic and translational scientific information from studies providing insight into the etiology and progression of cancers affecting these organs. New insights are provided from diverse areas of research such as studies exploring pre-neoplastic states, risk factors, epidemiology, genetics, preclinical therapeutics, surgery, radiation therapy, novel medical therapeutics, clinical trials, and outcome studies.In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, the journal also publishes: case reports, state-of-the-art reviews on topics of immediate interest or importance; invited articles analyzing particular areas of pancreatic research and knowledge; perspectives in which critical evaluation and conflicting opinions about current topics may be expressed; meeting highlights that summarize important points presented at recent meetings; abstracts of symposia and conferences; book reviews; hypotheses; Letters to the Editors; and other items of special interest, including:Complex Cases in GI Oncology: This is a new initiative to provide a forum to review and discuss the history and management of complex and involved gastrointestinal oncology cases. The format will be similar to a teaching case conference where a case vignette is presented and is followed by a series of questions and discussion points. A brief reference list supporting the points made in discussion would be expected.