[A Comparative Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Immune Monotherapy versus 
Immunotheray Combined with Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients Aged 75 Years 
and Above with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].

Yunye Mao, An Wang, Shu Sheng, Yangyang Jia, Xiangwei Ge, Jinzhao Zhai, Jinliang Wang
{"title":"[A Comparative Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Immune Monotherapy versus \u2029Immunotheray Combined with Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients Aged 75 Years \u2029and Above with Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].","authors":"Yunye Mao, An Wang, Shu Sheng, Yangyang Jia, Xiangwei Ge, Jinzhao Zhai, Jinliang Wang","doi":"10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2024.101.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The malignant tumor that has the highest global morbidity and death rate is lung cancer, which primarily affects the elderly. The therapy landscape for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has transformed with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of immune monotherapy and immunotheray combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC aged 75 years and above.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively analyzed 111 patients with advanced NSCLC who were at least 75 years old and received treatment at the First or Fifth Medical Centers of the People's Liberation Army General Hospital from January 2018 to October 2022. These patients underwent first-line or second-line treatment, with 70 receiving immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy and 41 receiving immunotherapy alone. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match the baseline characteristics of the patients, including age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score, and the number of treatment lines. The study endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median OS for the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was 27.87 months, and the median PFS was 11.50 months. The median OS for the immune monotherapy group was 34.93 months, and the median PFS was 17.00 months. There were no significant differences in OS (P=0.722) and PFS (P=0.474) between the two groups, but a significant difference was observed in ORR (P=0.025). After PSM matching, each group comprised 27 patients. The median OS for the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was 17.70 months, the median PFS was 8.97 months. The median OS for the immune monotherapy group was 17.87 months, and the median PFS was 11.53 months. No significant differences were observed in OS (P=0.635), PFS (P=0.878) and ORR (P=0.097). In terms of safety, the overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) before matching was 62.86% in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group, which was higher than 41.46% in the immune monotherapy group (P=0.029), while there was no difference in the incidence of AEs of grade 3 or above between the two groups (P=0.221). After matching, AEs occurred in 17 (62.96%) patients in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group and 13 (48.15%) in the immune monotherapy group. There were no significant differences in the overall incidence of AEs (P=0.273) or the incidence of grade 3 or above (P=0.299) between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy does not significantly improve OS or PFS in patients with NSCLC aged 75 years and above when compared to immunotherapy alone, and this conclusion was further validated by the analysis after PSM. The safety assessment suggests that before matching, the incidence of AEs of any grade in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was higher. Still, the two groups had no difference in the incidence of AEs of grade 3 or above. Following matching, the tolerability of the treatment was similar in both groups. According to the safety assessment, the unique circumstances and course of treatment for geriatric patients with advanced NSCLC should be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":39317,"journal":{"name":"中国肺癌杂志","volume":"27 9","pages":"665-673"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11534547/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国肺癌杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2024.101.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The malignant tumor that has the highest global morbidity and death rate is lung cancer, which primarily affects the elderly. The therapy landscape for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has transformed with the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of immune monotherapy and immunotheray combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC aged 75 years and above.

Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed 111 patients with advanced NSCLC who were at least 75 years old and received treatment at the First or Fifth Medical Centers of the People's Liberation Army General Hospital from January 2018 to October 2022. These patients underwent first-line or second-line treatment, with 70 receiving immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy and 41 receiving immunotherapy alone. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match the baseline characteristics of the patients, including age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) score, and the number of treatment lines. The study endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety assessment.

Results: The median OS for the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was 27.87 months, and the median PFS was 11.50 months. The median OS for the immune monotherapy group was 34.93 months, and the median PFS was 17.00 months. There were no significant differences in OS (P=0.722) and PFS (P=0.474) between the two groups, but a significant difference was observed in ORR (P=0.025). After PSM matching, each group comprised 27 patients. The median OS for the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was 17.70 months, the median PFS was 8.97 months. The median OS for the immune monotherapy group was 17.87 months, and the median PFS was 11.53 months. No significant differences were observed in OS (P=0.635), PFS (P=0.878) and ORR (P=0.097). In terms of safety, the overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) before matching was 62.86% in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group, which was higher than 41.46% in the immune monotherapy group (P=0.029), while there was no difference in the incidence of AEs of grade 3 or above between the two groups (P=0.221). After matching, AEs occurred in 17 (62.96%) patients in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group and 13 (48.15%) in the immune monotherapy group. There were no significant differences in the overall incidence of AEs (P=0.273) or the incidence of grade 3 or above (P=0.299) between the two groups.

Conclusions: Immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy does not significantly improve OS or PFS in patients with NSCLC aged 75 years and above when compared to immunotherapy alone, and this conclusion was further validated by the analysis after PSM. The safety assessment suggests that before matching, the incidence of AEs of any grade in the immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy group was higher. Still, the two groups had no difference in the incidence of AEs of grade 3 or above. Following matching, the tolerability of the treatment was similar in both groups. According to the safety assessment, the unique circumstances and course of treatment for geriatric patients with advanced NSCLC should be considered.

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
[75岁及以上晚期非小细胞肺癌老年患者免疫单药治疗与免疫治疗联合化疗的疗效和安全性比较研究]。
背景:肺癌是全球发病率和死亡率最高的恶性肿瘤,主要影响老年人。随着免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)的问世,非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的治疗格局发生了变化。本研究旨在比较免疫单药疗法和免疫疗法联合化疗对75岁及以上晚期NSCLC患者的安全性和有效性:本研究回顾性分析了2018年1月至2022年10月在中国人民解放军总医院第一或第五医学中心接受治疗的111例至少75岁的晚期NSCLC患者。这些患者接受了一线或二线治疗,其中70人接受免疫疗法联合化疗,41人单独接受免疫疗法。研究采用倾向得分匹配法(PSM)来匹配患者的基线特征,包括年龄、东部合作肿瘤学组(Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group)表现状态(ECOG PS)评分和治疗次数。研究终点包括客观反应率(ORR)、无进展生存期(PFS)、总生存期(OS)和安全性评估:结果:免疫疗法联合化疗组的中位OS为27.87个月,中位PFS为11.50个月。免疫单一疗法组的中位 OS 为 34.93 个月,中位 PFS 为 17.00 个月。两组的OS(P=0.722)和PFS(P=0.474)无明显差异,但ORR(P=0.025)有明显差异。经 PSM 匹配后,每组有 27 名患者。免疫疗法联合化疗组的中位OS为17.70个月,中位PFS为8.97个月。免疫单药治疗组的中位OS为17.87个月,中位PFS为11.53个月。在OS(P=0.635)、PFS(P=0.878)和ORR(P=0.097)方面未观察到明显差异。在安全性方面,匹配前,免疫疗法联合化疗组的不良事件(AEs)总发生率为62.86%,高于免疫单药组的41.46%(P=0.029),而两组间3级或以上AEs的发生率无差异(P=0.221)。配对后,免疫疗法联合化疗组有17例(62.96%)患者发生了AEs,免疫单一疗法组有13例(48.15%)患者发生了AEs。两组的AEs总发生率(P=0.273)和3级或以上的发生率(P=0.299)无明显差异:与单独使用免疫疗法相比,免疫疗法联合化疗并不能明显改善75岁及以上NSCLC患者的OS或PFS,PSM后的分析进一步验证了这一结论。安全性评估表明,在配对前,免疫疗法联合化疗组的任何级别的AEs发生率均较高。不过,两组在 3 级或以上 AE 的发生率上没有差异。配对后,两组患者的耐受性相似。根据安全性评估,应考虑到晚期NSCLC老年患者的特殊情况和疗程。
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
中国肺癌杂志
中国肺癌杂志 Medicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5131
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Lung Cancer(CJLC, pISSN 1009-3419, eISSN 1999-6187), a monthly Open Access journal, is hosted by Chinese Anti-Cancer Association, Chinese Antituberculosis Association, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital. CJLC was indexed in DOAJ, EMBASE/SCOPUS, Chemical Abstract(CA), CSA-Biological Science, HINARI, EBSCO-CINAHL,CABI Abstract, Global Health, CNKI, etc. Editor-in-Chief: Professor Qinghua ZHOU.
期刊最新文献
[A Case Report of EGFR-TKIs Resistant Secondary MET Gene Amplified 
Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Literature Review]. [Advances of Neoadjuvant Targeted Therapy in ALK-positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer]. [Application of Nano-drug Delivery Technology in Overcoming Drug Resistance 
in Lung Cancer]. [Clinicopathological Analysis of 14 Cases of Primary Pulmonary Lymphoepithelial Carcinoma]. [Immunotherapy for Extensive-stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: 
Research Progress and Future Perspectives].
×
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