Dataset Information

Benefit of second-line therapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a tri-center propensity score analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The level of evidence for palliative second-line therapy in advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (aESCC) is limited. This is the first study that reports efficacy data comparing second-line therapy + active symptom control (ASC) versus ASC alone in aESCC.

Methods

We conducted a tri-center retrospective cohort study (n = 166) including patients with aESCC who had experienced disease progression on palliative first-line therapy. A propensity score model using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was implemented for comparative efficacy analysis of overall survival (OS) in patients with second-line + ASC (n = 92, 55%) versus ASC alone (n = 74, 45%).

Results

The most frequent second-line regimens used were docetaxel (36%) and paclitaxel (18%). In unadjusted primary endpoint analysis, second-line + ASC was associated with significantly longer OS compared with ASC alone [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.35-0.69, p < 0.0001]. However, patients in the second-line + ASC group were characterized by more favorable baseline features including a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, a longer first-line treatment duration and lower C-reactive protein levels. After rigorous adjusting for baseline confounders by re-weighting the data with the IPTW the favorable association between second-line and longer OS weakened but prevailed. The median OS was 6.1 months in the second-line + ASC group and 3.2 months in the ASC group, respectively (IPTW-adjusted HR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.24-0.69, p = 0.001). Importantly, the benefit of second-line was consistent across several clinical subgroups, including patients with ECOG performance status ⩾1 and age ⩾65 years. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events associated with palliative second-line therapy were hematological toxicities.

Conclusion

This real-world study supports the concept that systemic second-line therapy prolongs survival in patients with aESCC.

SUBMITTER: Muller M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8488508 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe primary aim of this study was to compare survival from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (NCRS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (NCS) for the treatment of esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. The secondary aims were to compare pathological effects, short-term mortality and morbidity, and to evaluate the effect of lymph node harvest upon survival in both treatment groups.MethodsData were collected from 10 European centers from 2001 to 2012. Six hundred and eight patients with stage II or III oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junctional adenocarcinoma were included; 301 in the NCRS group and 307 in the NCS group. Propensity score matching and Cox regression analyses were used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics.ResultsNCRS resulted in significant pathological benefits with more ypT0 (26.7% versus 5%; P < 0.001), more ypN0 (63.3% versus 32.1%; P < 0.001), and reduced R1/2 resection margins (7.7% versus 21.8%; P < 0.001). Analysis of short-term outcomes showed no statistically significant differences in 30-day or 90-day mortality, but increased incidence of anastomotic leak (23.1% versus 6.8%; P < 0.001) in NCRS patients. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in 3-year overall survival (57.9% versus 53.4%; Hazard Ratio (HR)= 0.89, 95%C.I. 0.67-1.17, P = 0.391) nor disease-free survival (52.9% versus 48.9%; HR = 0.90, 95%C.I. 0.69-1.18, P = 0.443). The pattern of recurrence was also similar (P = 0.660). There was a higher lymph node harvest in the NCS group (27 versus 14; P < 0.001), which was significantly associated with a lower recurrence rate and improved disease free survival within the NCS group.ConclusionThe survival differences between NCRS and NCS maybe modest, if present at all, for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. Future large-scale randomized trials must control and monitor indicators of the quality of surgery, as the extent of lymphadenectomy appears to influence prognosis in patients treated with NCS, from this large multi-center European study.

Project description:AimTo compare the efficacy and safety of radiotherapy in combination with immunotherapy after achieving disease control from the first-line combination therapy of platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy for advanced lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC).MethodsThis study retrospectively evaluated the patients with advanced LUSC treated with the combination of radiotherapy with immunotherapy and chemotherapy (ICRT group, n = 52) or immunotherapy and chemotherapy (ICT group, n = 63) as the first-line treatment from April 2018 to April 2022. Using propensity score matching (PSM), 50 pairs were created, while the confounders and bias were controlled. The objective response rate (ORR), duration of overall response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events were analyzed in the two groups. The PFS and OS were re-analyzed separately for patients treated with thoracic radiotherapy.ResultsAfter PSM, the median PFS (12.23 vs. 7.43 months; P <0.001) and median OS (19.7 vs. 12.9 months; P <0.001) were significantly longer in the ICRT group than those in the ICT group. Both the PFS and OS rates were also significantly higher in the ICRT group than those in the ICT group, except for the OS rates in the 6th and 12th months. The mDOR of the ICRT group patients (17.10 vs. 8.27 months; P <0.001) was significantly higher than that of the ICT group patients. The median PFS, median OS, and local control rate were significantly longer in the thoracic radiotherapy group than in the control group. Radiation pneumonia was the most common adverse effect after radiotherapy; however, no treatment-related deaths occurred. The Cox regression analysis showed that ECOG scores 0-1, presence of necrosis in the tumor, radiotherapy, and optimal efficacy better than the stable disease (SD) were independent factors, affecting the PFS, while the patients with recurrent post-operative, pre-treatment NLR, radiotherapy, and optimal efficacy better than SD were the independent factors, affecting the OS.ConclusionsThe combination of radiotherapy with systematic immunotherapy and chemotherapy for the advanced LUSC was effective with tolerable adverse effects.