Page 110 - 《中国药房》2022年14期
P. 110

·循证药学·

        ICIs 对比常规二线化疗方案用于晚期食管癌有效性与安全性的

        Meta分析         Δ


                                1
                                        2 #
                        1
               1*
        甘水蓉 ,欧阳华 ,吕佩瑜 ,蔡鸿福 (1.厦门大学附属中山医院药学部,福建 厦门 361000;2.福建医科大学附
        属协和医院药学部,福州 350000)
        中图分类号 R979.1;R735.1         文献标志码 A          文章编号     1001-0408(2022)14-1764-06
        DOI   10.6039/j.issn.1001-0408.2022.14.18

        摘   要   目的 系统评价免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)对比常规二线化疗方案用于晚期食管癌的有效性和安全性,为临床用药提供循
        证参考。方法 计算机检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网、万方数据、维普网,收集 ICIs(试验组)对比常规二线化疗
        方案(对照组)用于晚期食管癌的随机对照试验(RCT),检索时限为建库起至2021年8月1日。筛选文献、提取资料后采用Cochrane系
        统评价员手册 5.1.0 推荐的偏倚风险评估工具对纳入文献进行质量评价,采用 RevMan 5.4.1 软件进行 Meta 分析和敏感性分析。
        结果 共纳入4项研究,共计1 656例患者。Meta分析结果显示,试验组患者的总生存期显著长于对照组[HR=0.79,95%CI(0.71,
        0.88),P<0.000 1]、3级及以上不良事件发生率显著低于对照组[RR=0.42,95%CI(0.32,0.54),P<0.000 01],两组患者的无进展
        生存期[HR=0.95,95%CI(0.75,1.21),P=0.70]、客观缓解率[RR=1.72,95%CI(0.95,3.13),P=0.07]比较,差异均无统计学意
        义。按患者程序性死亡配体1表达的不同进行的亚组分析结果显示,试验组中肿瘤比例分数≥1%患者的总生存期显著长于对照
        组[HR=0.64,95%CI(0.51,0.79),P<0.000 1];两组肿瘤比例分数<1%患者的总生存期[HR=0.83,95%CI(0.67,1.02),P=0.07]
        比较,差异无统计学意义。敏感性分析结果显示,除客观缓解率外,其余指标所得结果均稳定。结论 ICIs较常规二线化疗方案可
        延长晚期食管癌患者的总生存期,且安全性较好,但在无进展生存期和客观缓解率方面未显示出优势。
        关键词 免疫检查点抑制剂;食管癌;疗效;安全性;Meta分析
        Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors versus routine second-line chemotherapy for advanced
        esophageal cancer:a meta-analysis
                                                   1
                                      1
                                                                2
        GAN Shuirong ,OUYANG Hua ,LYU Peiyu ,CAI Hongfu (1. Dept. of Pharmacy, Zhongshan Hospital
                      1
        Affiliated to Xiamen University, Fujian Xiamen 361000, China; 2. Dept. of Pharmacy, Fujian Medical
        University Union Hospital,Fuzhou 350000,China)
        ABSTRACT    OBJECTIVE To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) versus
        routine second-line chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer,and to provide evidence-based reference for
        clinical medication. METHODS Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about ICIs (trial group) versus routine second-line
        chemotherapy (control group) in the treatment of advanced esophageal cancer were searched from PubMed,Embase,The
        Cochrane Library,CNKI,Wanfang and VIP databases from the inception to August 1st,2021. After screening the literature and
        extracting data,the risk of bias assessment tool recommended by Cochrane Systematic Evaluator Manual 5.1.0 was used to evaluate
        the quality of the included literature,and RevMan 5.4.1 software was used for meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. RESULTS A
        total of four studies were included,involving 1 656 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that the overall survival of trial group
        was significantly longer than control group [HR=0.79,95%CI(0.71,0.88),P<0.000 1];the incidence of grade 3 or higher
        adverse events in trial group was significantly lower than control group [RR=0.42,95%CI(0.32,0.54),P<0.000 01]. But there
        was no significant difference in progression-free survival [HR=0.95,95% CI (0.75,1.21),P=0.70] or objective remission
        rate [RR=1.72,95%CI(0.95,3.13),P=0.07] between 2 groups. Results of subgroup analysis was performed according to the
        expression of programmed death ligand 1 showed that overall survival of patients with tumor proportion score(TPS)≥1% in trial
        group was significantly longer than control group [HR=0.64,95%CI(0.51,0.79),P<0.000 1];there was no significant difference in
        overall survival of patients with TPS<1% between 2 groups [HR=0.83,95%CI(0.67,1.02),P=0.07]. The results of sensitivity
        analysis showed that except for the objective remission rate,the conclusions of other indicators were robust. CONCLUSIONS
        Compared with routine second-line treatment,ICIs can prolong overall survival and has good safety,but shows no advantage in
                                                            terms of progression-free survival and objective response rates.
            Δ 基金项目 福建省科技创新联合资金项目(No.2020Y9070)
                                                            KEYWORDS      immune checkpoint inhibitor; esophageal
            *第一作者 药师。研究方向:循证药学、药物临床试验管理。电
        话:0592-2292446。E-mail:398001984@qq.com              cancer;efficacy;safety;meta-analysis
            # 通信作者 副主任药师,硕士。研究方向:循证药学、药物经济
        学。电话:0591-86218223。E-mail:caihongfu31@qq.com


        ·1764 ·  China Pharmacy 2022 Vol. 33 No. 14                                 中国药房    2022年第33卷第14期
   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115