The efficacy and safety of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis

Combinational therapeutic strategies to overcome resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors

Over the past few years, immune checkpoint inhibitors resulted in magnificent and durable successes in treating cancer; however, only a minority of patients respond favorably to the treatment due to a broad-spectrum of tumor-intrinsic and tumor-extrinsic factors. With the recent insights gained into the mechanisms of resistance, combination treatment strategies to overcome the resistance and enhance the therapeutic potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors are emerging and showing promising results in both pre-clinical and clinical settings. This has been derived through multiple interconnected mechanisms such as enhancing tumor immunogenicity, improving neoantigen processing and presentation in addition to augmenting T cell infiltration and cytotoxic potentials. In the clinical settings, several avenues of combination treatments involving immune checkpoint inhibitors were associated with considerable improvement in the therapeutic outcome in terms of patient's survival and tumor growth control. This, in turn, increased the spectrum of cancer patients benefiting from the unprecedented and durable effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors leading to their adoption as a first-line treatment for certain cancers. Moreover, the significance of precision medicine in cancer immunotherapy and the unmet demand to develop more personalized predictive biomarkers and treatment strategies are also highlighted in this review.

Targeting the Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone System (RAAS) for Cardiovascular Protection and Enhanced Oncological Outcomes: Review

OPINION STATEMENT

The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is a crucial regulator of the cardiovascular system and a target for widely used therapeutic drugs. Dysregulation of RAAS, implicated in prevalent diseases like hypertension and heart failure, has recently gained attention in oncological contexts due to its role in tumor biology and cardiovascular toxicities (CVTs). Thus, RAAS inhibitors (RAASi) may be used as potential supplementary therapies in cancer treatment and CVT prevention. Oncological treatments have evolved significantly, impacting patient survival and safety profiles. However, they pose cardiovascular risks, necessitating strategies for mitigating adverse effects. The main drug classes used in oncology include anthracyclines, anti-HER2 therapies, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling pathway inhibitors (VSPI). While effective against cancer, these drugs induce varying CVTs. RAASi adjunctive therapy shows promise in enhancing clinical outcomes and protecting the cardiovascular system. Understanding RAAS involvement in cancer and CVT can inform personalized treatment approaches and improve patient care.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapy in first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to an increase in randomized controlled trials exploring various first-line combination treatment regimens. With the introduction of new PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, there are now more clinical options available. For the first time, the AK105 monoclonal antibody Penpulimab, developed in China, was included. The AK105-302 Phase III trial studied the efficacy and safety of Penpulimab combined with chemotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic squamous NSCLC. To determine the optimal treatment options, we conducted an updated network meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of these regimens.

METHODS

The system retrieves data from Chinese and English electronic databases, Clinical Trials, and the gov Clinical Trial Registration website up to September 6, 2023. The study indirectly compared the efficacy and safety of PD-1/PD-L1 combination regimens, including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), all-grade adverse events, and above-grade III adverse events. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) level, histological type, ECOG score, sex, and smoking history.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTS were included, with a total of ten thousand eight hundred patients. Penpulimab plus chemotherapy (Pen + CT) provided the best OS (HR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81) for PD-L1 patients with non-selective advanced NSCLC. Except Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab (Niv + Ipi), other PD-1/PD-L1 combination therapies significantly extended PFS compared with CT, and Nivolumab plus Bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy (Niv + Bev + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.26-0.74) provided the best PFS benefit and was comparable to Pen + CT (HR = 1.0) for PFS prolongation. For ORR, except Niv + Ipi, all the other regimens significantly improved ORR compared with CT. In terms of safety, except Tor + CT, the incidence of any-grade AEs or grade ≥ 3 adverse events may be higher than those of chemotherapy. The subgroup analysis revealed that for patients with PD-L1 levels below 1%, treatment with Tor + CT resulted in the best progression-free survival (HR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.25-0.86). For patients with PD-L1 levels of 1% or higher, Sintilimab plus chemotherapy (Sin + CT) (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-0.99) and Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy (Cam + CT) (HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.28-0.64) were associated with the best overall survival and progression-free survival, respectively. For patients with SqNSCLC, combined immunotherapy may provide greater survival benefits. For patients with Non-sqNSCLC, Niv + Bev + CT and Tor + CT were associated with optimal PFS and OS, respectively. Cam + CT provided the best PFS in male patients with a history of smoking and an ECOG score of 0. In both female and non-smoking patient subgroups, Pem + CT was associated with the best PFS and OS benefits.

CONCLUSION

For patients with advanced non-selective PD-L1 NSCLC, two effective regimens are Pen + CT and Niv + Bev + CT, which rank first in OS and PFS among all patients. Cam + CT and Tor + CT have advantages for OS in patients with SqNSCLC and Non-sqNSCLC, respectively. Niv + Ipi + CT provided the best OS benefit for patients with an ECOG score of 0, while Pem + CT may be the most effective treatment for patients with an ECOG score of 1. Pem + CT has a better effect on female patients and non-smokers. Sin + CT was found to be the most effective treatment for male patients and the smoking subgroup, while Cam + CT was found to be the most effective for PFS. In addition, Tor + CT was associated with the best PFS for patients with negative PD-L1 expression. Pem + CT was found to significantly improve both PFS and OS compared to CT alone. For patients with positive PD-L1 expression, Sin + CT and Cam + CT were found to be optimal for OS and PFS, respectively. It is important to note that, with the exception of Tor + CT, the toxicity of the other combinations was higher than that of CT alone.

Epigenetic modification in radiotherapy and immunotherapy for cancers

Radiotherapy (RT) is one of the primary treatment modalities in managing cancer patients. Recently, combined RT and immunotherapy (IT) (i.e., radio-IT [RIT]) have been aggressively investigated in managing cancer patients. However, several issues in conducting RIT are challenging, such as incorporating advanced irradiation techniques, predictive/prognostic biomarkers, and other treatment modalities. Several clinical efforts and novel biomarkers have been introduced and developed to solve these challenges. For example, stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic radiotherapy, stereotactic body radiotherapy/stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy, and FLASH-RT have been applied for delivering precise irradiation to lung and liver tumors in conjunction with IT. Besides, several novel IT agents and incorporations of other therapies, such as targeted and thermal therapies, have been further investigated. The present study reviewed the emerging challenges of RIT in modern oncology. We also evaluated clinical practice, bench research, and multimodality treatments. In addition to several clinically applicable biomarkers, we emphasize the roles of advanced irradiation techniques and epigenetic modification as predictive/prognostic biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets. For example, 6(m) A-based epigenetic agents demonstrate the potential to enhance the treatment effects of RIT. However, further prospective randomized trials should be conducted to confirm their roles.

Strategies to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of anti-PD-1 antibody, anti-PD-L1 antibody and anti-CTLA-4 antibody in cancer therapy

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (anti-PD-1 antibody, anti-PD-L1 antibody, and anti-CTLA-4 antibody) have displayed considerable success in the treatment of malignant tumors, the therapeutic effect is still unsatisfactory for a portion of patients. Therefore, it is imperative to develop strategies to enhance the effect of these ICIs. Increasing evidence strongly suggests that the key to this issue is to transform the tumor immune microenvironment from a state of no or low immune infiltration to a state of high immune infiltration and enhance the tumor cell-killing effect of T cells. Therefore, some combination strategies have been proposed and this review appraise a summary of 39 strategies aiming at enhancing the effectiveness of ICIs, which comprise combining 10 clinical approaches and 29 foundational research strategies. Moreover, this review improves the comprehensive understanding of combination therapy with ICIs and inspires novel ideas for tumor immunotherapy.

The real-world treatment characteristic and efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: Data from a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and prognosis of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remain unresolved issues. Here, we assessed the treatment characteristics and efficacy of ICIs in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using real-world data and evaluated the predictive value of factors, including programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, for the clinical outcome of ICIs in NSCLC.

METHODS

Analyzed data was collected from hospitalized patients in the West China Hospital of Sichuan University between January 2017 and March 2023. The Kaplan-Meier method was utilized for analyzing real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), while Cox regression models was employed to access the correlation between the efficacy of immunotherapy and sociodemographic characteristics, disease information, and characteristics of ICI treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients were included in the retrospective study and characteristics of immunotherapy varied significantly among PD-L1 expression groups. The median rwPFS for the entire population was 9.76 months. Subgroup analyses revealed that patients with high PD-L1 expression, early TNM stage, first-line immunotherapy, EGFR wild-type and those who have not received radiotherapy and targeted therapy previously were more likely to have better rwPFS. Furthermore, multivariate Cox regression analyses identified PD-L1 expression, EGFR mutation status and previous radiotherapy as the most influential predictors of the response to ICI treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents the real-world experience of Chinese NSCLC patients undergoing ICI treatment, offering guidance for clinical decision-making based on various patient conditions, preferences, and indications for ICIs, through the evaluation of immunotherapy efficacy and predictors in NSCLC patients.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Metastatic Without Oncogenic Alterations

This overview provides a thorough review of current treatment approaches for first-line management of nononcogenic addicted non-small cell lung cancer. We also address pertinent clinical decision-making queries encountered in everyday practice, such as the optimal treatment strategy for PD-L1-high patients, predictive factors for response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) both in terms of patient and cancer characteristics, the potential benefits of dual checkpoint blockade, and the unresolved issue of safe discontinuation strategies for long-term responders. Around one in five patients falls into this latter category while the majority develop either primary or acquired resistance to ICI-based first-line therapy, necessitating effective subsequent lines of treatment. Docetaxel, with or without combination of antiangiogenic agents, serves as the backbone of treatment, although evidence in the post-ICI setting is limited. Given that an inflamed tumor microenvironment (TME) is crucial for ICI responses, targeting the TME in cases of acquired resistance alongside continued ICI administration appears rational, although clinical trials so far have failed to confirm this hypothesis. Antibody-drug conjugates have emerged as a promising treatment modality, offering the potential for reduced toxicity and improved efficacy by targeting specific cancer antigens. Moreover, several chemotherapy-free approaches are currently under investigation for treatment-naïve patients, including alternative ICI and drugs targeting epitopes on both cancer and immune cells.

The efficacy and safety of immune-checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors(ICIs) combined with chemotherapy are emerging as an effective first-line treatment in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, reports on the magnitude of effectiveness and safety are conflicting.

METHODS

Relevant articles published before February 2022 were searched in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The study included all randomized controlled trials that evaluated ICIs with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for the treatment of NSCLC. Among the outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included a total of 12 studies. Overall analysis indicated that ICIs plus chemotherapy could significantly improve OS (HR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.74-0.84; I2 = 44.4%, P = 0.055), PFS (HR = 0.62; 95% CI: 0.59-0.67; I2 = 75.3%, P = 0.000), and ORR (RR = 1.48; 95% CI: 1.27-1.73; I2 = 79.0%, P = 0.000) when compared to chemotherapy treatments. Subgroup analysis showed that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy significantly improved OS, PFS, and ORR when compared with chemotherapy with decreased grade 1-2 TRAEs. In addition, female patients with nonsquamous histology might receive more OS benefit from ICIs plus chemotherapy when compared to chemotherapy alone. Despite the fact that CTLA-4 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy increased PFS, there were no benefits gained in OS nor ORR. When PD-L1/CTLA-4 inhibitors were added to chemotherapy, the risk of grade 3-5 adverse events increased whereas PD-1 inhibitors did not.

CONCLUSIONS

ICIs plus chemotherapy, compared with chemotherapy, were associated with significantly improved PFS, ORR, and OS in NSCLC therapy. However, PD-L1/CTLA-4 inhibitors plus chemotherapy could increase the risk of grade 3-5 adverse events, but not PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy.

A multicenter, real-world study on effectiveness and safety of first-line modified PD-1 inhibitors with chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) with drive gene-negative

OBJECTIVES

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, particularly PD-1 inhibitors, has revolutionized the treatment of advanced tumors and shown significant improvements in patient survival rates. However, which PD-1 inhibitor is more effective and safer for a specific indication remains unclear. To address this problem, our study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different PD-1 inhibitors in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy for individuals with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without driver genes in the real world.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of individuals diagnosed with aNSCLC who received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with modified PD-1 inhibitors, including Sintilimab, Toripalimab, Tislelizumab, Camrelizumab, or Pembrolizumab as first-line treatment between March 5th, 2016 and October 20th, 2022. We assessed demographic and clinical information and analyzed clinical response, survival outcomes, and safety profiles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety.

RESULTS

As of the date cut-off on October 20th, 2022, the median follow-up time was 20.62 months. A total of 204 patients were enrolled in the study, including 56 (27.5%) patients receiving modified PD-1 inhibitors (Sintilimab, Toripalimab, Tislelizumab, or Camrelizumab) in combination with chemotherapy and 148 (72.5%) patients receiving Pembrolizumab in combination with chemotherapy. In the overall cohort, the median overall survival (OS) was 26.9 months (95%CI, 22.3-31.6), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.4 months (95%CI, 6.9-9.8), and the objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 47.6% (95%CI, 29.9-43.6) and 84.3% (95%CI, 78.4-88.9). The mOS of modified PD-1 inhibitors group and Pembrolizumab group were 30.7 (95%CI, 17.3-44.4) months and 26.8 (95%CI, 22.2-31.4) months. The mPFS of two groups were 8.3(95%CI, 6.9-9.6) months and 8.8 (95%CI, 6.9-10.7) months, respectively. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of OS or PFS. The ORR for the two groups was 48.2% (95%CI, 34.8-61.8) and 47.3% (95%CI, 39.1-5.6), respectively. However, due to the limited sample size, the difference was not statistically significant. On the other hand, the DCR tended to be higher in the Pembrolizumab group (86.5%; 95%CI, 79.7-91.4) compared to the modified PD-1 inhibitors group (78.6%; 95%CI, 65.2-87.9), and this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.006). In terms of safety, both groups exhibited favorable clinical safety profiles. The only two types of potentially immune-related adverse events reported were pneumonitis and reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (RCCEP).

CONCLUSIONS

The modified PD-1 inhibitors showed comparable survival outcomes and manageable safety profiles in NSCLC compared to Pembrolizumab. Moreover, these inhibitors exhibited improved accessibility and economic outcomes compared to Pembrolizumab. While there were similarities in drug-related and immunotherapy-related adverse reactions between the modified PD-1 inhibitors and Pembrolizumab, there were some slight differences. Further prospective and retrospective studies would be necessary to validate these findings beyond the scope of the CTONG1901 study.

Assessing Potential Factors Influencing the Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors with Radiation in Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

Recent evidence suggests that combining radiotherapy (RT) with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may result in better outcomes. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of ICI plus radiation versus ICI alone and explored potential factors affecting its efficacy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

Methods

The databases including PubMed and Embase were searched to retrieve eligible studies comparing the efficacy and safety outcomes in advanced NSCLC patients after ICIs ± RT treatments. We performed subgroup analyses to identify potential prognostic factors from radiation details and study types. The odds ratio (OR) of objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR), hazard ratio (HR) of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and risk ratio (RR) of adverse events were used to represent the outcome effects.

Results

26 eligible studies with 14192 cases were included. The results showed that the ORR (OR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.42, 0.93; p = 0.02) and DCR (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.82; p < 0.01) of RT + ICIs groups were significantly higher than those of the ICIs alone group. The median PFS and OS for ICIs versus RT + ICIs were 2.2 versus 4.4 months and 9.0 versus 13.4 months, respectively. Patients in the ICIs plus RT group had a significantly better PFS (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.81; p < 0.01) and OS (HR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.83; p < 0.01) when compared to those in the ICIs group. In terms of adverse events, the risk of pneumonia was not significantly increased in patients treated with both ICIs and RT when compared to ICIs group alone (risk ratio = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.55, 1.44; p = 0.63). The correlation analysis found that PFS was significantly correlated with OS (p = 0.02). The subgroup analysis results showed that significant improvements in OS were observed in non-palliative RT group (HR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.13, 0.65; p < 0.01) and extracranial RT group (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.83; p < 0.01). RT type could also be a prognostic factor associated with the OS (for conventional RT: HR = 0.68 and p = 0.22; for stereotactic body radiation therapy: HR = 0.77 and p < 0.01). However, concerning RT timing, the results showed a similar trend in reducing mortality risk (for previous RT: HR = 0.64 and p = 0.21; for concurrent RT: HR = 0.35 and p = 0.16).

Conclusion

RT plus ICIs is associated with improved survival for advanced NSCLC patients, especially for those with non-palliative RT. Further clinical trials are needed to validate its effect on survival outcomes.

The efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and chemotherapy (CT) versus CT alone in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Clinical outcome measures including overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were analyzed by Stata 15.0 software; significance level was 0.05.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs involving 4227 patients were included. The results showed ICI + CT significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62-0.85, p < 0.001), PFS (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.57 - 0.75, p < 0.001) and ORR (odds ratio [OR] = 1.89; 95% CI, 1.43-2.49, p < 0.001) compared with CT alone. Subgroup analysis indicated that significantly longer OS was also observed in subgroups including combination regimens (pembrolizumab + CT, atezolizumab + CT, ipilimumab + CT, and nivolumab + ipilimumab + CT) and PD-L1 status [negative (< 1%), positive (≥ 1%), low (1-49%) and high (≥ 50%)]. However, ICI + CT showed signifcantly higher grade 3-5 treatment-related AEs than CT (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.19 - 1.79, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ICI + CT showed better clinical efficacy than CT alone in patients with advanced NSCLC, with increased treatment-related AEs.

Ferroptosis-Inducing Nanomedicine for Cancer Therapy

Ferroptosis, a new iron- and reactive oxygen species-dependent form of regulated cell death, has attracted much attention in the therapy of various types of tumors. With the development of nanomaterials, more and more evidence shows the potential of ferroptosis combined with nanomaterials for cancer therapy. Recently, there has been much effort to develop ferroptosis-inducing nanomedicine, specially combined with the conventional or emerging therapy. Therefore, it is necessary to outline the previous work on ferroptosis-inducing nanomedicine and clarify directions for improvement and application to cancer therapy in the future. In this review, we will comprehensively focus on the strategies of cancer therapy based on ferroptosis-inducing nanomedicine currently, elaborate on the design ideas of synthesis, analyze the advantages and limitations, and finally look forward to the future perspective on the emerging field.

Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy Combined With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and GM-CSF as Salvage Therapy in a PD-L1-Positive Patient With Refractory Metastatic Thyroid Hürthle Cell Carcinoma: A Case Report and Literature Review

Thyroid Hürthle cell carcinoma, known as thyroid eosinophilic carcinoma, is a rare pathological type of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), representing 3-4% of all thyroid cancers. However, given the high risk of invasion and metastasis, thyroid Hürthle cell carcinoma has a relatively poor prognosis. Traditional treatment methods have limited effects on patients with metastatic thyroid cancers. Developing a valuable therapy for advanced thyroid carcinomas is an unfilled need, and immunotherapy could represent another choice for these tumors. We herein reported the case of a patient with recurrent advanced thyroid Hürthle cell cancer and positive programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, who suffered tumor progression after re-surgery, radiotherapy, and targeted therapy. It is encouraging that PD-1 inhibitors in combination with GM-CSF and stereotactic body irradiation (SBRT) on metastatic disease have a significant anti-tumor effect.

The benefits and risks of CTLA4 inhibitor plus PD1/PDL1 inhibitor in stage IIIB/IV non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic analysis and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown clinical benefit for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the efficacy of the combination of ICIs targeting different pathways is still unclear. We performed this meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibitor plus programmed cell death 1 receptor (PD-1)/programmed cell death receptor ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor therapy (CP) for NSCLC IIIB/IV patients.

METHODS

We systematically searched the main databases for relevant studies. The main outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We identified 3526 articles, including 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (4377 patients), in our meta-analysis. We conducted two comparisons of CP versus chemotherapy or PD1/PDL1 inhibitor (P). Compared with chemotherapy, CP was more effective, with better OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.77, 95% CI [confidence interval]: 0.66-0.91; p = 0.001), better PFS (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.70-0.85; p < 0.00001) and comparable objective response rate (ORR) (risk ratio [RR]: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.98-1.65; p = 0.07); in terms of toxicity, CP was comparable to chemotherapy across all-grade adverse events (AEs) (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.73-1.03; p = 0.11) and grade 3-5 AEs (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.63-1.14; p = 0.27). Compared with P, CP had no superiority in efficacy in terms of the OS (HR: 1.04, 95%CI: 0.86-1.24; p=0.70), PFS (HR: 0.95, 95%CI: 0.75-1.22; p = 0.70) and the ORR (RR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.95-1.21; p = 0.27) but CP was more effective than P when PD-L1 expression was <1% (RR: 0.77,95%CI: 0.60-0.98; p = 0.04); in terms of toxicity, CP was associated with increased all-grade AEs (RR:1.07, 95% CI: 0.97-1.19; p = 0.18) and grade 3-5 AEs (RR:1.58, 95% CI: 1.21-2.07; p = 0.0008).

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

CP is a beneficial therapeutic schedule with longer PFS and OS than chemotherapy and has an acceptable, manageable grade 3-4 AE rate in IIIB/IV NSCLC. However, compared with P, CP results in better OS only in patients with PD-L1 expression <1%.