Neoadjuvant immunotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis

Identifying patients who benefit more from perioperative immunotherapy combinations for resectable non-small cell lung cancer based on clinical and molecular characteristics: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

This study aims to identify patient subgroups who benefit more from perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (IO-CT) based on clinical and molecular characteristics in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on perioperative IO-CT were searched. Beneficial differences of IO-CT regimens across different patient subgroups were assessed by pooling trial-specific ratios in event-free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), pathological complete response (pCR), and major pathological response (MPR).

RESULTS

Six studies (n = 3003) involving five IO-CT regimens were included. Compared to CT alone, all IO-CT regimens significantly improved EFS, OS, MPR, and pCR, but increased toxicity. Toripa-chemo showed the best EFS and nivo-chemo showed the best OS. Patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1% had more EFS benefits compared to those with PD-L1 < 1% (HR [hazard ratio]: 1.55, 95% CI 1.17-2.04). Squamous NSCLC patients had significantly more pCR and MPR benefits than non-squamous NSCLC patients (pCR: OR [odds ratio] 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.95; MPR: OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.82). Former smokers had significantly higher pCR benefits than non-smokers (OR: 2.18; 95% CI 1.21-3.92). Additionally, OS benefit was significantly higher in patients < 65 years compared to those ≥ 65 years (HR ratio: 0.59, 95% CI 0.36-0.95). For MPR, males benefited significantly more from IO-CT compared to females (OR: 1.69, 95% CI 1.18-2.42).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative IO-CT is more effective but more toxic than CT alone in resectable NSCLC. Patients with PD-L1 ≥ 1%, squamous NSCLC, a history of smoking, age < 65 years and male gender may experience greater benefits from perioperative IO-CT.

Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in treating patients with NSCLC were comprehensively retrieved from electronic databases, eligible studies, previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, guidelines, and conference abstracts. The meta-analysis was performed by the Stata/SE 12.0 software.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials were eventually included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy significantly improved the objective response rate compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT; 62.46% vs 41.88%, P = 0.003), but the objective response rate of neoadjuvant double-immunotherapy was roughly comparable to that of neoadjuvant single-immunotherapy (15.74% vs 10.45%, P = 0.387). Major pathologic response (MPR) rate and pathologic complete response (pCR) rate of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and neoadjuvant double-immunotherapy were significantly superior to neoadjuvant CT alone and neoadjuvant single-immunotherapy, respectively. Compared with neoadjuvant CT alone, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy increased the down-staging rate (40.16% vs 26.70%, P = 0.060), the surgical resection rate (83.69% vs 73.07%, P = 0.231), and R0 resection rate (86.19% vs 77.98%, P = 0.502), but there were no statistically significant differences. Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy did not increase the postoperative complications rate than neoadjuvant CT alone (40.20% vs 41.30%, P = 0.920). In terms of safety, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and neoadjuvant double-immunotherapy did not increase the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and the grade 3 or higher TRAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy had better clinical efficacy than neoadjuvant CT for patients with NSCLC. MPR rate and pCR rate of neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy and neoadjuvant double-immunotherapy were significantly superior to neoadjuvant CT and neoadjuvant single-immunotherapy, respectively, for patients with NSCLC, showing that MPR rate and pCR rate were probably considered as alternative endpoints for survival benefit. TRAEs were comparable between the corresponding groups. The long-term survival outcome of neoadjuvant immunotherapy for patients with NSCLC needs to be further confirmed to better guide clinical practice.

What is the ideal endpoint in early-stage immunotherapy neoadjuvant trials in lung cancer?

Numerous clinical trials investigating neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been performed over the last 5 years. As the number of neoadjuvant trials increases, attention must be paid to identifying informative trial endpoints. Complete pathologic response has been shown to be an appropriate surrogate endpoint for clinical outcomes, such as event-free survival or overall survival, in breast cancer and bladder cancer, but it is less established for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The simultaneous advances reported with adjuvant ICI make the optimal strategy for early-stage disease debatable. Considering the long time required to conduct trials, it is important to identify optimal endpoints and discover surrogate endpoints for survival that can help guide ongoing clinical research. Endpoints can be grouped into two categories: medical and surgical. Medical endpoints are measures of survival and drug activity; surgical endpoints describe the feasibility of neoadjuvant approaches at a surgical level as well as perioperative attrition and complications. There are also several exploratory endpoints, including circulating tumor DNA clearance and radiomics. In this review, we outline the advantages and disadvantages of commonly reported endpoints for clinical trials of neoadjuvant regimens in NSCLC.

Clinical Stage III NSCLC Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy and Surgery: The Prognostic Role of Nodal Characteristics

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to analyze the prognostic factors in patients that underwent induction therapy and surgery for clinical stage III NSCLC. METHODS: Clinical and pathological characteristics of stage III NSCLC patients for N2 involvement that underwent neoadjuvant treatment (NAD) and surgery from 1/01/1998 to 31/12/2017 were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Tumor characteristics, yClinical, yPathological stage and lymph node characteristics were correlated to Overall Survival (OS). RESULTS: The analysis was conducted on 180 patients. Five-year OS (5YOS) was 50.9%. Univariable analysis results revealed old age (p = 0.003), clinical N2 post-NAD (p = 0.01), pneumonectomy (0.005), persistent pathological N2 (p = 0.039, HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.09−2.68) and adjuvant therapy absence (p = 0.049) as significant negative prognostic factors. Multivariable analysis confirmed pN0N1 (p = 0.02, HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.13−0.62) as a favorable independent prognostic factor and adjuvant therapy absence (p = 0.012, HR 2.61, 95% CI 1.23−5.50) as a negative prognostic factor. Patients with persistent N2 presented a 5YOS of 35.3% vs. 55.8% in pN0N1 patients. Regarding lymph node parameters, the lymph node ratio (NR) significantly correlated with OS: 5YOS of 67.6% in patients with NR < 50% vs. 29.5% in NR > 50% (p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Clinical response aided the stratification of prognosis in patients that underwent multimodal treatment for stage III NSCLC. Adjuvant therapy seemed to be an important option in these patients, while node ratio was a strong prognosticator in patients with persistent nodal involvement.