免疫检查点抑制剂联合治疗转移性乳腺癌的疗效和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析

Ying Wang, Yalan Sun, Fang Lu, Xianghong Zhao, Zhenlin Nie, Feng Zhu, Bangshun He
{"title":"免疫检查点抑制剂联合治疗转移性乳腺癌的疗效和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Ying Wang, Yalan Sun, Fang Lu, Xianghong Zhao, Zhenlin Nie, Feng Zhu, Bangshun He","doi":"10.1007/s12094-024-03396-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy have showed its benefits in clinical studies, and here we conducted a further evaluation on the safety and efficacy of this treatment strategy.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies on ICIs and chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. The primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. Random or fixed effects models were used to estimate pooled Hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR) and the data of 95% confidence interval (CI) depend on the Heterogeneity. Cochrane risk assessment tool was used to assess risk of bias. We also drew forest plots and funnel plots, respectively.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Seven studies with intend-to-treat (ITT) population for 3255 patients were analyzed. ICIs pooled therapy showed clinical benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, improving PFS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74–0.90) of patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC), especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors. However, it had no effect on OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.85–1.01). Besides, mTNBC patients received pooled therapy were less frequently to have AEs (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.09–1.54). In patients with metastatic Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) negative breast cancer, pooled therapy showed no benefit for PFS (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50–1.28) and OS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.48–1.58).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Pooled therapy had improved PFS in mTNBC patients, especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, and it was less likely to cause grade ≥ 3 AEs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10166,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Oncology","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of a combination treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ying Wang, Yalan Sun, Fang Lu, Xianghong Zhao, Zhenlin Nie, Feng Zhu, Bangshun He\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12094-024-03396-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Purpose</h3><p>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy have showed its benefits in clinical studies, and here we conducted a further evaluation on the safety and efficacy of this treatment strategy.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies on ICIs and chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. The primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. Random or fixed effects models were used to estimate pooled Hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR) and the data of 95% confidence interval (CI) depend on the Heterogeneity. Cochrane risk assessment tool was used to assess risk of bias. We also drew forest plots and funnel plots, respectively.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Seven studies with intend-to-treat (ITT) population for 3255 patients were analyzed. ICIs pooled therapy showed clinical benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, improving PFS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74–0.90) of patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC), especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors. However, it had no effect on OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.85–1.01). Besides, mTNBC patients received pooled therapy were less frequently to have AEs (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.09–1.54). In patients with metastatic Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) negative breast cancer, pooled therapy showed no benefit for PFS (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50–1.28) and OS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.48–1.58).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Pooled therapy had improved PFS in mTNBC patients, especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, and it was less likely to cause grade ≥ 3 AEs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Translational Oncology\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Translational Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-024-03396-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Translational Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-024-03396-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)联合化疗在临床研究中显示了其优势,在此我们对这一治疗策略的安全性和有效性进行了进一步评估。方法在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆进行了系统性文献综述,以确定有关ICIs和化疗治疗转移性乳腺癌的临床研究。主要疗效终点为无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS),并对不良事件(AEs)进行了分析。随机或固定效应模型用于估算集合危险比(HR)、几率比(OR)以及取决于异质性的 95% 置信区间(CI)数据。科克伦风险评估工具用于评估偏倚风险。我们还分别绘制了森林图和漏斗图。结果分析了7项研究的意向治疗(ITT)人群,共3255名患者。与单纯化疗相比,ICIs联合疗法显示出临床优势,可改善转移性三阴性乳腺癌(mTNBC)患者的PFS(HR=0.81,95% CI:0.74-0.90),尤其是PD-L1阳性肿瘤患者。然而,它对OS没有影响(HR = 0.92,95% CI 0.85-1.01)。此外,接受联合疗法的 mTNBC 患者发生 AE 的频率较低(OR = 1.30,95% CI:1.09-1.54)。在转移性人表皮生长因子受体2(HER2)阴性乳腺癌患者中,联合疗法对PFS(HR=0.80,95% CI:0.50-1.28)和OS(HR=0.87,95% CI:0.48-1.58)无益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Efficacy and safety of a combination treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy and safety of a combination treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in combination with chemotherapy have showed its benefits in clinical studies, and here we conducted a further evaluation on the safety and efficacy of this treatment strategy.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library to identify clinical studies on ICIs and chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. The primary efficacy endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. Random or fixed effects models were used to estimate pooled Hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR) and the data of 95% confidence interval (CI) depend on the Heterogeneity. Cochrane risk assessment tool was used to assess risk of bias. We also drew forest plots and funnel plots, respectively.

Results

Seven studies with intend-to-treat (ITT) population for 3255 patients were analyzed. ICIs pooled therapy showed clinical benefits compared with chemotherapy alone, improving PFS (HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74–0.90) of patients with metastatic triple negative breast cancer (mTNBC), especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors. However, it had no effect on OS (HR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.85–1.01). Besides, mTNBC patients received pooled therapy were less frequently to have AEs (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.09–1.54). In patients with metastatic Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) negative breast cancer, pooled therapy showed no benefit for PFS (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.50–1.28) and OS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.48–1.58).

Conclusion

Pooled therapy had improved PFS in mTNBC patients, especially in patients with PD-L1-positive tumors, and it was less likely to cause grade ≥ 3 AEs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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