Winy Widjaja, Irene Ng, Nicolas Shannon, N Gopalakrishna Iyer
{"title":"Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Resectable HNSCC: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Winy Widjaja, Irene Ng, Nicolas Shannon, N Gopalakrishna Iyer","doi":"10.1245/s10434-024-16587-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immunotherapy is a recently recognised FDA-approved treatment for R/M HNSCC. Our goal is to explore the safety profile and the efficacy of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting before surgery in mucosal head and neck cancer.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three electronic databases had been systematically searched through March 2024. Demographic and tumour characteristics were extracted. Primary outcomes obtained were disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), complete pathological response (cPR), which was defined as no residual tumour, and major pathological response (MPR), which as defined as <10% residual viable tumour. Safety outcomes examined were grade 3 and above adverse event, median time to surgery, delays to surgery, and death related to neoadjuvant treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 459 patients from 15 studies were included in the analysis. The pooled estimate of cPR for all the studies was 14.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.0-26.2). Subgroup analysis showed chemoimmunotherapy had a higher cPR 30.1% (95% CI 22.8-38.62) compared with immunotherapy alone 1.4% (95% CI 0.3-5.2). There was no treatment-related death. Chemoimmunotherapy had a higher pooled estimate of adverse events 22.9% (95% CI 11.0-41.5) compared with immunotherapy alone 8.5% (95% CI 2.6-24.3). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that chemoimmunotherapy had a higher DFS compared with immunotherapy alone: 89.8% (95% CI 81.4-94.7) versus 80.44% (95% CI 73.9-85.7), respectively. Neoadjuvant immunoradiotherapy had conflicting results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Neoadjuvant immunotherapy was well tolerated. Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy may be more effective in treating LAHNSCC over immunotherapy alone; however, TRAEs were higher.</p>","PeriodicalId":8229,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"2713-2724"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-16587-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Immunotherapy is a recently recognised FDA-approved treatment for R/M HNSCC. Our goal is to explore the safety profile and the efficacy of immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting before surgery in mucosal head and neck cancer.
Methods: Three electronic databases had been systematically searched through March 2024. Demographic and tumour characteristics were extracted. Primary outcomes obtained were disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), complete pathological response (cPR), which was defined as no residual tumour, and major pathological response (MPR), which as defined as <10% residual viable tumour. Safety outcomes examined were grade 3 and above adverse event, median time to surgery, delays to surgery, and death related to neoadjuvant treatment.
Results: A total of 459 patients from 15 studies were included in the analysis. The pooled estimate of cPR for all the studies was 14.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.0-26.2). Subgroup analysis showed chemoimmunotherapy had a higher cPR 30.1% (95% CI 22.8-38.62) compared with immunotherapy alone 1.4% (95% CI 0.3-5.2). There was no treatment-related death. Chemoimmunotherapy had a higher pooled estimate of adverse events 22.9% (95% CI 11.0-41.5) compared with immunotherapy alone 8.5% (95% CI 2.6-24.3). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that chemoimmunotherapy had a higher DFS compared with immunotherapy alone: 89.8% (95% CI 81.4-94.7) versus 80.44% (95% CI 73.9-85.7), respectively. Neoadjuvant immunoradiotherapy had conflicting results.
Conclusions: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy was well tolerated. Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy may be more effective in treating LAHNSCC over immunotherapy alone; however, TRAEs were higher.
背景:免疫疗法是fda最近批准的一种治疗R/M型HNSCC的方法。我们的目标是探讨免疫治疗在粘膜头颈癌术前新辅助治疗中的安全性和有效性。方法:系统检索截至2024年3月的3个电子数据库。提取人口学特征和肿瘤特征。获得的主要结果包括无病生存期(DFS)、无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)、完全病理反应(cPR)(定义为无残留肿瘤)和主要病理反应(MPR)(定义为结果):来自15项研究的459例患者被纳入分析。所有研究的cPR合并估计为14.9%(95%可信区间[CI] 8.0-26.2)。亚组分析显示,化疗免疫治疗的cPR比单独免疫治疗的1.4% (95% CI 0.3-5.2)高30.1% (95% CI 22.8-38.62)。没有治疗相关的死亡。化疗免疫治疗的不良事件汇总估计为22.9% (95% CI 11.0-41.5),而单独免疫治疗的不良事件汇总估计为8.5% (95% CI 2.6-24.3)。亚组分析表明,化学免疫治疗与单独免疫治疗相比具有更高的DFS:分别为89.8% (95% CI 81.4-94.7)和80.44% (95% CI 73.9-85.7)。新辅助免疫放射治疗有矛盾的结果。结论:新辅助免疫治疗耐受性良好。新辅助免疫化疗治疗LAHNSCC可能比单独免疫治疗更有效;然而,贸易值更高。
期刊介绍:
The Annals of Surgical Oncology is the official journal of The Society of Surgical Oncology and is published for the Society by Springer. The Annals publishes original and educational manuscripts about oncology for surgeons from all specialities in academic and community settings.