Dataset Information

Lung Cancer Surgery after Treatment with Anti-PD1/PD-L1 Immunotherapy for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Case-Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are the standard of care for non-resectable non-small-cell lung cancer and are under investigation for resectable disease. Some authors have reported difficulties during lung surgery following ICI treatment. This retrospective study investigated the perioperative outcomes of lung resection in patients with preoperative ICI.

Methods

Patients with major lung resection after receiving ICIs were included as cases and were compared to patients who received preoperative chemotherapy without ICI. Surgical, clinical, and imaging data were collected.

Results

A total of 25 patients were included in the ICI group, and 34 were included in the control group. The ICI patients received five (2-18) infusions of ICI (80% with pembrolizumab). Indications for surgery varied widely across groups (p < 0.01). Major pathological response was achieved in 44% of ICI patients and 23.5% of the control group (p = 0.049). Surgery reports showed a higher rate of tissue fibrosis/inflammation in the ICI group (p < 0.01), mostly in centrally located tumours (7/13, 53.8% vs. 3/11, 27.3% of distal tumours, p = 0.24), with no difference in operating time (p = 0.81) nor more conversions (p = 0.46) or perioperative complications (p = 0.94). There was no 90-day mortality. Disease-free survival was higher in the ICI group (HR = 0.30 (0.13-0.71), p = 0.02).

Conclusions

This study further supports the safety and feasibility of lung resection in patients following preoperative treatment with ICI.

SUBMITTER: El Husseini K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8508022 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDue to the increasing number of trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the first-line therapy of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, we performed a systematic review and meta-analyses to investigate the difference between anti PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies, used alone or in combination with chemotherapy, through adjusted indirect analysis to minimize the potential bias regarding overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs).MethodsA systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes and toxicity associated with first-line therapy employing anti-PD1 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies alone, or in combination with chemotherapy, to treat metastatic, treatment-naïve NSCLC patients was performed. Primary outcomes were OS, PFS, ORR and grade 3-5 AEs. We used a random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions. Meta-analyses using pooled risk ratios were performed for binary outcomes from comparative studies with the random effects model.ResultsA total of 13 eligible studies met our eligibility criteria, including 7673 patients. In the ICI-chemotherapy combination subgroup, we observed that anti-PD1 therapy was associated with better OS (p = 0.022) and PFS (p = 0.029) compared with anti-PD-L1 therapy. In the monotherapy subgroup, there was no statistical difference between the use of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 for OS and PFS. With regard to ORR and toxicity, in the ICI-chemotherapy combination subgroup, we observed a trend of better ORR (p = 0.12) with the use of anti-PD1 therapy and less frequent grade 3-5 AEs compared to the use of anti-PD-L1 therapy (p = 0.0302). In the monotherapy subgroup, there was no statistical difference between the use of anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 regarding ORR and toxicity.ConclusionsOur study suggests that PD-1 drug plus chemotherapy is superior to anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy for NSCLC; nevertheless, as monotherapy, both strategies appear to be similar.