Evidence Hub

The Long-Term and Short-Term Efficacy of Immunotherapy in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients With Brain Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Xianjing Chu, Lishui Niu, G. Xiao, Haiqin Peng, Fu-Sheng Deng, Zhiyuan Liu, Honghua Wu, Lei Yang et al.

Frontiers in Immunology, 2022

3,160 participants · 50 citations

Abstract

Background Although immunotherapy has been widely used, there is currently no research comparing immunotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with brain metastases (BMs). This meta-analysis addresses a gap in the comparison of immunotherapy efficacy, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), chemotherapy (CT), radiotherapy (RT), and ICI combined CT or RT. Methods A search of Pubmed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov was conducted to identify studies which enrolled NSCLC patients with BM treated with ICIs. The outcomes consisted of intracerebral overall response rate (iORR), intracerebral disease control rate (iDCR), extracranial overall response rate (EORR), distant brain failure (DBF), local control (LC), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results A total of 3160 participants from 46 trials were included in the final analysis. Patients treated with immunotherapy were associated with a longer PFS (0.48, 95%CI: 0.41-0.56), and a longer OS (0.64, 95%CI: 0.60-0.69) compared with immunotherapy-naive patients. In prospective studies, dual ICI combined CT and ICI combined CT achieved a better OS. The hazard ratio (HR) of dual ICI combined CT versus dual ICI was 0.61, and the HR of ICI combined CT versus ICI monotherapy was 0.58. Moreover, no statistical difference in PFS, OS, EORR, iORR, iDCR, and EDCR was found between patients with ICI monotherapy and ICI combined cranial radiotherapy. Concurrent ICI combined RT was shown to…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,160 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free