Dataset Information

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Combined With Chemotherapy Compared With Chemotherapy Alone for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It is still controversial whether immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can improve the curative effect when added to original standard chemotherapy treatment for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). We compared their antitumor efficacy and adverse effects (AEs) to make a better clinical decision.

Methods

Seven databases were searched for eligible articles. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and AEs were measured as the primary outcomes.

Results

Nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4,501 patients were included. ICI+chemotherapy treatment achieved better PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, [0.70-0.86], p < 0.00001), OS (HR: 0.86, [0.74-0.99], p = 0.04), and complete response (584/1,106 vs. 341/825, risk ratio [RR]: 1.38, [1.01-1.89], p = 0.04). With the prolongation of survival, the survival advantage of ICI+chemotherapy increased compared with chemotherapy. Subgroup analysis suggested that the addition of ICIs might not have a better effect in Asian patients, patients with locally advanced disease, or patients with brain metastases. In the toxicity analysis, more Grade 3-5 AEs and serious AEs were found in the ICI+chemotherapy group. For Grade 3-5 AEs, more cases of diarrhea, severe skin reactions, pneumonitis, hepatitis, and adrenal insufficiency were related to the ICI+chemotherapy group.

Conclusions

ICI+chemotherapy appears to be better than chemotherapy alone for TNBC treatment, with better OS and PFS. However, its high rates of serious AEs need to be taken seriously.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO Registration: CRD42021276394.

SUBMITTER: Ji Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8716854 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeSome studies have shown that Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have a favorable efficacy in advanced triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, but the results are controversial in neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) stage. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety after NACT plus ICIs in early TNBC patients.MethodsAfter searching PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and several mainly oncology conferences up to 30 January 2021 systematically, and define randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exploring the efficacy and safety of programmed death protein-1/programmed cell death-Ligand 1(PD-1/PD-L1) inhibitors plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in TNBC patients. The primary endpoint was the pathological complete response (pCR) in intention-to-treat populations (ITT), and the secondary endpoints were event-free survival (EFS) and safety analysis in the ITT populations.ResultsSix RCTs (N = 2142) were included in our meta-analysis; NACT plus ICIs increased pCR rates compared with NACT in intention-to-treat (ITT) populations (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.32-2.78, P < 0.001). The pCR rate also increased in both PD-L1 positive (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.26-2.16, P < 0.001) and PD-L1 negative patients (OR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.04-2.33, P = 0.03), especially in PD-L1 positive patients. The benefit was also observed in nodal-positive populations (OR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.69-3.77, P < 0.001) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score (ECOG PS) 0 subgroup (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.42-2.53, P < 0.001). Three RCTs (N = 1615) reported EFS and the results showed that adding PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors increased EFS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.50-0.83, P = 0.0007) in ITT populations with a short follow-up time. In the safety analysis of 2205 patients with early TNBC from five eligible studies, NACT plus ICIs had a higher risk of grade 3-4 diarrhea (OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.21-5.32; P = 0.01), any grade of adverse effects(AEs)including vomiting (OR: 1.37; 95% CI: 1.00-1.86; P = 0.05), hyperthyroidism (OR: 6.04; 95% CI: 2.39-15.29; P < 0.001), and hypothyroidism (OR: 5.04; 95% CI: 3.02-8.39; P < 0.001).ConclusionsPD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors combined with chemotherapy can improve pCR rates and EFS, and with an increased incidence of some immune-related AEs compared with chemotherapy alone. NACT plus ICIs might be an option in patients with in PD-L1 positive and high-risk populations with positive nodal disease early TNBC.

Project description:Immunotherapy has emerged as the fifth pillar of cancer treatment alongside surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are the current superheroes of immunotherapy, unleashing a patient's own immune cells to kill tumors and revolutionizing cancer treatment in a variety of cancers. Although breast cancer was historically believed to be immunologically silent, treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors has been shown to induce modest responses in metastatic breast cancer. Given the inherent heterogeneity of breast tumors, this raised the question whether certain breast tumors might benefit more from immune-based interventions and which cancer cell-intrinsic and/or microenvironmental factors define the likelihood of inducing a potent and durable anti-tumor immune response. In this review, we will focus on triple negative breast cancer as immunogenic breast cancer subtype, and specifically discuss the relevance of tumor mutational burden, the plethora and diversity of tumor infiltrating immune cells in addition to the immunoscore, the presence of immune checkpoint expression, and the microbiome in defining immune checkpoint blockade response. We will highlight the current immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment options, either as monotherapy or in combination with standard-of-care treatment modalities such as chemotherapy and targeted therapy. In addition, we will look into the potential of immunotherapy-based combination strategies using immune checkpoint inhibitors to enhance both innate and adaptive immune responses, or to establish a more immune favorable environment for cancer vaccines. Finally, the review will address the need for unambiguous predictive biomarkers as one of the main challenges of immune checkpoint blockade. To conclude, the potential of immune checkpoint blockade for triple negative breast cancer treatment could be enhanced by exploration of aforementioned factors and treatment strategies thereby providing promising future prospects.

Project description:Purpose: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is the most dangerous subtype of breast cancer with high rates of metastasis and recurrence. The efficacy of capecitabine in chemotherapy for TNBC is still controversial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of capecitabine combining with standard, adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for TNBC. Methods: We systematically searched clinical studies through PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, Wanfang Database, China Academic Journals (CNKI), and American Society of Clinical Oncology's (ASCO) annual conference report. Studies were assessed for design and quality by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager to quantify the effect of capecitabine combined with standard, adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate of TNBC patients. Furthermore, safety analysis was performed to evaluate the adverse events. Results: Twelve randomized controlled clinical trials involving totally 4854 TNBC patients were included, of which 2,214 patients received chemotherapy as control group, and 2,278 patients received capecitabine combining with chemotherapy. The results indicated that capecitabine could significantly improve the DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.90, P = 0.0003] and OS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74-0.93, P = 0.001). In subgroup analysis, the combination of capecitabine and cyclophosphamide exhibited a significant benefit in all outcomes (DFS HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.90, P = 0.002; OS HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52-0.80, p < 0.0001). Additionally, defferent dose of capecitabine subgroup showed same significant effect on the results. Safety analysis showed that the addition of capecitabine was associated with a much higher risk of hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea and mucositis or stomatitis. Conclusion: The results showed that adjuvant capecitabine could bring significant benefits on DFS and OS to unselected TNBC patients, the combination of capecitabine and cyclophosphamide could improve the survival rate of patients, although the addition of capecitabine could bring significant side effects such as hand foot syndrome (HFS) and diarrhea.