Junipearl Cheng, Charlotte McKay, Victoria Bray, Po Yee Yip, Annette Tognela, Peey Sei Kok
{"title":"接受化学免疫治疗与免疫治疗的高PD-L1晚期非小细胞肺癌患者的真实生存结果","authors":"Junipearl Cheng, Charlotte McKay, Victoria Bray, Po Yee Yip, Annette Tognela, Peey Sei Kok","doi":"10.1111/ajco.14205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomized studies have demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) of pembrolizumab (pembro), both alone and in combination with chemotherapy (chemo) over chemo alone in patients with programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We reviewed the real-world outcomes of patients who received pembro-chemo versus pembro only.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This Australian-based retrospective cohort study used data from patients with advanced NSCLC PD-L1 ≥ 50%, diagnosed between January 2016 and July 2021 and had received first-line pembro-chemo or pembro only. Patients with an EGFR/ALK/ROS1 sensitizing mutation were excluded. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate OS and progression-free survival (PFS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 111 eligible patients, 25 received pembro-chemo and 86 received pembro only. After a median follow-up of 15.7 months, median (95% CI) OS was not reached in the pembro-chemo group versus 15.6 (9.5-21.7) months in the pembro-only group (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.28-1.16, p = 0.12). Median PFS was 12.4 (6.5-18.3) versus 9.5 (6.3-12.6) months in pembro-chemo versus pembro-only groups, respectively (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32-1.18, p = 0.18). Objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the pembro-chemo group (60% vs. 30.3%). There were more hospitalizations in the pembro-chemo group versus pembro-only group, 28% versus 18.6%, but immune-related adverse events were similar (32% vs. 32.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% advanced NSCLC, addition of chemo to first-line pembro yielded a higher ORR but no additional benefit in PFS or OS, supporting a shared-decision approach. However, higher rates of hospitalizations seen in the pembro-chemo group should warrant caution in use.</p>","PeriodicalId":8633,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","volume":" ","pages":"e14205"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Real-World Survival Outcomes of Patients With High PD-L1 Advanced NSCLC Who Received Chemoimmunotherapy Versus Immunotherapy.\",\"authors\":\"Junipearl Cheng, Charlotte McKay, Victoria Bray, Po Yee Yip, Annette Tognela, Peey Sei Kok\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajco.14205\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Randomized studies have demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) of pembrolizumab (pembro), both alone and in combination with chemotherapy (chemo) over chemo alone in patients with programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We reviewed the real-world outcomes of patients who received pembro-chemo versus pembro only.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This Australian-based retrospective cohort study used data from patients with advanced NSCLC PD-L1 ≥ 50%, diagnosed between January 2016 and July 2021 and had received first-line pembro-chemo or pembro only. Patients with an EGFR/ALK/ROS1 sensitizing mutation were excluded. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate OS and progression-free survival (PFS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 111 eligible patients, 25 received pembro-chemo and 86 received pembro only. After a median follow-up of 15.7 months, median (95% CI) OS was not reached in the pembro-chemo group versus 15.6 (9.5-21.7) months in the pembro-only group (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.28-1.16, p = 0.12). Median PFS was 12.4 (6.5-18.3) versus 9.5 (6.3-12.6) months in pembro-chemo versus pembro-only groups, respectively (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32-1.18, p = 0.18). Objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the pembro-chemo group (60% vs. 30.3%). There were more hospitalizations in the pembro-chemo group versus pembro-only group, 28% versus 18.6%, but immune-related adverse events were similar (32% vs. 32.6%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% advanced NSCLC, addition of chemo to first-line pembro yielded a higher ORR but no additional benefit in PFS or OS, supporting a shared-decision approach. However, higher rates of hospitalizations seen in the pembro-chemo group should warrant caution in use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e14205\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.14205\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajco.14205","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:随机研究表明,在程序性细胞死亡配体-1 (PD-L1)≥50%的晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者中,派姆单抗(pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab)单独或联合化疗(chemo)优于单独化疗(chemo)。我们回顾了接受pembroms化疗与仅接受pembroms化疗的患者的实际结果。方法:这项基于澳大利亚的回顾性队列研究使用了2016年1月至2021年7月诊断的晚期NSCLC PD-L1≥50%的患者的数据,这些患者接受了一线pembrom -chemo或pembroo化疗。排除EGFR/ALK/ROS1致敏突变的患者。采用Cox比例风险模型和Kaplan-Meier方法估计OS和无进展生存期(PFS)。结果:在111例符合条件的患者中,25例接受了pembro化疗,86例仅接受pembro化疗。中位随访15.7个月后,化疗组的中位(95% CI) OS未达到,而单纯化疗组为15.6(9.5-21.7)个月(HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.28-1.16, p = 0.12)。pembro化疗组和单药组的中位PFS分别为12.4(6.5-18.3)和9.5(6.3-12.6)个月(HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32-1.18, p = 0.18)。泊姆化疗组的客观缓解率(ORR)更高(60% vs. 30.3%)。彭美化疗组住院率高于彭美化疗组(28%比18.6%),但免疫相关不良事件相似(32%比32.6%)。结论:在PD-L1≥50%的晚期NSCLC患者中,一线pembrolizumab化疗增加了更高的ORR,但在PFS或OS中没有额外的益处,支持共同决策方法。然而,彭美化疗组较高的住院率应谨慎使用。
Real-World Survival Outcomes of Patients With High PD-L1 Advanced NSCLC Who Received Chemoimmunotherapy Versus Immunotherapy.
Background: Randomized studies have demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) of pembrolizumab (pembro), both alone and in combination with chemotherapy (chemo) over chemo alone in patients with programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) ≥ 50% advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We reviewed the real-world outcomes of patients who received pembro-chemo versus pembro only.
Methods: This Australian-based retrospective cohort study used data from patients with advanced NSCLC PD-L1 ≥ 50%, diagnosed between January 2016 and July 2021 and had received first-line pembro-chemo or pembro only. Patients with an EGFR/ALK/ROS1 sensitizing mutation were excluded. Cox proportional-hazards model and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate OS and progression-free survival (PFS).
Results: Of 111 eligible patients, 25 received pembro-chemo and 86 received pembro only. After a median follow-up of 15.7 months, median (95% CI) OS was not reached in the pembro-chemo group versus 15.6 (9.5-21.7) months in the pembro-only group (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.28-1.16, p = 0.12). Median PFS was 12.4 (6.5-18.3) versus 9.5 (6.3-12.6) months in pembro-chemo versus pembro-only groups, respectively (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.32-1.18, p = 0.18). Objective response rate (ORR) was higher in the pembro-chemo group (60% vs. 30.3%). There were more hospitalizations in the pembro-chemo group versus pembro-only group, 28% versus 18.6%, but immune-related adverse events were similar (32% vs. 32.6%).
Conclusion: In patients with PD-L1 ≥ 50% advanced NSCLC, addition of chemo to first-line pembro yielded a higher ORR but no additional benefit in PFS or OS, supporting a shared-decision approach. However, higher rates of hospitalizations seen in the pembro-chemo group should warrant caution in use.
期刊介绍:
Asia–Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal of oncology that aims to be a forum for facilitating collaboration and exchanging information on what is happening in different countries of the Asia–Pacific region in relation to cancer treatment and care. The Journal is ideally positioned to receive publications that deal with diversity in cancer behavior, management and outcome related to ethnic, cultural, economic and other differences between populations. In addition to original articles, the Journal publishes reviews, editorials, letters to the Editor and short communications. Case reports are generally not considered for publication, only exceptional papers in which Editors find extraordinary oncological value may be considered for review. The Journal encourages clinical studies, particularly prospectively designed clinical trials.