Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session

139P - Efficacy and safety of perioperative immunotherapy combinations for resectable non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Date

22 Mar 2024

Session

Poster Display session

Topics

Tumour Site

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Presenters

Yuelin Han

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2024) 9 (suppl_3): 1-12. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop102573

Authors

Y. Han, X. Xiao, S. Yao, X. Liu, Y. Feng, P. Li, Y. Li, S. Xia

Author affiliations

  • Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan/CN

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 139P

Background

Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of perioperative immunotherapy for resectable non small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have reported positive results. They were designed to adjuvant, neoadjuvant and sandwich (neoadjuvant plus adjuvant) immunotherapy by use of immune checkpoint inhibitors and platinum based chemotherapy (CT). The differences between neoadjuvant and sandwich modalities were unclear.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis by retrieving relevant literature from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and major international conferences. We included public data of RCTs comparing perioperative immunotherapy plus CT with CT for patients with resectable NSCLC.

Results

We analyzed 8 studies involving 3429 patients, including 6 neoadjuvant plus adjuvant (Neo-Adj) and 2 neoadjuvant (Neo) trials. For patients without programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) selection, Neo-Adj had better event free survival (EFS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-0.77) than CT. Especially, there existed no marked difference between Neo-Adj and Neo in EFS (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.48-1.68) and OS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.30-2.96). 3 treatments did not have statistical difference in the occurrence of adverse events (AEs), but Neo seemed to have lower incidence rates of any-grade AEs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.17-2.32) and grade ≥ 3 AEs (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.50-1.69). Subgroup analysis by PD-L1 suggested that EFS of Neo-Adj (HR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.21-0.74) and Neo (HR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.06-0.99) was significantly longer than CT for PD-L1 ≥ 50% subgroup. Neo-Adj had an opposite tendency in EFS than Neo when PD-L1 < 1% (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.43-1.66) and PD-L1 ≥ 50% (HR = 1.76, 95% CI: 0.36-7.85).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that Neo-Adj and Neo are associated with similar EFS benefit than CT for patients with resectable NSCLC. Neo-Adj tend to cause better EFS than Neo without any PD-L1 selection. However, patients with different PD-L1 expression may obtain different benefit from Neo-Adj or Neo. Moreover, the addition of adjuvant immunotherapy to Neo have a latent risk to increase the toxicity for patients.

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.