Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Treatment Options for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL International Journal of Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2024-02-12 DOI:10.1155/2024/8585035
Luqing Zhao, Zhiting Zhao, Xiaoqi Yan, Fei Wu, Ning Sun, Renhong Guo, Shaorong Yu, Xiao Hu, Jifeng Feng
{"title":"Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of First-Line Treatment Options for Unresectable Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis","authors":"Luqing Zhao,&nbsp;Zhiting Zhao,&nbsp;Xiaoqi Yan,&nbsp;Fei Wu,&nbsp;Ning Sun,&nbsp;Renhong Guo,&nbsp;Shaorong Yu,&nbsp;Xiao Hu,&nbsp;Jifeng Feng","doi":"10.1155/2024/8585035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>Background</i>. Based on PACIFIC trial, durvalumab as consolidation therapy following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) has been a new standard treatment for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In clinical applications, there are heterogeneous adjustments or novel strategies following specialized discussions in experienced multidisciplinary teams. This study retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line treatments for unresectable stage III NSCLC. <i>Methods</i>. We retrospectively analyzed 397 patients who received first-line treatment for unresectable stage III NSCLC. Comparisons and statistical analyses of treatment were made in terms of efficacy and safety. Adverse events and responses were assessed using CTCAE v5.0 and RECIST v1.1. The progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method or the Cox survival regression model and compared using the log-rank test. <i>Results</i>. In wild-type driver genes group, the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and median PFS (mPFS) were prolonged in the radiotherapy group compared to those in the nonradiotherapy group (ORR: 50.94% vs. 30.06%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001; DCR: 98.11% vs. 80.37%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001; and mPFS: 21.00 vs. 8.20 months, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). The incidence of pneumonia at any grade in the radiotherapy group was higher than that in the nonradiotherapy group (9.43% vs. 2.45%, <i>p</i> = 0.008). In the radiotherapy group, the chemoradiotherapy (CRT) plus immunotherapy subgroup had longer mPFS than the CRT subgroup, with increased toxicity at any grade (24.60 vs. 17.90 months, p = 0.025, and 83.17% vs. 65.52%, <i>p</i> = 0.011). In the nonradiotherapy group, the DCR and mPFS were higher in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy subgroup than in the chemotherapy subgroup, with increased toxicity at any grade (DCR: 93.67% vs. 67.86%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001; mPFS: 13.53 vs. 5.07 months, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001; and 68.35% vs. 41.67%, <i>p</i> = 0.001). In the mutant driver genes group, the efficacy did not significantly differ among the radiotherapy subgroup, targeted therapy subgroup, and radiotherapy plus targeted therapy subgroup (ORR: <i>p</i> = 0.633; mPFS: <i>p</i> = 0.450). <i>Conclusions</i>. For unresectable stage III NSCLC patients with wild-type driver genes, the combination of radiotherapy and immunotherapy in the initial treatment was essential to significantly improve the efficacy. For patients with mutant driver genes, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, and the combination of radiotherapy and targeted therapy showed similar short-term efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":13782,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/8585035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Based on PACIFIC trial, durvalumab as consolidation therapy following concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) has been a new standard treatment for unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In clinical applications, there are heterogeneous adjustments or novel strategies following specialized discussions in experienced multidisciplinary teams. This study retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of different first-line treatments for unresectable stage III NSCLC. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed 397 patients who received first-line treatment for unresectable stage III NSCLC. Comparisons and statistical analyses of treatment were made in terms of efficacy and safety. Adverse events and responses were assessed using CTCAE v5.0 and RECIST v1.1. The progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method or the Cox survival regression model and compared using the log-rank test. Results. In wild-type driver genes group, the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and median PFS (mPFS) were prolonged in the radiotherapy group compared to those in the nonradiotherapy group (ORR: 50.94% vs. 30.06%, p < 0.001; DCR: 98.11% vs. 80.37%, p < 0.001; and mPFS: 21.00 vs. 8.20 months, p < 0.001). The incidence of pneumonia at any grade in the radiotherapy group was higher than that in the nonradiotherapy group (9.43% vs. 2.45%, p = 0.008). In the radiotherapy group, the chemoradiotherapy (CRT) plus immunotherapy subgroup had longer mPFS than the CRT subgroup, with increased toxicity at any grade (24.60 vs. 17.90 months, p = 0.025, and 83.17% vs. 65.52%, p = 0.011). In the nonradiotherapy group, the DCR and mPFS were higher in the chemotherapy plus immunotherapy subgroup than in the chemotherapy subgroup, with increased toxicity at any grade (DCR: 93.67% vs. 67.86%, p < 0.001; mPFS: 13.53 vs. 5.07 months, p < 0.001; and 68.35% vs. 41.67%, p = 0.001). In the mutant driver genes group, the efficacy did not significantly differ among the radiotherapy subgroup, targeted therapy subgroup, and radiotherapy plus targeted therapy subgroup (ORR: p = 0.633; mPFS: p = 0.450). Conclusions. For unresectable stage III NSCLC patients with wild-type driver genes, the combination of radiotherapy and immunotherapy in the initial treatment was essential to significantly improve the efficacy. For patients with mutant driver genes, radiotherapy, targeted therapy, and the combination of radiotherapy and targeted therapy showed similar short-term efficacy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
无法切除的 III 期非小细胞肺癌一线治疗方案的疗效和安全性比较:回顾性分析
背景。根据 PACIFIC 试验,durvalumab 作为同期化放疗(cCRT)后的巩固治疗已成为不可切除的 III 期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的新标准治疗方法。在临床应用中,经过经验丰富的多学科团队的专门讨论,出现了不同的调整或新策略。本研究回顾性比较了不同一线治疗方法对不可切除的 III 期 NSCLC 的疗效和安全性。方法。我们对接受一线治疗的 397 例不可切除 III 期 NSCLC 患者进行了回顾性分析。从疗效和安全性方面对治疗进行了比较和统计分析。不良事件和反应采用 CTCAE v5.0 和 RECIST v1.1 进行评估。采用 Kaplan-Meier 法或 Cox 生存回归模型估算无进展生存期(PFS),并采用 log-rank 检验进行比较。结果在野生型驱动基因组中,与非放疗组相比,放疗组的客观反应率(ORR)、疾病控制率(DCR)和中位生存期(mPFS)均有所延长(ORR:50.94% vs. 30.06%,< 0.001;DCR:98.11% vs. 80.37%,< 0.001;mPFS:21.00 vs. 8.20个月,< 0.001)。放疗组任何级别肺炎的发生率均高于非放疗组(9.43% vs. 2.45%,= 0.008)。在放疗组中,化学放疗(CRT)加免疫治疗亚组的mPFS比CRT亚组长,但任何级别的毒性均有所增加(24.60个月对17.90个月,P=0.025;83.17%对65.52%,=0.011)。在非放疗组中,化疗加免疫治疗亚组的 DCR 和 mPFS 均高于化疗亚组,但任何级别的毒性均有所增加(DCR:93.67% vs. 67.86%,< 0.001;mPFS:13.53 vs. 5.07 个月,< 0.001;68.35% vs. 41.67%,= 0.001)。在突变驱动基因组中,放疗亚组、靶向治疗亚组和放疗加靶向治疗亚组的疗效无明显差异(ORR:=0.633;mPFS:=0.450)。结论对于具有野生型驱动基因的不可切除的III期NSCLC患者,在初始治疗中联合放疗和免疫治疗对显著提高疗效至关重要。对于有突变驱动基因的患者,放疗、靶向治疗以及放疗与靶向治疗的联合治疗显示出相似的短期疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
274
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: IJCP is a general medical journal. IJCP gives special priority to work that has international appeal. IJCP publishes: Editorials. IJCP Editorials are commissioned. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] Perspectives. Most IJCP Perspectives are commissioned. Example. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] Study design and interpretation. Example. [Always peer reviewed] Original data from clinical investigations. In particular: Primary research papers from RCTs, observational studies, epidemiological studies; pre-specified sub-analyses; pooled analyses. [Always peer reviewed] Meta-analyses. [Always peer reviewed] Systematic reviews. From October 2009, special priority will be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed] Non-systematic/narrative reviews. From October 2009, reviews that are not systematic will be considered only if they include a discrete Methods section that must explicitly describe the authors'' approach. Special priority will, however, be given to systematic reviews. [Always peer reviewed] ''How to…'' papers. Example. [Always peer reviewed] Consensus statements. [Always peer reviewed] Short reports. [Always peer reviewed] Letters. [Peer reviewed at the editor''s discretion] International scope IJCP publishes work from investigators globally. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the UK. Around 30% of IJCP articles list an author from the USA or Canada. Around 45% of IJCP articles list an author from a European country that is not the UK. Around 15% of articles published in IJCP list an author from a country in the Asia-Pacific region.
期刊最新文献
A Cross-Sectional Study on Nurse-Parent Partnership in the Pediatric Intensive Care Units Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy Reduces Pain and Improves Internal Rotation after Arthroscopic Capsular Release: A Randomized Clinical Trial Why Some People Did Not Want to be Vaccinated against COVID-19? Analysis of Some Psychological Factors Connected with a Decision about Vaccination Predicting the Risk of Fundus Lesions in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Nomogram Model Health Experts’ Perspectives on Barriers, Facilitators, and Needs for Improvement of Hospital Care in the Dying Phase
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1