PO.CL05.13 · 临床研究

头颈癌中免疫治疗相比化疗的早期无进展生存较差的模式:一项随机试验的荟萃分析

Pattern of inferior early progression-free survival with immunotherapy versus chemotherapy in head and neck cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

海报缩略图:头颈癌中免疫治疗相比化疗的早期无进展生存较差的模式:一项随机试验的荟萃分析
编号 6691 展板 2 时间 4/21 02:00–05:00 区域 Section 49 主讲 Donghwi Choi, MD
分会场 Vaccines and Other Immunomodulatory Agents
查看 PDF 下载 PDF 🔒 查看 / 下载完整 PDF 需登录并开通下载套餐 · 查看套餐 / 开通 AACR 官方页面

作者与单位 Authors & Affiliations

Donghwi Choi, Hangyul Lee, Jinha Kim, Young Kwang Chae

Northwestern Univ. Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL

摘要 Abstract

中文摘要
引言:铂类化疗联合免疫治疗长期以来一直是晚期头颈部鳞状细胞癌(HNSCC)的标准一线治疗。近来,以PD-L1表达为指导的基于pembrolizumab的方案,为选定患者引入了仅用免疫治疗的可行选择。然而,随机试验的早期数据提示,与化疗相比,免疫治疗可能导致较差的短期无进展生存(PFS),这可能是由于免疫激活延迟或疾病可能出现超进展。为阐明这些时间依赖性效应,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,比较晚期HNSCC中免疫治疗与化疗的早期疗效。 方法:我们系统检索了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆,寻找评估晚期HNSCC一线免疫治疗(Pembrolizumab、Nivolumab+Ipilimumab、Durvalumab、Durvalumab+Tremelimumab)与铂类化疗的II-III期RCT。合格试验须具有免疫治疗组和化疗组的Kaplan-Meier PFS曲线。排除包含一线后治疗背景的试验。将Kaplan-Meier PFS曲线数字化,并通过Guyot方法推导重建的患者个体数据。随后生成合并的Kaplan-Meier生存曲线,并在第3、6、9和12个月计算比较免疫治疗组和化疗组的风险比(HR)值,以评估治疗效应随时间的变化。HR通过两阶段荟萃分析方法估计,每项研究根据其样本量和方差进行加权,以适应试验间的差异。 结果:鉴定出三项合格的RCT。与化疗相比,免疫治疗在PFS方面表现出明显的早期劣势,第3个月的HR为3.77(95% CI,3.17–4.48),第6个月为2.20(95% CI,1.80–2.68)。这一差距随时间缩小,但到第9个月(HR 1.86;95% CI,1.62–2.13)和第12个月(HR 1.73;95% CI,1.49–2.01)仍具有统计学意义。合并的Kaplan-Meier PFS曲线反映了这些发现,显示免疫治疗的短期表现较差,随后两组逐渐趋同,免疫治疗组最终在约第12个月与化疗组交叉。 结论:在转移性HNSCC患者中,一线ICI单药治疗最初显示出相比化疗较差的结局,但随着免疫治疗的延迟效应显现,生存获益在约第12个月变得明显。这些结果凸显了密切早期监测的重要性,并支持采用联合或序贯方案,以对抗早期疾病进展同时维持长期获益。
查看英文原文 English abstract
Introduction: Platinum-based chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy has long been the standard first-line treatment for advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). Recently, pembrolizumab-based regimens guided by PD-L1 expression have introduced immunotherapy-only approaches as viable options for selected patients. However, early data from randomized trials suggest that immunotherapy may result in inferior short-term progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy, likely due to delayed immune activation or possible hyperprogression of the disease. To clarify these time-dependent effects, we performed a meta-analysis comparing the early efficacy of immunotherapy versus chemotherapy in advanced HNSCC. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for phase II-III RCTs evaluating first-line immunotherapy(Pembrolizumab, Nivoluab+Ipilimumab, Durvalumab, Durvalumab+Tremelimumab) with platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced HNSCC. Eligible trials were required to have Kaplan-Meier PFS curves for immunotherapy and chemotherapy arms. Trials including post-first-line settings were excluded. Kaplan-Meier PFS curves were digitized, and reconstructed individual patient data were derived via the Guyot method. Pooled Kaplan-Meier survival curves were then generated, and hazard ratio (HR) values comparing immunotherapy and chemotherapy arms were calculated at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months to assess changes in treatment effect over time. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated through a two-stage meta-analytic method, with each study weighted according to its sample size and variance to accommodate inter-trial differences. Results: Three eligible RCTs were identified. Immunotherapy exhibited a pronounced early disadvantage in PFS compared with chemotherapy, with HRs of 3.77 (95% CI, 3.17-4.48) at 3 months and 2.20 (95% CI, 1.80-2.68) at 6 months. This gap narrowed over time but was still statistically significant by the 9th (HR 1.86; 95% CI, 1.62-2,13) and the 12th month (HR 1.73; 95% CI, 1.49-2.01). Pooled Kaplan-Meier PFS curves mirrored these findings, showing inferior short-term performance of immunotherapy followed by gradual convergence of both arms, with the immunotherapy arm ultimately crossing over the chemotherapy arm around the 12th month. Conclusion: Among patients with metastatic HNSCC, first-line ICI monotherapy initially shows inferior outcomes compared to chemotherapy, but the survival benefit becomes evident around the 12th month as the delayed effects of immunotherapy emerge. These results highlight the importance of close early monitoring and lend support to combination or sequential regimens to counteract early disease progression while maintaining long-term benefit.
利益披露 Disclosure
D. Choi, None.. H. Lee, None.. J. Kim, None. Y. Chae, AbbVie ). Bristol Myers Squibb ). Biodesix ). Freenome ). Predicine ). Tempus ). Imagine AI ). Picture Health ). Oncohost ). Regeneron ). Roche/Genentech Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. AstraZeneca Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Foundation Medicine Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Neogenomics Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Guardant Health Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Boehringer Ingelheim Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Biodesix Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. ImmuneOncia Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Lilly Oncology Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria. Merck Consulting fees, payments, and/or honoraria.

← 返回 AACR 2026 检索