{"title":"不同治疗时间段的免疫检查点抑制剂对广泛期小细胞肺癌患者预后的影响","authors":"Song Mi, Yunxin Yang, Xin Liu, Shaotong Tang, Ning Liang, Jinyue Sun, Chao Liu, Qidong Ren, Jihong Lu, Pingping Hu, Jiandong Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s12094-024-03471-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>The application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) has brought us new hope, but the real-world outcome is relatively lacking. Our aim was to investigate the clinical use, efficacy, and survival benefit of ICIs in ES-SCLC from real-world data analysis.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients was conducted between 2012 and 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed between groups to evaluate the value of ICIs at different lines of treatment. PFS1 was defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death. PFS2 was defined as the duration from the first disease progression to the second disease progression or death.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>One hundred and eighty patients with ES-SCLC were included. We performed landmark analysis, which showed that compared to the second-line and subsequent-lines ICIs-combined therapy group (2SL-ICIs) and non-ICIs group, the first-line ICIs-combined therapy group (1L-ICIs) prolonged OS and PFS1. There was a trend toward prolonged OS in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group, but the significance threshold was not met (median OS 11.94 months vs. 11.10 months, <i>P</i> = 0.14). A longer PFS2 was present in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group (median PFS2 4.13 months vs. 2.60 months, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>First-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in clinical practice. If patients did not use ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line therapy, the use of ICIs in the second line or subsequent lines of treatment could prolong PFS2.</p>","PeriodicalId":10166,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Oncology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors at different treatment time periods on prognosis of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer\",\"authors\":\"Song Mi, Yunxin Yang, Xin Liu, Shaotong Tang, Ning Liang, Jinyue Sun, Chao Liu, Qidong Ren, Jihong Lu, Pingping Hu, Jiandong Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12094-024-03471-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Background</h3><p>The application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) has brought us new hope, but the real-world outcome is relatively lacking. Our aim was to investigate the clinical use, efficacy, and survival benefit of ICIs in ES-SCLC from real-world data analysis.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients was conducted between 2012 and 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed between groups to evaluate the value of ICIs at different lines of treatment. PFS1 was defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death. PFS2 was defined as the duration from the first disease progression to the second disease progression or death.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>One hundred and eighty patients with ES-SCLC were included. We performed landmark analysis, which showed that compared to the second-line and subsequent-lines ICIs-combined therapy group (2SL-ICIs) and non-ICIs group, the first-line ICIs-combined therapy group (1L-ICIs) prolonged OS and PFS1. There was a trend toward prolonged OS in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group, but the significance threshold was not met (median OS 11.94 months vs. 11.10 months, <i>P</i> = 0.14). A longer PFS2 was present in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group (median PFS2 4.13 months vs. 2.60 months, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>First-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in clinical practice. If patients did not use ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line therapy, the use of ICIs in the second line or subsequent lines of treatment could prolong PFS2.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Translational Oncology\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-10\",\"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/s12094-024-03471-y\",\"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/s12094-024-03471-y","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
背景免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)在治疗广泛期小细胞肺癌(ES-SCLC)患者中的应用给我们带来了新的希望,但真实世界的结果却相对缺乏。我们的目的是通过真实世界的数据分析,研究 ICIs 在 ES-SCLC 中的临床应用、疗效和生存获益。对不同组间的无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期(OS)进行评估,以评价ICIs在不同治疗方案中的价值。PFS1定义为从初始治疗到疾病进展或死亡的持续时间。结果 共纳入180例ES-SCLC患者。我们进行了标志性分析,结果显示,与二线及后续线 ICIs 联合治疗组(2SL-ICIs)和非 ICIs 组相比,一线 ICIs 联合治疗组(1L-ICIs)延长了 OS 和 PFS1。与非 ICIs 组相比,2SL-ICIs 组有延长 OS 的趋势,但未达到显著性阈值(中位 OS 11.94 个月 vs. 11.10 个月,P = 0.14)。2SL-ICIs组的PFS2长于非ICIs组(中位PFS2为4.13个月 vs. 2.60个月,P < 0.001)。如果患者在一线治疗中没有使用 ICIs 加化疗,那么在二线或后续治疗中使用 ICIs 可延长 PFS2。
Effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors at different treatment time periods on prognosis of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer
Background
The application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) has brought us new hope, but the real-world outcome is relatively lacking. Our aim was to investigate the clinical use, efficacy, and survival benefit of ICIs in ES-SCLC from real-world data analysis.
Methods
A retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients was conducted between 2012 and 2022. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed between groups to evaluate the value of ICIs at different lines of treatment. PFS1 was defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death. PFS2 was defined as the duration from the first disease progression to the second disease progression or death.
Results
One hundred and eighty patients with ES-SCLC were included. We performed landmark analysis, which showed that compared to the second-line and subsequent-lines ICIs-combined therapy group (2SL-ICIs) and non-ICIs group, the first-line ICIs-combined therapy group (1L-ICIs) prolonged OS and PFS1. There was a trend toward prolonged OS in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group, but the significance threshold was not met (median OS 11.94 months vs. 11.10 months, P = 0.14). A longer PFS2 was present in the 2SL-ICIs group than in the non-ICIs group (median PFS2 4.13 months vs. 2.60 months, P < 0.001).
Conclusion
First-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in clinical practice. If patients did not use ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line therapy, the use of ICIs in the second line or subsequent lines of treatment could prolong PFS2.