Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with or without Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with or without Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Ting Zheng, Xingxing Li, Li Zhou, Jianjiang Jin","doi":"10.1007/s12029-025-01273-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Recently, there has been significant attention focused on neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (NICT) for the treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In order to assess the efficacy and safety of this innovative combination in relation to traditional neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), we performed a systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review of the literature was performed across Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed, covering the period from their inception to May 2, 2025, to identify appropriate RCTs. The primary outcomes included pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR), R0 resection rate, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). The adverse events (AEs) was identified as the secondary outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of five RCTs involving 755 patients were included for the final analysis. The result showed that compared with the NCT group, the NICT group for resectable ESCC significantly improved pCR (RR = 2.51; 95% CI: 1.64-3.84; P < 0.01) and MPR (RR = 1.83; 95% CI: 1.16-2.88; P = 0.01). The pooled rates of pMR and MPR in the NICT group were significantly higher compared to the NCT group, with values of 23.2% versus 7.7% and 42.8% versus 25.8%. The R0 resection rate was comparable between the two groups (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99-1.02; P = 0.63) with pooled rates observed to be 100% for the NICT group and 98.2% for the NCT group. However, only one phase III RCT reported survival outcomes that demonstrated improved 1-year EFS rate (HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-1.00, P = 0.05) and 1-year OS rates (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24-0.97, P = 0.037) in the NICT group. Nevertheless, the analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in grade ≥ 3 TRAEs across the treatment strategies (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.80-1.32; P = 0.82), with pooled rates recorded at 34.4% for the NICT group and 33.1% for the NCT group. The pooled rates were observed to be 24.7% for all grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 3.1% for grade ≥ 3 irAEs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Combining ICIs with chemotherapy as a neoadjuvant approach shows significant therapeutic promise in treating resectable ESCC, exhibiting favorable efficacy and acceptable safety profiles in the Chinese population. Nonetheless, more additional large-scale phase III RCTs are warranted for further validation of these preliminary outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":"56 1","pages":"172"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-11","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/s12029-025-01273-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Recently, there has been significant attention focused on neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy (NICT) for the treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In order to assess the efficacy and safety of this innovative combination in relation to traditional neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), we performed a systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature was performed across Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and PubMed, covering the period from their inception to May 2, 2025, to identify appropriate RCTs. The primary outcomes included pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR), R0 resection rate, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS). The adverse events (AEs) was identified as the secondary outcome.
Results: A total of five RCTs involving 755 patients were included for the final analysis. The result showed that compared with the NCT group, the NICT group for resectable ESCC significantly improved pCR (RR = 2.51; 95% CI: 1.64-3.84; P < 0.01) and MPR (RR = 1.83; 95% CI: 1.16-2.88; P = 0.01). The pooled rates of pMR and MPR in the NICT group were significantly higher compared to the NCT group, with values of 23.2% versus 7.7% and 42.8% versus 25.8%. The R0 resection rate was comparable between the two groups (RR = 1.00; 95% CI: 0.99-1.02; P = 0.63) with pooled rates observed to be 100% for the NICT group and 98.2% for the NCT group. However, only one phase III RCT reported survival outcomes that demonstrated improved 1-year EFS rate (HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39-1.00, P = 0.05) and 1-year OS rates (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24-0.97, P = 0.037) in the NICT group. Nevertheless, the analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in grade ≥ 3 TRAEs across the treatment strategies (RR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.80-1.32; P = 0.82), with pooled rates recorded at 34.4% for the NICT group and 33.1% for the NCT group. The pooled rates were observed to be 24.7% for all grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and 3.1% for grade ≥ 3 irAEs.
Conclusions: Combining ICIs with chemotherapy as a neoadjuvant approach shows significant therapeutic promise in treating resectable ESCC, exhibiting favorable efficacy and acceptable safety profiles in the Chinese population. Nonetheless, more additional large-scale phase III RCTs are warranted for further validation of these preliminary outcomes.
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.