RESUMO
Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the therapeutic landscape of cancer. However, optimal patient selection is still an unmet need. One-hundred-forty-six patients with metastatic cancer candidates to ICI at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona Clinical Trials Unit were prospectively recruited in this observational study. Blood samples were collected at different timepoints, baseline LIPI score calculated and pre-ICI archived tissues retrieved to evaluate PD-L1, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and PD1 mRNA levels. Tumor assessments were centrally reviewed by RECIST 1.1 criteria. Associations with overall response rates (ORR), durable clinical benefit (DCB), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were performed with univariable/multivariable logistic and Cox regressions, where appropriate. At a median follow-up of 26.9 months, median PFS and OS were 2.7 and 12.9 months. Response rates were 17.8% with duration of response (DOR) of 4.4 months. LIPI score was independently associated with PFS (p = 0.025) and OS (p < 0.001). Immunotherapy-naïve status was independently associated with better PFS (p = 0.005). Time-to-best response (TTBR) and ORR (p < 0.001 both) were associated with better OS at univariate analysis. PFS and DOR were moderately correlated with OS (p < 0.001 both). A PD-L1 10% cut-off detected worse/best responders in terms of ORR (univariate p = 0.011, multivariate p = 0.028) and DCB (univariate p = 0.043). PD1 mRNA levels were strikingly associated to complete responses (p = 0.021). To resume, in our prospective observational pan-cancer study, baseline LIPI score, immunotherapy-naïve status, cancer type and RT before starting ICI were the most relevant clinical factors independently correlated with immunotherapy outcomes. Longer TTBR seemed to associate with better survival, while PD1 mRNA and PD-L1 protein levels might be tumor-agnostic predictive factors of response to ICI and should be furtherly explored.
Assuntos
Antineoplásicos Imunológicos , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Neoplasias , Humanos , Antígeno B7-H1 , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/uso terapêutico , Antineoplásicos Imunológicos/farmacologia , Biomarcadores Tumorais/genética , Biomarcadores Tumorais/análise , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , RNA Mensageiro/genética , RNA Mensageiro/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Multimodality treatment is a standard of care for LARC, but the optimal sequencing of the treatment modalities remains unclear. Several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) compared total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) vs. standard neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with inconsistent results. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of TNT in terms of complete pathological response (pCR) rate, disease-free and overall survival vs. standard CRT in LARC. A systematic search was performed through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and meeting abstracts up to May 2020. RCTs comparing CRT vs. TNT followed by surgery in LARC were eligible for the study. Study selection and data extraction were done following PRISMA guidelines by two independent reviewers. The Mantel-Haenzel method was used to obtain a fixed-effects model of pooled odds or hazard ratios for the main outcomes. Eight RCTs, including 2301 patients, met the eligibility criteria. TNT significantly improved pCR rate (OR = 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-2.49; p < 0.001), 3-year disease-free-survival (DFS) (HR = 0.82, 95%CI 0.71-0.95; p = 0.01) and 3-year overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.81, p = 0.04). Grade 3-4 adverse events were not significantly different in both strategies (OR = 1.58; p = 0.14). An improved pCR rate was documented regardless of the type of radiotherapy administered (long vs. short fractionation schedules). No significant heterogeneity was found. The results of this meta-analysis show that TNT improves pCR and survival rates vs. standard preoperative CRT in patients with LARC. TNT may become a new standard of care in LARC, although longer follow-up is needed to properly assess its long-term impact on survival.