Perioperative immunotherapy for stage II-III non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis base on randomized controlled trials

Front Oncol. 2024 Feb 22:14:1351359. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1351359. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

Background: In recent years, we have observed the pivotal role of immunotherapy in improving survival for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the effectiveness of immunotherapy in the perioperative (neoadjuvant + adjuvant) treatment of resectable NSCLC remains uncertain. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of its antitumor efficacy and adverse effects (AEs) by pooling data from the KEYNOTE-671, NADIM II, and AEGEAN clinical trials.

Methods: For eligible studies, we searched seven databases. The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) pertaining to the comparative analysis of combination neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative immunotherapy (PIO) versus perioperative placebo (PP) were included. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). Secondary endpoints encompassed drug responses, AEs, and surgical outcomes.

Results: Three RCTs (KEYNOTE-671, NADIM II, and AEGEAN) were included in the final analysis. PIO group (neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative immunotherapy) exhibited superior efficacy in OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.63 [0.49-0.81]), EFS (HR: 0.61 [0.52, 0.72]), objective response rate (risk ratio [RR]: 2.21 [1.91, 2.54]), pathological complete response (RR: 4.36 [3.04, 6.25]), major pathological response (RR: 2.79 [2.25, 3.46]), R0 resection rate (RR: 1.13 [1.00, 1.26]) and rate of adjuvant treatment (RR: 1.08 [1.01, 1.15]) compared with PP group (neoadjuvant platinum-based chemotherapy plus perioperative placebo). In the subgroup analysis, EFS tended to favor the PIO group in almost all subgroups. BMI (>25), T stage (IV), N stage (N1-N2) and pathological response (with pathological complete response) were favorable factors in the PIO group. In the safety assessment, the PIO group exhibited higher rates of serious AEs (28.96% vs. 23.51%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (12.84% vs. 5.81%). Meanwhile, although total adverse events, grade 3-5 adverse events, and fatal adverse events tended to favor the PP group, the differences were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: PIO appears to be superior to PP for resectable stage II-III NSCLC, demonstrating enhanced survival and pathological responses. However, its elevated adverse event (AE) rate warrants careful consideration.

Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#recordDetails, identifier CRD42023487475.

Keywords: adjuvant; immunotherapy; meta-analysis; neoadjuvant; non-small cell lung cancer; surgery.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review

Grants and funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), number of grants (81560345). The funding had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.