A retrospective real-world study: the efficacy of immune-related combination therapies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer after resistance to EGFR-TKIs.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Whether patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) should choose an immune-combination therapy regimen after EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) resistance is currently unclear. METHODS: We evaluated 118 NSCLC patients treated by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) + chemotherapy (I + C), ICIs + chemotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy (I + C + A), chemotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy (C + A) after inefficacy of EGFR-TKIs. We assessed the objective remission rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) of these treatments. RESULTS: The ORR was 26.1% vs 38.2% vs 16.3% in the three groups (P = 0.093). The divergence in DCR was also statistically significant (65.2% vs 85.3% vs 74.4%, P = 0.209). The median PFS was no statistically significant difference in PFS (3.09 vs 6.31 vs 5.91 months, P = 0.809), but the Kaplan-Meier survival curve of 12-month-PFS indicated an apparent survival advantage in the I + C + A group (P = 0.001). In addition, the I + C/I + C + A group showed higher median PFS than the C + A group in patients with brain metastases (median PFS, 6.44 vs 4.21 months, P = 0.022). The divergence in ORR of patients in the brain group was also statistically significant (P = 0.045). The I + C + A group showed superior efficacy in patients with liver metastases (median PFS, 0.95 vs 6.44 vs 3.48 months, P < 0.0001). The Cox proportional hazard modeling analysis suggested that the age, brain metastases, and liver metastases were all connected with the prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that advanced NSCLC patients after resistance to EGFR-TKIs may achieve better outcomes from triple therapy. Patients with brain metastases favor ICIs-related combination therapies and patients with liver metastases prefer I + C + A therapy.