Clinical evidence of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma: A systematic review

2区 医学 Q1 Medicine
Zikun Wu, Chong Xiao, Xue-Ke Li, Feng-Ming You
{"title":"Clinical evidence of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma: A systematic review","authors":"Zikun Wu, Chong Xiao, Xue-Ke Li, Feng-Ming You","doi":"10.53388/2023623013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as the neoadjuvant therapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (rlaEC) remains challenging given the poor reports of efficacy and safety. This study aimed to summarize reliable evidence for the preoperative neoadjuvant immunotherapy of rlaEC by analyzing all the published clinical trials on the ICIs as the neoadjuvant therapy for rlaEC. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until June 1st, 2023, for available reports to perform a meta-analysis. The primary endpoints were R0 resection, objective response rate (ORR), pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR), as well as treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and postoperative complications. The Stata 14.0 software was employed to estimate pooled effect size. Results: A total of 18 single-arm clinical trials involving 625 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that, among these patients with rlaEC, the pooled R0 resection rate was 97.0% (95% CI: 94.0% – 99.0%), the pooled ORR was 70.0% (95% CI: 64.0% – 76.0%), the pooled pCR and MPR rate were 34.0% (95 % CI: 29.0% – 39.0%) and 56.0% (95% CI: 47.0% – 65.0%) respectively. The incidence of main treatment-related AEs and postoperative complications was about 6% – 45% and 8% – 19% respectively. Conclusions: Patients with rlaEC were tolerated to neoadjuvant immunotherapy and it might be beneficial to improve efficacy. But this meta-analysis had limitations and the conclusions still needed to be validated by more rigorous phase III randomized controlled clinical trials.","PeriodicalId":50875,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Cancer Research","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Cancer Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53388/2023623013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as the neoadjuvant therapy for resectable locally advanced esophageal carcinoma (rlaEC) remains challenging given the poor reports of efficacy and safety. This study aimed to summarize reliable evidence for the preoperative neoadjuvant immunotherapy of rlaEC by analyzing all the published clinical trials on the ICIs as the neoadjuvant therapy for rlaEC. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception until June 1st, 2023, for available reports to perform a meta-analysis. The primary endpoints were R0 resection, objective response rate (ORR), pathological complete response (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR), as well as treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and postoperative complications. The Stata 14.0 software was employed to estimate pooled effect size. Results: A total of 18 single-arm clinical trials involving 625 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that, among these patients with rlaEC, the pooled R0 resection rate was 97.0% (95% CI: 94.0% – 99.0%), the pooled ORR was 70.0% (95% CI: 64.0% – 76.0%), the pooled pCR and MPR rate were 34.0% (95 % CI: 29.0% – 39.0%) and 56.0% (95% CI: 47.0% – 65.0%) respectively. The incidence of main treatment-related AEs and postoperative complications was about 6% – 45% and 8% – 19% respectively. Conclusions: Patients with rlaEC were tolerated to neoadjuvant immunotherapy and it might be beneficial to improve efficacy. But this meta-analysis had limitations and the conclusions still needed to be validated by more rigorous phase III randomized controlled clinical trials.
新辅助免疫治疗可切除局部晚期食管癌的临床证据:一项系统综述
背景:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)作为可切除的局部晚期食管癌(rlaEC)的新辅助治疗仍然具有挑战性,因为疗效和安全性的报道不佳。本研究旨在通过分析所有已发表的ICIs作为rlaEC新辅助治疗的临床试验,总结rlaEC术前新辅助免疫治疗的可靠证据。方法:检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Embase和ClinicalTrials.gov从成立到2023年6月1日的可用报告,进行meta分析。主要终点为R0切除、客观缓解率(ORR)、病理完全缓解(pCR)和主要病理反应(MPR),以及治疗相关不良事件(ae)和术后并发症。采用Stata 14.0软件估计合并效应大小。结果:共有18项涉及625例患者的单臂临床试验符合纳入标准。meta分析显示,在这些rlaEC患者中,合并R0切除率为97.0% (95% CI: 94.0% ~ 99.0%),合并ORR为70.0% (95% CI: 64.0% ~ 76.0%),合并pCR和MPR率分别为34.0% (95% CI: 29.0% ~ 39.0%)和56.0% (95% CI: 47.0% ~ 65.0%)。主要治疗相关不良事件发生率为6% ~ 45%,术后并发症发生率为8% ~ 19%。结论:rlaEC患者对新辅助免疫治疗耐受,可能有利于提高疗效。但这项荟萃分析有局限性,结论仍需要通过更严格的III期随机对照临床试验来验证。
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
Advances in Cancer Research
Advances in Cancer Research 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Advances in Cancer Research (ACR) has covered a remarkable period of discovery that encompasses the beginning of the revolution in biology. Advances in Cancer Research (ACR) has covered a remarkable period of discovery that encompasses the beginning of the revolution in biology. The first ACR volume came out in the year that Watson and Crick reported on the central dogma of biology, the DNA double helix. In the first 100 volumes are found many contributions by some of those who helped shape the revolution and who made many of the remarkable discoveries in cancer research that have developed from it.
×
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