Abstract

BackgroundIn non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), tumor mutation burden (TMB) has been found to have predictive potential for survival. When compared to TMB detection in tissue (tTMB), detecting TMB in the blood (bTMB) has practical advantages; yet, the results of various studies are conflicting. The question of whether bTMB can be utilized as a predictive biomarker is becoming increasingly contentious. To confirm the predictive efficacy of bTMB, researchers did a systematic review and meta-analysis to look into the relationship between ICIs and bTMB.MethodFrom the inception to March 2021, Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and other databases were systematically searched. The predictive value of bTMB in ICIs, or the efficacy of ICIs against chemotherapy, was studied. The results were presented as pooled ratio rate (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals for the Objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Subgroup analysis, heterogeneity analyses, and sensitivity analysis were also performed.ResultsA total of 2,610 NSCLC patients were studied in seven trials. There were no significant differences in OS (HR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.62–1.91, P = 0.774) or PFS (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.20–2.65, P = 0.629) between high and low bTMB groups in the ICIs cohort. When ICIs were compared to chemotherapy, ICIs were found to enhance OS (HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59–0.92, P = 0.006), but the improvement in PFS and ORR was only a numerical trend (PFS: HR = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.63–1.09, P = 0.173; ORR: RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.77–1.10, P = 0.372). NSCLC patients treated with ICIs in the high bTMB group had better survival benefits than chemotherapy patients in terms of OS (HR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.51–0.76, P <0.001), PFS (HR = 0.63; 95% CI: 0.52–0.76, P <0.001), and ORR (RR = 1.86; 95% CI: 1.32–2.62, P <0.001), while in the low TMB group, the results were no different or even reversed (OS: HR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.64–1.24, P = 0.485; PFS: HR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.93–1.58, P = 0.154; ORR: RR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54–0.85, P = 0.001).ConclusionsTMB could predict the enhanced survival benefit of NSCLC patients treated with ICIs; however the role of bTMB is limited at this stage. For NSCLC patients with high TMB, ICIc may be a better option than chemotherapy.

Highlights

  • Immunotherapy has attracted increasing attention from clinical oncologists in recent years as a revolutionary therapy, with immune checkpoint inhibitors as a successful representative

  • There were no significant differences in overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.62–1.91, P = 0.774) or progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.20–2.65, P = 0.629) between high and low bTMB groups in the immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) cohort

  • When ICIs were compared to chemotherapy, ICIs were found to enhance OS (HR = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.59–0.92, P = 0.006), but the improvement in PFS and Objective response rate (ORR) was only a numerical trend (PFS: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.83; 95% CI: 0.63–1.09, P = 0.173; ORR: ratio rate (RR) = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.77–1.10, P = 0.372)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Immunotherapy has attracted increasing attention from clinical oncologists in recent years as a revolutionary therapy, with immune checkpoint inhibitors as a successful representative. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) that target programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) as monotherapy or in combination with anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 therapy have been shown to be more effective than standard therapies in several cancers, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [1,2,3,4]. Combination immunotherapy can improve response rates, it increases the occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) [6, 7]. As a result, identifying predictive biomarkers to identify responsive patients is critical. In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), tumor mutation burden (TMB) has been found to have predictive potential for survival. To confirm the predictive efficacy of bTMB, researchers did a systematic review and meta-analysis to look into the relationship between ICIs and bTMB

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call