Real-world long-term outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment with or without immune checkpoint inhibitors.

IF 7.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Chinese Medical Journal Pub Date : 2025-11-20 Epub Date: 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1097/CM9.0000000000003551
Bolun Zhou, Lin Li, Fan Zhang, Qilin Huai, Liang Zhao, Fengwei Tan, Qi Xue, Wei Guo, Shugeng Gao
{"title":"Real-world long-term outcomes of non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant treatment with or without immune checkpoint inhibitors.","authors":"Bolun Zhou, Lin Li, Fan Zhang, Qilin Huai, Liang Zhao, Fengwei Tan, Qi Xue, Wei Guo, Shugeng Gao","doi":"10.1097/CM9.0000000000003551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been included in various neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) regimens for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, due to the relatively short period for the use of ICIs in NAT, patients' clinical outcomes with different regimens are uncertain. Our study aims to examine the efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NAIT) for NSCLC patients and compare the overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) of patients receiving different NAT regimens.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively included 308 NSCLC patients treated with different NAT regimens and subsequent surgery in National Cancer Center between August 1, 2016 and July 31, 2022. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were conducted to evaluate the prognosis of patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>With a median follow-up of 27.5 months, the 1-year OS rates were 98.8% and 96.2%, and the 2-year OS rates were 96.6% and 85.8% in patients of the NAIT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) group, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.339; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.160-0.720; P = 0.003). The 1-year EFS rates were 96.0% and 88.0%, and the 2-year EFS rates were 92.0% and 77.7% for patients in the NAIT and NACT groups, respectively (HR, 0.438; 95% CI, 0.276-0.846; P = 0.010). For patients who did not achieve pathological complete response (pCR), significantly longer OS ( P = 0.012) and EFS ( P = 0.019) were observed in patients receiving NAIT than those receiving NACT. Different NAT regimens had little effect on surgery and the postoperative length of stay (6 [4, 7] days vs . 6 [4, 7] days, Z = -0.227, P = 0.820).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>NAIT exhibited superior efficacy to NACT for NSCLC, resulting in longer OS and EFS. The OS and EFS benefits were also observed among patients in the NAIT group who did not achieve pCR.</p>","PeriodicalId":10183,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":"2963-2973"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12634232/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000003551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been included in various neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) regimens for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, due to the relatively short period for the use of ICIs in NAT, patients' clinical outcomes with different regimens are uncertain. Our study aims to examine the efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy (NAIT) for NSCLC patients and compare the overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) of patients receiving different NAT regimens.

Methods: This study retrospectively included 308 NSCLC patients treated with different NAT regimens and subsequent surgery in National Cancer Center between August 1, 2016 and July 31, 2022. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were conducted to evaluate the prognosis of patients.

Results: With a median follow-up of 27.5 months, the 1-year OS rates were 98.8% and 96.2%, and the 2-year OS rates were 96.6% and 85.8% in patients of the NAIT and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) group, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.339; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.160-0.720; P = 0.003). The 1-year EFS rates were 96.0% and 88.0%, and the 2-year EFS rates were 92.0% and 77.7% for patients in the NAIT and NACT groups, respectively (HR, 0.438; 95% CI, 0.276-0.846; P = 0.010). For patients who did not achieve pathological complete response (pCR), significantly longer OS ( P = 0.012) and EFS ( P = 0.019) were observed in patients receiving NAIT than those receiving NACT. Different NAT regimens had little effect on surgery and the postoperative length of stay (6 [4, 7] days vs . 6 [4, 7] days, Z = -0.227, P = 0.820).

Conclusions: NAIT exhibited superior efficacy to NACT for NSCLC, resulting in longer OS and EFS. The OS and EFS benefits were also observed among patients in the NAIT group who did not achieve pCR.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
使用或不使用免疫检查点抑制剂进行新辅助治疗的非小细胞肺癌患者的实际长期预后
背景:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)已被纳入非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)的各种新辅助治疗(NAT)方案中。然而,由于在NAT中使用ICIs的时间相对较短,不同方案的患者临床结果不确定。我们的研究旨在检验新辅助免疫治疗(NAIT)对NSCLC患者的疗效,并比较接受不同NAT方案的患者的总生存期(OS)和无事件生存期(EFS)。方法:本研究回顾性纳入2016年8月1日至2022年7月31日在国家癌症中心接受不同NAT方案治疗并随后手术的308例非小细胞肺癌患者。采用Kaplan-Meier生存分析和Cox比例风险回归分析评价患者预后。结果:中位随访27.5个月,NAIT组和新辅助化疗(NACT)组患者1年OS率分别为98.8%和96.2%,2年OS率分别为96.6%和85.8%(风险比[HR], 0.339;95%置信区间[CI], 0.160-0.720;P = 0.003)。NAIT组和NACT组患者1年EFS发生率分别为96.0%和88.0%,2年EFS发生率分别为92.0%和77.7% (HR, 0.438;95% ci, 0.276-0.846;P = 0.010)。对于未达到病理完全缓解(pCR)的患者,接受NAIT的患者OS (P = 0.012)和EFS (P = 0.019)明显长于接受NACT的患者。不同NAT方案对手术时间和术后住院时间影响较小(6 [4,7]d vs. 6 [4,7] d, Z = -0.227, P = 0.820)。结论:NAIT治疗NSCLC的疗效优于NACT,延长了OS和EFS。在没有达到pCR的NAIT组患者中也观察到OS和EFS的益处。
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
Chinese Medical Journal
Chinese Medical Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
19245
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Chinese Medical Journal (CMJ) is published semimonthly in English by the Chinese Medical Association, and is a peer reviewed general medical journal for all doctors, researchers, and health workers regardless of their medical specialty or type of employment. Established in 1887, it is the oldest medical periodical in China and is distributed worldwide. The journal functions as a window into China’s medical sciences and reflects the advances and progress in China’s medical sciences and technology. It serves the objective of international academic exchange. The journal includes Original Articles, Editorial, Review Articles, Medical Progress, Brief Reports, Case Reports, Viewpoint, Clinical Exchange, Letter,and News,etc. CMJ is abstracted or indexed in many databases including Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, Index Medicus/Medline, Science Citation Index (SCI), Current Contents, Cancerlit, Health Plan & Administration, Embase, Social Scisearch, Aidsline, Toxline, Biocommercial Abstracts, Arts and Humanities Search, Nuclear Science Abstracts, Water Resources Abstracts, Cab Abstracts, Occupation Safety & Health, etc. In 2007, the impact factor of the journal by SCI is 0.636, and the total citation is 2315.
期刊最新文献
Regulation of mitochondrial biogenesis and energy metabolism in the heart. Mechanisms and clinical applications of transcranial alternating current stimulation in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders: Current evidence and future directions. Disease burden of hematological malignancies worldwide, in China and in the United States based on the GLOBOCAN 2022 and Global Burden of Disease 2021 data. LedX: A novel blood-based early lung cancer detection approach with exceptional accuracy and robustness. Data-driven subgroups for 3-year risk stratification of incident diabetes and complications in diabetes-free Chinese adults.
×
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:604180095
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