中国全科医学 ›› 2023, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (30): 3815-3822.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2023.0180

• 医学循证 • 上一篇    下一篇

程序性死亡因子1/程序性死亡因子1配体抑制剂治疗肾细胞癌有效性及安全性的Meta分析

张懂理1, 沈冲1, 张卫川2, 陈海滨2, 赵建军2,*()   

  1. 1.056002 河北省邯郸市,河北工程大学临床医学院
    2.056002 河北省邯郸市,河北工程大学附属医院泌尿外二科
  • 收稿日期:2022-12-05 修回日期:2023-04-12 出版日期:2023-10-20 发布日期:2023-05-26
  • 通讯作者: 赵建军

  • 作者贡献:张懂理提出并设计研究方案,制订具体的研究方案,负责论文起草;张懂理、沈冲提取研究所需信息及数据;张卫川、陈海滨负责数据整理、分析、绘图;赵建军负责最终版修订,对论文负责。
  • 基金资助:
    河北省自然科学基金资助项目(H2021402018)

Efficacy and Safety of Programmed Death-1/Programmed Death-1 Ligand Inhibitors in the Treatment of Renal Cell Cancer: a Meta-analysis

ZHANG Dongli1, SHEN Chong1, ZHANG Weichuan2, CHEN Haibin2, ZHAO Jianjun2,*()   

  1. 1. College of Clinical Medicine, Hebei University of Engineering, Handan 056002, China
    2. Department of Urology, Affiliated Hospital ofHebei University of Engineering, Handan 056002, China
  • Received:2022-12-05 Revised:2023-04-12 Published:2023-10-20 Online:2023-05-26
  • Contact: ZHAO Jianjun

摘要: 背景 肾细胞癌因起病隐匿,缺乏早期典型的临床表现,多数患者确诊时已经发生转移或已到晚期,根治性肾细胞癌切除术疗效较差。近年来,随着靶向治疗在肿瘤治疗中广泛应用,很大程度上降低了术后复发率和死亡率,但由于存在一定的不良反应及并发症,因而临床治疗的有效性及安全性缺乏循证依据。 目的 系统评价程序性死亡因子1(PD-1)/程序性死亡因子1配体(PD-L1)抑制剂治疗肾细胞癌的有效性及安全性。 方法 计算机检索中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普网及PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane Library、Clinical Trials英文数据库和手动检索以收集PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗肾细胞癌的随机对照试验,试验组为接受PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗,对照组为接受常规治疗或安慰剂。检索时间为建库至2022-09-30。由2位研究员独立提取和整理资料,依据Cochrane 5.3手册标准对纳入文献的质量进行评价,应用RevMan 5.4软件进行Meta分析。 结果 最终纳入11篇文献,研究对象7 895例,试验组3 936例,对照组3 959例。Meta分析结果显示,试验组总生存期(OS)、无进展生存期(PFS)优于对照组〔HR=0.87,95%CI(0.84,0.90),P<0.000 01;HR=0.85,95%CI(0.78,0.92),P<0.000 1〕;试验组客观缓解率(ORR)、部分缓解率(PR)、完全缓解率(CR)、基本控制率(DCR)高于对照组〔RR=1.72,95%CI(1.39,2.12),P<0.000 01;RR=1.56,95%CI(1.20,2.01),P=0.000 7;RR=3.05,95%CI(2.39,3.09),P<0.000 01;RR=1.12,95%CI(1.05,1.20),P=0.000 5〕;试验组疾病稳定率(SD)低于对照组〔RR=0.66,95%CI(0.62,0.72),P<0.000 01〕。试验组和对照组疾病进展率(PD)、总不良反应发生率(AEs)、Ⅰ~Ⅱ级不良反应发生率、Ⅲ~Ⅴ级不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义〔RR=0.73,95%CI(0.53,0.99),P=0.05;RR=1.01,95%CI(0.89,1.04),P=0.60;RR=1.02,95%CI(0.88,1.17),P=0.82;RR=1.02,95%CI(0.88,1.19),P=0.80〕。Egger's检验结果均为P>0.05,表明各研究间发表偏倚不显著。 结论 PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗肾细胞癌可显著改善和提高患者的OS、PFS、ORR、PR、CR和DCR,其安全性较好,未增加患者的不良反应发生率,从而证实PD-1/PD-L1抑制剂治疗肾细胞癌在临床有效性及安全性方面有一定的优越性。

关键词: 癌, 肾细胞, 程序性细胞死亡受体1, 免疫检查点抑制剂, 有效性, 安全性, Meta分析

Abstract:

Background

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is characterized by insidious onset, lack of early typical clinical manifestations, metastasis or advanced stage at diagnosis in most patients and poor efficacy of radical nephrectomy. In recent years, with the broadly application of targeted therapies in tumors, the postoperative recurrence and mortality rates have been greatly reduced. However, there is a lack of evidence for the efficacy and safety of clinical treatment due to the existence of certain adverse effects and complications.

Objective

To systematically review the efficacy and safety of programmed death-1 (PD-1) /programmed death-1 ligand (PD-L1) inhibitors in the treatment of RCC.

Methods

CNKI, Wanfang Data, VIP, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials and other English databases were searched by computer and manually for the randomized controlled trials of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for RCC from the inception to 2022-09-30. Two researchers independently extracted and collated the data, evaluated the quality of the included literature according to Cochrane 5.3 manual criteria, and performed meta-analysis using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results

A total of 11 papers were finally included, involving 7 895 study subjects with 3 936 cases in the trial group and 3 959 cases in the control group. Meta-analysis results showed that the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were better in the trial group than in the control group〔HR=0.87, 95%CI (0.84, 0.90), P<0.000 01; HR=0.85, 95%CI (0.78, 0.92), P<0.000 1〕; the objective response rate (ORR), partial response rate (PR), complete response rate (CR), and disease-control rate (DCR) were higher in the trial group than in the control group〔RR=1.72, 95%CI (1.39, 2.12), P<0.000 01; RR=1.56, 95%CI (1.20, 2.01), P=0.000 7; RR=3.05, 95%CI (2.39, 3.09), P<0.000 01; RR=1.12, 95%CI (1.05, 1.20), P=0.000 5〕; the rate of stable disease (SD) was lower in the trial group than in the control group〔RR=0.66, 95%CI (0.62, 0.72), P<0.000 01〕. The differences were not statistically significant when comparing the rate of PD, total rate of adverse events (AEs), rates of grade Ⅰ-Ⅱ adverse events and grade Ⅲ-Ⅴ adverse events between the trial and control groups〔RR=0.73, 95%CI (0.53, 0.99), P=0.05; RR=1.01, 95%CI (0.89, 1.04), P=0.60; RR=1.02, 95%CI (0.88, 1.17), P=0.82; RR=1.02, 95%CI (0.88, 1.19), P=0.80〕. Egger's tests resulted in P>0.05, indicating no significant publication bias among studies.

Conclusion

PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for RCC can significantly improve and enhance OS, PFS, ORR, CR, PR and DCR in patients without increasing the incidence of adverse effects in terms of safety, thus confirming the superiority of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors for RCC in terms of clinical efficacy and safety.

Key words: Carcinoma, renal cell, Programmed cell death 1 receptor, Immune checkpoint inhibitors, Efficacy, Safety, Meta-analysis