免疫检查点抑制剂在结直肠癌中的有效性和安全性:对现实世界研究的系统回顾。

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Current Oncology Reports Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-13 DOI:10.1007/s11912-025-01676-0
Leping Kong, Chin Hang Yiu, Christine Y Lu
{"title":"免疫检查点抑制剂在结直肠癌中的有效性和安全性:对现实世界研究的系统回顾。","authors":"Leping Kong, Chin Hang Yiu, Christine Y Lu","doi":"10.1007/s11912-025-01676-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant efficacy in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, most evidence has come from clinical trials with strict eligibility criteria. Understanding real-world effectiveness and safety of ICIs in CRC is important to guide routine clinical practice across diverse populations.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to identify observational studies evaluating ICI-based regimens compared to conventional or combination therapies in patients with CRC. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus) were searched from inception through March 15, 2025. Eligible studies reported at least one efficacy outcome (e.g., progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], etc.) and/or safety outcome (e.g., adverse events) among real-world populations with CRC treated with ICIs. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and a narrative synthesis was performed to summarize the key findings. Eleven real-world studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing data from 2,049 patients. In MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, real-world findings aligned with the survival benefits observed in clinical trials, demonstrating improved PFS and OS compared to conventional therapies. For MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC, combining ICIs with other agents (e.g., tyrosine kinase inhibitors or chemotherapy) showed improvements but yielded conflicting results. Overall, the safety profiles were comparable to conventional therapies, with treatment-related adverse events occurring at similar rates. Real-world evidence supports the efficacy of ICI monotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC and suggests potential benefits of ICI-based combination therapies in MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC. However, most of the data are derived from small, single-center cohorts, which limit their generalizability. Further multi-center studies are needed, especially to assess the efficacy of ICI-based combination therapies in the broader CRC population.</p>","PeriodicalId":10861,"journal":{"name":"Current Oncology Reports","volume":" ","pages":"687-702"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12227369/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Real-World Studies.\",\"authors\":\"Leping Kong, Chin Hang Yiu, Christine Y Lu\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11912-025-01676-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant efficacy in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, most evidence has come from clinical trials with strict eligibility criteria. Understanding real-world effectiveness and safety of ICIs in CRC is important to guide routine clinical practice across diverse populations.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to identify observational studies evaluating ICI-based regimens compared to conventional or combination therapies in patients with CRC. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus) were searched from inception through March 15, 2025. Eligible studies reported at least one efficacy outcome (e.g., progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], etc.) and/or safety outcome (e.g., adverse events) among real-world populations with CRC treated with ICIs. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and a narrative synthesis was performed to summarize the key findings. Eleven real-world studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing data from 2,049 patients. In MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, real-world findings aligned with the survival benefits observed in clinical trials, demonstrating improved PFS and OS compared to conventional therapies. For MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC, combining ICIs with other agents (e.g., tyrosine kinase inhibitors or chemotherapy) showed improvements but yielded conflicting results. Overall, the safety profiles were comparable to conventional therapies, with treatment-related adverse events occurring at similar rates. Real-world evidence supports the efficacy of ICI monotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC and suggests potential benefits of ICI-based combination therapies in MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC. However, most of the data are derived from small, single-center cohorts, which limit their generalizability. Further multi-center studies are needed, especially to assess the efficacy of ICI-based combination therapies in the broader CRC population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Oncology Reports\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"687-702\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12227369/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Oncology Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-025-01676-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Oncology Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-025-01676-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述目的:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)在治疗结直肠癌(CRC)中显示出显著的疗效。然而,大多数证据来自具有严格资格标准的临床试验。了解ICIs在结直肠癌中的实际有效性和安全性对于指导不同人群的常规临床实践具有重要意义。根据PRISMA指南进行了一项系统综述,以确定观察性研究,评估基于ci的方案与常规或联合治疗在结直肠癌患者中的效果。三个数据库(MEDLINE, Embase和Scopus)从成立到2025年3月15日进行了检索。符合条件的研究报告了至少一个疗效结果(例如,无进展生存期[PFS],总生存期[OS]等)和/或安全性结果(例如,不良事件)在现实世界中使用ICIs治疗的结直肠癌人群中。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估研究质量,并进行叙述性综合以总结主要发现。11项真实世界的研究符合纳入标准,包括来自2049名患者的数据。在MSI-H/dMMR转移性CRC中,现实世界的研究结果与临床试验中观察到的生存益处相一致,表明与传统疗法相比,PFS和OS得到改善。对于MSS/pMMR转移性结直肠癌,将ICIs与其他药物(如酪氨酸激酶抑制剂或化疗)联合使用显示出改善,但结果相互矛盾。总体而言,安全性与传统疗法相当,治疗相关不良事件发生率相似。实际证据支持ICI单药治疗MSI-H/dMMR转移性结直肠癌的疗效,并提示基于ICI的联合治疗MSS/pMMR转移性结直肠癌的潜在益处。然而,大多数数据来自小的单中心队列,这限制了它们的普遍性。需要进一步的多中心研究,特别是评估基于ci的联合治疗在更广泛的结直肠癌人群中的疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Real-World Studies.

Purpose of review: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated significant efficacy in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, most evidence has come from clinical trials with strict eligibility criteria. Understanding real-world effectiveness and safety of ICIs in CRC is important to guide routine clinical practice across diverse populations.

Recent findings: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted to identify observational studies evaluating ICI-based regimens compared to conventional or combination therapies in patients with CRC. Three databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus) were searched from inception through March 15, 2025. Eligible studies reported at least one efficacy outcome (e.g., progression-free survival [PFS], overall survival [OS], etc.) and/or safety outcome (e.g., adverse events) among real-world populations with CRC treated with ICIs. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and a narrative synthesis was performed to summarize the key findings. Eleven real-world studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing data from 2,049 patients. In MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC, real-world findings aligned with the survival benefits observed in clinical trials, demonstrating improved PFS and OS compared to conventional therapies. For MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC, combining ICIs with other agents (e.g., tyrosine kinase inhibitors or chemotherapy) showed improvements but yielded conflicting results. Overall, the safety profiles were comparable to conventional therapies, with treatment-related adverse events occurring at similar rates. Real-world evidence supports the efficacy of ICI monotherapy in MSI-H/dMMR metastatic CRC and suggests potential benefits of ICI-based combination therapies in MSS/pMMR metastatic CRC. However, most of the data are derived from small, single-center cohorts, which limit their generalizability. Further multi-center studies are needed, especially to assess the efficacy of ICI-based combination therapies in the broader CRC population.

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
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
187
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal aims to review the most important, recently published clinical findings in the field of oncology. By providing clear, insightful, balanced contributions by international experts, the journal intends to serve all those involved in the care of those affected by cancer. We accomplish this aim by appointing international authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas, such as cancer prevention, leukemia, melanoma, neuro-oncology, and palliative medicine. Section Editors, in turn, select topics for which leading experts contribute comprehensive review articles that emphasize new developments and recently published papers of major importance, highlighted by annotated reference lists. An international Editorial Board reviews the annual table of contents, suggests articles of special interest to their country/region, and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research. Commentaries from well-known figures in the field are also provided.
×
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