Perioperative or neo/adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Qiong Zhang, Jia Duan, Yuanmei Zhang, Lei Yang, Duo Li
{"title":"Perioperative or neo/adjuvant chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy for resectable non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Qiong Zhang, Jia Duan, Yuanmei Zhang, Lei Yang, Duo Li","doi":"10.1186/s13643-025-02767-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lung cancer, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Despite surgery being the main treatment for resectable NSCLC, many patients experience postoperative recurrence. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may shrink tumors and improve surgical outcomes, while adjuvant chemotherapy targets residual disease post-surgery. Recent advancements in immunotherapy have introduced its use in the perioperative phase for resectable NSCLC. This study investigates the relative benefits and potential complications of neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone, focusing on event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO. The authors searched PUBMED, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with resectable NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant/adjuvant immunotherapy or chemotherapy. Statistical analyses were performed using a frequentist network meta-analysis method in R software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From an initial 5902 articles, 13 RCTs involving 6704 patients were included after extensive filtering. PFS: Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy showed significant benefits compared to chemotherapy alone. OS: Perioperative immunotherapy was notably more effective than adjuvant immunotherapy and standard chemotherapy. Chemotherapy generally had fewer severe adverse effects compared to neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy. However, these immunotherapy combinations are generally well tolerated.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings indicate that neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy can significantly improve overall survival in patients with resectable NSCLC compared to standard chemotherapy. However, additional adverse effects associated with long-term immunotherapy require careful management. The lack of significant benefits in specific subgroups suggests a need for further research. The study stresses the importance of optimizing treatment strategies and potentially reassessing immunotherapy's role in certain patient populations. Future clinical trials are anticipated to clarify these results further.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"14 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11760710/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-025-02767-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Lung cancer, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Despite surgery being the main treatment for resectable NSCLC, many patients experience postoperative recurrence. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may shrink tumors and improve surgical outcomes, while adjuvant chemotherapy targets residual disease post-surgery. Recent advancements in immunotherapy have introduced its use in the perioperative phase for resectable NSCLC. This study investigates the relative benefits and potential complications of neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone, focusing on event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs).

Methods: This systematic review and network meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO. The authors searched PUBMED, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with resectable NSCLC treated with neoadjuvant/adjuvant immunotherapy or chemotherapy. Statistical analyses were performed using a frequentist network meta-analysis method in R software.

Results: From an initial 5902 articles, 13 RCTs involving 6704 patients were included after extensive filtering. PFS: Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy showed significant benefits compared to chemotherapy alone. OS: Perioperative immunotherapy was notably more effective than adjuvant immunotherapy and standard chemotherapy. Chemotherapy generally had fewer severe adverse effects compared to neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy. However, these immunotherapy combinations are generally well tolerated.

Conclusions: The findings indicate that neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy can significantly improve overall survival in patients with resectable NSCLC compared to standard chemotherapy. However, additional adverse effects associated with long-term immunotherapy require careful management. The lack of significant benefits in specific subgroups suggests a need for further research. The study stresses the importance of optimizing treatment strategies and potentially reassessing immunotherapy's role in certain patient populations. Future clinical trials are anticipated to clarify these results further.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信