Identifying subgroups deriving the most benefit from PD-1 checkpoint inhibition plus chemotherapy in advanced metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY World Journal of Surgical Oncology Pub Date : 2024-12-21 DOI:10.1186/s12957-024-03424-3
Shengfa Lin, Bihe Fu, Muhammad Khan
{"title":"Identifying subgroups deriving the most benefit from PD-1 checkpoint inhibition plus chemotherapy in advanced metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Shengfa Lin, Bihe Fu, Muhammad Khan","doi":"10.1186/s12957-024-03424-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy has demonstrated an enhancement in progression-free survival (PFS) for individuals with advanced and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) when compared to the use of chemotherapy alone. Nevertheless, the extent to which different subgroups of metastatic TNBC patients experience this benefit remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Our objective was to conduct subgroup analyses to more precisely identify the factors influencing these outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The PubMed database was searched until Dec 2023 for studies that compared PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy (ICT) with chemotherapy (CT) alone. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. was used for the data analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 2468 advanced and metastatic TNBC were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. PFS surge with combined therapy was observed in White (HR 0.80 [0.70, 0.91], p = 0.0007) and Asian ethnicities (HR 0.73 [0.58, 0.93], p = 0.01) but not in Blacks (HR 0.72 [0.42, 1.24], p = 0.24). Overall, patients with distant metastasis demonstrated to derive the PFS benefit from additional immunotherapy (HR 0.87 [0.77, 0.99], p = 0.03); however, metastasis to individual distant site was associated with failure to achieve any treatment difference (Bone: HR 0.79 [0.41, 1.52], p = 0.49; Lung: HR 0.85 [0.70, 1.04], p = 0.11; Liver: HR 0.80 [0.64, 1.01], p = 0.06). While number of metastases > 3 also showed to impact the PFS advantage (HR 0.89 [0.69, 1.16], p = 0.39). While patients, regardless of prior chemotherapy, experienced a notable enhancement in PFS with ICT (Overall: HR 0.79 [0.71, 0.88], p < 0.0001; Yes: HR 0.87 [0.76, 1.00], p = 0.05; No: HR 0.67 [0.56, 0.80], p < 0.00001), those previously exposed to chemotherapy exhibited a significantly smaller PFS advantage compared to those without prior chemotherapy, as evidenced by a significant subgroup difference (Test for subgroup difference: P = 0.02, I2 = 82.2%). Patients lacking PD-L1 expression also failed to achieve any additional benefit from immunotherapy (PD-L1-: HR 0.95 [0.81, 1.12]; p = 0.54; PD-L1+: HR 0.73 [0.64, 0.85], p < 0.0001). Age, ECOG status, and presentation with de novo metastasis/recurrent shown no impact on IT-associated PFS advantage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Patient- and treatment- related factors such as ethnicity, distant metastases, number of metastases (> 3), previous exposure to chemotherapy and PD-L1 expression, seem to influence or restrict the advantage in progression-free survival associated with the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy, as opposed to chemotherapy alone, in patients with advanced and metastatic TNBC. Larger studies are warranted to validate these outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23856,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":"22 1","pages":"346"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11663364/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-024-03424-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy has demonstrated an enhancement in progression-free survival (PFS) for individuals with advanced and metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) when compared to the use of chemotherapy alone. Nevertheless, the extent to which different subgroups of metastatic TNBC patients experience this benefit remains uncertain.

Objectives: Our objective was to conduct subgroup analyses to more precisely identify the factors influencing these outcomes.

Materials and methods: The PubMed database was searched until Dec 2023 for studies that compared PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy (ICT) with chemotherapy (CT) alone. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. was used for the data analysis.

Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 2468 advanced and metastatic TNBC were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. PFS surge with combined therapy was observed in White (HR 0.80 [0.70, 0.91], p = 0.0007) and Asian ethnicities (HR 0.73 [0.58, 0.93], p = 0.01) but not in Blacks (HR 0.72 [0.42, 1.24], p = 0.24). Overall, patients with distant metastasis demonstrated to derive the PFS benefit from additional immunotherapy (HR 0.87 [0.77, 0.99], p = 0.03); however, metastasis to individual distant site was associated with failure to achieve any treatment difference (Bone: HR 0.79 [0.41, 1.52], p = 0.49; Lung: HR 0.85 [0.70, 1.04], p = 0.11; Liver: HR 0.80 [0.64, 1.01], p = 0.06). While number of metastases > 3 also showed to impact the PFS advantage (HR 0.89 [0.69, 1.16], p = 0.39). While patients, regardless of prior chemotherapy, experienced a notable enhancement in PFS with ICT (Overall: HR 0.79 [0.71, 0.88], p < 0.0001; Yes: HR 0.87 [0.76, 1.00], p = 0.05; No: HR 0.67 [0.56, 0.80], p < 0.00001), those previously exposed to chemotherapy exhibited a significantly smaller PFS advantage compared to those without prior chemotherapy, as evidenced by a significant subgroup difference (Test for subgroup difference: P = 0.02, I2 = 82.2%). Patients lacking PD-L1 expression also failed to achieve any additional benefit from immunotherapy (PD-L1-: HR 0.95 [0.81, 1.12]; p = 0.54; PD-L1+: HR 0.73 [0.64, 0.85], p < 0.0001). Age, ECOG status, and presentation with de novo metastasis/recurrent shown no impact on IT-associated PFS advantage.

Conclusions: Patient- and treatment- related factors such as ethnicity, distant metastases, number of metastases (> 3), previous exposure to chemotherapy and PD-L1 expression, seem to influence or restrict the advantage in progression-free survival associated with the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy, as opposed to chemotherapy alone, in patients with advanced and metastatic TNBC. Larger studies are warranted to validate these outcomes.

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
确定晚期转移性三阴性乳腺癌从PD-1检查点抑制加化疗中获益最多的亚组:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析
背景:与单独使用化疗相比,免疫治疗和化疗联合治疗可以提高晚期和转移性三阴性乳腺癌(TNBC)患者的无进展生存期(PFS)。然而,不同亚组的转移性TNBC患者体验到这种益处的程度仍不确定。目的:我们的目的是进行亚组分析,以更准确地确定影响这些结果的因素。材料和方法:截至2023年12月,PubMed数据库检索了PD-1检查点抑制剂联合化疗(ICT)与单独化疗(CT)的研究。主要研究终点为无进展生存期(PFS)。Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4版。用于数据分析。结果:四项随机对照试验(rct)包括2468例晚期和转移性TNBC纳入本系统评价和荟萃分析。在白人(HR 0.80 [0.70, 0.91], p = 0.0007)和亚洲种族(HR 0.73 [0.58, 0.93], p = 0.01)中观察到联合治疗的PFS激增,但在黑人(HR 0.72 [0.42, 1.24], p = 0.24)中没有。总体而言,远处转移患者从额外的免疫治疗中获得PFS益处(风险比0.87 [0.77,0.99],p = 0.03);然而,转移到个别远端部位与治疗失败相关(骨:HR 0.79 [0.41, 1.52], p = 0.49;肺:HR 0.85 [0.70, 1.04], p = 0.11;肝脏:HR 0.80 [0.64, 1.01], p = 0.06)。而转移灶数量bbb3也会影响PFS优势(HR 0.89 [0.69, 1.16], p = 0.39)。而患者,无论之前是否接受化疗,ICT治疗后PFS显著增强(总体:HR 0.79 [0.71, 0.88], p)。患者和治疗相关因素,如种族、远处转移、转移数量(bbb3)、既往化疗暴露和PD-L1表达,似乎会影响或限制晚期和转移性TNBC患者在化疗中添加免疫治疗而不是单独化疗的无进展生存优势。需要更大规模的研究来验证这些结果。
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
4.70
自引率
15.60%
发文量
362
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: World Journal of Surgical Oncology publishes articles related to surgical oncology and its allied subjects, such as epidemiology, cancer research, biomarkers, prevention, pathology, radiology, cancer treatment, clinical trials, multimodality treatment and molecular biology. Emphasis is placed on original research articles. The journal also publishes significant clinical case reports, as well as balanced and timely reviews on selected topics. Oncology is a multidisciplinary super-speciality of which surgical oncology forms an integral component, especially with solid tumors. Surgical oncologists around the world are involved in research extending from detecting the mechanisms underlying the causation of cancer, to its treatment and prevention. The role of a surgical oncologist extends across the whole continuum of care. With continued developments in diagnosis and treatment, the role of a surgical oncologist is ever-changing. Hence, World Journal of Surgical Oncology aims to keep readers abreast with latest developments that will ultimately influence the work of surgical oncologists.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer patients: a retrospective, comparative study. Establishing a preoperative predictive model for gallbladder adenoma and cholesterol polyps based on machine learning: a multicentre retrospective study. Division of the inferior pulmonary ligament during upper lobectomy does not improve postoperative pulmonary function: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. Risk factors for lymphatic leakage following radical cystectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Efficacy comparison of optimal natural orifice specimen extraction for robotic middle rectal cancer resection in women: transanal or transvaginal orifice.
×
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