Yi-Fu Li, Yu Chen, Hui Cheng, Jia-Yi Shen, Bo-Wen Shen, Hao-Xiang Long, Xue-Song Sun, Jie Chen, Jing-Yun Peng, Pan Wang, Shan-Shan Guo, Qiu-Yan Chen, Lin-Quan Tang, Hai-Qiang Mai, Li-Ting Liu
{"title":"抗pd -1抗体联合或不联合卡培他滨作为复发或转移性鼻咽癌一线治疗后的维持治疗。","authors":"Yi-Fu Li, Yu Chen, Hui Cheng, Jia-Yi Shen, Bo-Wen Shen, Hao-Xiang Long, Xue-Song Sun, Jie Chen, Jing-Yun Peng, Pan Wang, Shan-Shan Guo, Qiu-Yan Chen, Lin-Quan Tang, Hai-Qiang Mai, Li-Ting Liu","doi":"10.1093/oncolo/oyaf188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of maintenance therapy for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC) following first-line treatment with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and anti-PD-1 antibody remains controversial. Therefore, an effective and low-toxicity maintenance treatment option is urgently needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 301 patients who received either combined maintenance therapy (anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine) or anti-PD-1 antibody alone. Patients were matched in a 1:3 ratio using propensity score matching (PSM). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary outcome, and its association with maintenance therapy was assessed using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-eight patients were included in the combined maintenance therapy group. After PSM, 174 patients were included in the anti-PD-1 antibody maintenance therapy group. In the matched cohort, the 2-year PFS rate was significantly higher in the combined maintenance therapy group than in the anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy group (66.8% vs. 51.3%, P = 0.0063). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with pre-treatment Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA >12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels had significant improved PFS with combined maintenance therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.20-0.96, P = 0.033). In contrast, no statistically significant PFS improvement from the combined maintenance therapy was observed among patients with low pre-treatment EBV DNA (≤12,400 copies/mL) and undetectable post-treatment levels (HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.27-1.27, P = 0.17), or those with detectable post-treatment EBV DNA levels regardless of pre-treatment levels (HR = 0.73, 95% = CI 0.31-1.70, P = 0.46). Combined maintenance therapy was associated with higher rates of grade 3-4 hand-foot syndrome (P < 0.001) and leukopenia (P = 0.0487).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine maintenance therapy improved PFS with manageable toxicities in patients with RM-MPC following first-line immunochemotherapy, particularly in those with pre-treatment EBV DNA > 12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":54686,"journal":{"name":"Oncologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anti-PD-1 antibody with or without capecitabine as maintenance therapy after first-line therapy of recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Yi-Fu Li, Yu Chen, Hui Cheng, Jia-Yi Shen, Bo-Wen Shen, Hao-Xiang Long, Xue-Song Sun, Jie Chen, Jing-Yun Peng, Pan Wang, Shan-Shan Guo, Qiu-Yan Chen, Lin-Quan Tang, Hai-Qiang Mai, Li-Ting Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oncolo/oyaf188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of maintenance therapy for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC) following first-line treatment with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and anti-PD-1 antibody remains controversial. Therefore, an effective and low-toxicity maintenance treatment option is urgently needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 301 patients who received either combined maintenance therapy (anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine) or anti-PD-1 antibody alone. Patients were matched in a 1:3 ratio using propensity score matching (PSM). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary outcome, and its association with maintenance therapy was assessed using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-eight patients were included in the combined maintenance therapy group. After PSM, 174 patients were included in the anti-PD-1 antibody maintenance therapy group. In the matched cohort, the 2-year PFS rate was significantly higher in the combined maintenance therapy group than in the anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy group (66.8% vs. 51.3%, P = 0.0063). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with pre-treatment Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA >12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels had significant improved PFS with combined maintenance therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.20-0.96, P = 0.033). In contrast, no statistically significant PFS improvement from the combined maintenance therapy was observed among patients with low pre-treatment EBV DNA (≤12,400 copies/mL) and undetectable post-treatment levels (HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.27-1.27, P = 0.17), or those with detectable post-treatment EBV DNA levels regardless of pre-treatment levels (HR = 0.73, 95% = CI 0.31-1.70, P = 0.46). Combined maintenance therapy was associated with higher rates of grade 3-4 hand-foot syndrome (P < 0.001) and leukopenia (P = 0.0487).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine maintenance therapy improved PFS with manageable toxicities in patients with RM-MPC following first-line immunochemotherapy, particularly in those with pre-treatment EBV DNA > 12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oncologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oncologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyaf188\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oncologist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oncolo/oyaf188","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:在吉西他滨、顺铂和抗pd -1抗体一线治疗后,复发或转移性鼻咽癌(RM-NPC)的维持治疗的使用仍然存在争议。因此,迫切需要一种有效、低毒的维持治疗方案。方法:本回顾性研究纳入301例接受联合维持治疗(抗pd -1抗体加卡培他滨)或单用抗pd -1抗体的患者。采用倾向评分匹配(PSM),以1:3的比例对患者进行匹配。无进展生存期(PFS)是主要终点,使用log-rank检验和Cox比例风险模型评估其与维持治疗的相关性。结果:58例患者纳入联合维持治疗组。PSM后,174例患者被纳入抗pd -1抗体维持治疗组。在匹配的队列中,联合维持治疗组的2年PFS率显著高于抗pd -1抗体单药治疗组(66.8% vs. 51.3%, P = 0.0063)。亚组分析显示,治疗前EBV (Epstein-Barr virus, EBV) DNA bb0 12400拷贝/mL且治疗后水平检测不到的患者,联合维持治疗显著改善了PFS(风险比[HR] = 0.44, 95%可信区间[CI] = 0.20-0.96, P = 0.033)。相比之下,在治疗前EBV DNA水平低(≤12400拷贝/mL)且治疗后水平不可检测的患者(HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.27-1.27, P = 0.17)或治疗后EBV DNA水平可检测的患者(HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.31-1.70, P = 0.46)中,联合维持治疗未观察到PFS改善的统计学意义。联合维持治疗与较高的3-4级手足综合征(P < 0.001)和白细胞减少(P = 0.0487)发生率相关。结论:抗pd -1抗体加卡培他滨维持治疗改善了一线免疫化疗后RM-MPC患者的PFS,并且毒性可控,特别是那些治疗前EBV DNA bb0 12,400拷贝/mL且治疗后水平无法检测的患者。
Anti-PD-1 antibody with or without capecitabine as maintenance therapy after first-line therapy of recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
Background: The use of maintenance therapy for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RM-NPC) following first-line treatment with gemcitabine, cisplatin, and anti-PD-1 antibody remains controversial. Therefore, an effective and low-toxicity maintenance treatment option is urgently needed.
Methods: This retrospective study included 301 patients who received either combined maintenance therapy (anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine) or anti-PD-1 antibody alone. Patients were matched in a 1:3 ratio using propensity score matching (PSM). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary outcome, and its association with maintenance therapy was assessed using the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model.
Results: Fifty-eight patients were included in the combined maintenance therapy group. After PSM, 174 patients were included in the anti-PD-1 antibody maintenance therapy group. In the matched cohort, the 2-year PFS rate was significantly higher in the combined maintenance therapy group than in the anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy group (66.8% vs. 51.3%, P = 0.0063). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with pre-treatment Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA >12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels had significant improved PFS with combined maintenance therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.20-0.96, P = 0.033). In contrast, no statistically significant PFS improvement from the combined maintenance therapy was observed among patients with low pre-treatment EBV DNA (≤12,400 copies/mL) and undetectable post-treatment levels (HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.27-1.27, P = 0.17), or those with detectable post-treatment EBV DNA levels regardless of pre-treatment levels (HR = 0.73, 95% = CI 0.31-1.70, P = 0.46). Combined maintenance therapy was associated with higher rates of grade 3-4 hand-foot syndrome (P < 0.001) and leukopenia (P = 0.0487).
Conclusion: Anti-PD-1 antibody plus capecitabine maintenance therapy improved PFS with manageable toxicities in patients with RM-MPC following first-line immunochemotherapy, particularly in those with pre-treatment EBV DNA > 12,400 copies/mL and undetectable post-treatment levels.
期刊介绍:
The Oncologist® is dedicated to translating the latest research developments into the best multidimensional care for cancer patients. Thus, The Oncologist is committed to helping physicians excel in this ever-expanding environment through the publication of timely reviews, original studies, and commentaries on important developments. We believe that the practice of oncology requires both an understanding of a range of disciplines encompassing basic science related to cancer, translational research, and clinical practice, but also the socioeconomic and psychosocial factors that determine access to care and quality of life and function following cancer treatment.