Impact of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to standard therapies in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review of efficacy outcomes

IF 6.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Ana Pinto Correia , Adriana Marques , Bruno Sepodes , Carla Torre , João Rocha
{"title":"Impact of adding immune checkpoint inhibitors to standard therapies in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review of efficacy outcomes","authors":"Ana Pinto Correia ,&nbsp;Adriana Marques ,&nbsp;Bruno Sepodes ,&nbsp;Carla Torre ,&nbsp;João Rocha","doi":"10.1016/j.critrevonc.2025.105098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for 85 % of all cases. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized NSCLC treatment, the extent to which they improve survival when combined with standard therapies, rather than used alone, remains unclear. Here, we systematically review published clinical trials evaluating ICIs combined with other standard systemic therapies versus each strategy alone. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed) and EMBASE, following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials published until December 2024 that studied the efficacy of immunotherapy regimens combining approved ICIs and other systemic therapies in NSCLC were included. Results We included 36 RCTs with a combined 24,495 participants. Most were open-label (n = 21, 58.3 %), while the remaining studies were double-blinded (n = 15, 41.7 %). Most studies were phase 3 trials (n = 33, 91.7 %) and only three trials were phase 2 (8.3 %). Included trials utilized platinum-doublet chemotherapy as the backbone, with some also incorporating bevacizumab and/or additional immunotherapy. In the included studies, combining immunotherapy with other standard therapies significantly improved survival outcomes compared to either strategy alone. These benefits were consistent across histological subtypes, PD-L1 expression levels, and disease stage. However, the efficacy of this combined approach was limited in EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Conclusions: By synthesizing existing evidence from RCTs, this systematic review demonstrates the benefits and limitations of combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with other systemic treatments, clarifying which clinical situations may benefit the most from a combined approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11358,"journal":{"name":"Critical reviews in oncology/hematology","volume":"218 ","pages":"Article 105098"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical reviews in oncology/hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104084282500486X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide, with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounting for 85 % of all cases. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized NSCLC treatment, the extent to which they improve survival when combined with standard therapies, rather than used alone, remains unclear. Here, we systematically review published clinical trials evaluating ICIs combined with other standard systemic therapies versus each strategy alone. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed) and EMBASE, following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials published until December 2024 that studied the efficacy of immunotherapy regimens combining approved ICIs and other systemic therapies in NSCLC were included. Results We included 36 RCTs with a combined 24,495 participants. Most were open-label (n = 21, 58.3 %), while the remaining studies were double-blinded (n = 15, 41.7 %). Most studies were phase 3 trials (n = 33, 91.7 %) and only three trials were phase 2 (8.3 %). Included trials utilized platinum-doublet chemotherapy as the backbone, with some also incorporating bevacizumab and/or additional immunotherapy. In the included studies, combining immunotherapy with other standard therapies significantly improved survival outcomes compared to either strategy alone. These benefits were consistent across histological subtypes, PD-L1 expression levels, and disease stage. However, the efficacy of this combined approach was limited in EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Conclusions: By synthesizing existing evidence from RCTs, this systematic review demonstrates the benefits and limitations of combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with other systemic treatments, clarifying which clinical situations may benefit the most from a combined approach.
在非小细胞肺癌标准疗法中加入免疫检查点抑制剂的影响:疗效结果的系统评价
肺癌仍然是全球癌症相关死亡的主要原因,非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)占所有病例的85%。尽管免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)已经彻底改变了非小细胞肺癌的治疗,但它们与标准疗法联合使用而不是单独使用时提高生存率的程度仍不清楚。在这里,我们系统地回顾了已发表的临床试验,评估了ICIs联合其他标准全身治疗与单独使用每种策略的疗效。方法:遵循PRISMA指南,使用MEDLINE(通过PubMed)和EMBASE进行系统评价。截至2024年12月发表的随机对照试验,研究了免疫治疗方案联合批准的ICIs和其他全身治疗在非小细胞肺癌中的疗效。我们纳入了36项随机对照试验,共有24,495名受试者。大多数为开放标签研究(n=21, 58.3%),其余研究为双盲研究(n=15, 41.7%)。大多数研究为3期试验(n=33, 91.7%),只有3项试验为2期试验(8.3%)。纳入的试验以铂双药化疗为主要方案,其中一些还结合了贝伐单抗和/或额外的免疫治疗。在纳入的研究中,与单独使用任何一种策略相比,将免疫疗法与其他标准疗法联合使用显著改善了生存结果。这些益处在组织学亚型、PD-L1表达水平和疾病分期中是一致的。然而,在酪氨酸激酶抑制剂进展后egfr突变的NSCLC中,这种联合方法的疗效有限。结论:通过综合来自随机对照试验的现有证据,本系统综述展示了免疫检查点抑制剂与其他全身治疗联合的益处和局限性,阐明了哪些临床情况可能从联合治疗中获益最多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
3.20%
发文量
213
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology publishes scholarly, critical reviews in all fields of oncology and hematology written by experts from around the world. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology is the Official Journal of the European School of Oncology (ESO) and the International Society of Liquid Biopsy.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书