PO.CL05.13 · 临床研究

NSCLC中仅免疫治疗相较于化疗的早期进展劣势:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析

Early progression disadvantage of immunotherapy-only treatment versus chemotherapy in NSCLC: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

海报缩略图:NSCLC中仅免疫治疗相较于化疗的早期进展劣势:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析
编号 6695 展板 6 时间 4/21 02:00–05:00 区域 Section 49 主讲 Jinha Kim, BS
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

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

Northwestern Univ. Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL

摘要 Abstract

中文摘要
引言:免疫检查点抑制剂(ICI)已成为晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)治疗的基石。然而,在多项随机对照试验(RCT)中,与化疗或化疗-免疫治疗联合方案相比,仅免疫治疗组在无进展生存期(PFS)和总生存期方面表现出早期劣势。这种早期下降可能反映多种因素,包括缺乏减瘤作用、免疫治疗疗效相对于化疗起效延迟,或超进展现象。为更好地界定这一模式,我们对比较仅免疫治疗方案与化疗用于一线NSCLC的RCT进行了荟萃分析,以确定这种早期劣势是否一致且可推广。 方法:我们系统检索了三个数据库(PubMed、Cochrane Library和Embase),寻找评估仅免疫治疗方案(Nivolumab联合Ipilimumab、Pembrolizumab、Atezolizumab、Avelumab、Nivolumab、Durvalumab、Durvalumab联合Tremelimumab、Cemiplimab)用于晚期NSCLC一线治疗的II期和III期RCT。仅限于后线治疗的试验被排除。合格研究需具备PFS的Kaplan-Meier曲线。共有12项RCT符合纳入标准。对生存曲线进行数字化处理,并使用Guyot算法重建个体患者数据。从汇总数据生成合并的Kaplan-Meier估计值,并通过采用研究特异性权重的两阶段荟萃分析获得比较仅免疫治疗与铂类化疗的风险比(HR)。计算曲线下面积(AUC)值以评估治疗效应的时相变化。 结果:在12项RCT中,仅免疫治疗方案在PFS方面表现出明显的早期劣势。在3个月时,PFS的风险比为2.03(95% CI 1.77-2.32),表明免疫治疗组的进展风险显著更高。这种情况在6个月时持续存在(HR 1.36,95% CI 1.18-1.57),但在9个月(HR 1.13)和12个月(HR 1.08)时减弱。在整个随访期间,免疫治疗最终优于化疗(HR = 0.86,95% CI 0.74-0.99,p = 0.048),显示出延迟获益。AUC分析证实在最初6个月期间累积PFS获益较差,随后逐渐追赶。 结论:NSCLC一线仅免疫治疗相较于化疗表现出早期PFS劣势,随后长期结局更优。这一模式强调了需要进行早期监测和优化联合策略,以在保持免疫治疗持久获益的同时防止早期进展。
查看英文原文 English abstract
Introduction : Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have become a cornerstone in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, across several randomized controlled trials (RCTs), immunotherapy-only arms have demonstrated an early disadvantage in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival when compared with chemotherapy or chemo-immunotherapy combinations. This early decline may reflect multiple factors, including lack of cytoreduction, delayed onset of immunotherapy efficacy relative to chemotherapy, or the phenomenon of hyperprogression. To better define this pattern, we conducted a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing immunotherapy-only regimens with chemotherapy in first-line NSCLC to determine whether this early disadvantage is consistent and generalizable. Methods: We systematically searched three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase) for phase II and III RCTs evaluating an immunotherapy-only regimen (Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab, Pembrolizumab, Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Nivolumab, Durvalumab, Durvalumab plus Tremelimumab, Cemiplimab) in the first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. Trials limited to later-line therapy were excluded. Eligible studies required Kaplan-Meier curves for PFS. Twelve RCTs met inclusion criteria. Survival curves were digitized, and individual patient data were reconstructed using the Guyot algorithm. Combined Kaplan-Meier estimates were generated from pooled data, and hazard ratios (HRs) comparing immunotherapy-only vs platinum-based chemotherapy were obtained through two-stage meta-analysis with study-specific weights. Area under the curve (AUC) values were calculated to evaluate temporal changes in treatment effect. Results : Across 12 RCTs, immunotherapy-only regimens showed a clear early disadvantage in PFS. At three months, the hazard ratio for PFS was 2.03 (95% CI 1.77-2.32), indicating a significantly higher risk of progression in the immunotherapy arms. This persisted at six months (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.18-1.57), but diminished by nine months (HR 1.13) and 12 months (HR 1.08). Over the full follow-up, immunotherapy ultimately outperformed chemotherapy (HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-0.99, p = 0.048), showing a delayed benefit. AUC analysis confirmed an inferior cumulative PFS benefit during the first 6 months, followed by a gradual catch-up. Conclusion : First-line immunotherapy-only treatment in NSCLC shows an early PFS disadvantage relative to chemotherapy, followed by superior long-term outcomes. This pattern underscores the need for early monitoring and optimized combination strategies to prevent early progression while maintaining immunotherapy's durable benefits.
利益披露 Disclosure
J. Kim, None.. H. Lee, None.. D. Choi, None. Y. Chae, AbbVie ). Bristol Myers Squibb ). Biodesix ). Freenome ). Predicine ). Tempus ). Imagine AI ). Picture Health ). Oncohost ). Regeneron ). Roche/Genentech ). AstraZeneca ). Foundation Medicine ). Neogenomics ). Guardant Health ). Boehringer Ingelheim ). ImmuneOncia ). Lilly Oncology ). Merck ). Takeda ).

← 返回 AACR 2026 检索