Cancer Medicine (Jul 2023)

A retrospective real‐world experience of immunotherapy in patients with extensive stage small‐cell lung cancer

  • Guihuan Qiu,
  • Fei Wang,
  • Xiaohong Xie,
  • Ting Liu,
  • Chen Zeng,
  • Ziyao Chen,
  • Maolin Zhou,
  • Haiyi Deng,
  • Yilin Yang,
  • Xinqing Lin,
  • Zhanhong Xie,
  • Gengyun Sun,
  • Chengzhi Zhou,
  • Ming Liu

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.5843
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 14
pp. 14881 – 14891

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background The treatment of extensive stage small‐cell lung cancer (ES‐SCLC) has only made modest progress in the past decade, with two immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), atezolizumab and durvalumab, approved for the treatment of SCLC by January 2022. However, currently, there is limited real‐world data on ES‐SCLC patients received immunotherapy. Methods We retrospectively collected and analyzed the demographic and treatment data of ES‐SCLC patients at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2017 to January 2022. Survival and prognosis information was obtained through follow‐up. Results A total of 353 ES‐SCLC patients were included, of which 165 received immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy as the first‐line (FL) treatment (chemo‐immune group), and 188 received chemotherapy (chemotherapy group). The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) of patients receiving immunotherapy as the FL treatment were better than the chemotherapy group (76.97% vs. 48.40%, p < 0.001, and 83.03% vs. 68.09%, p < 0.001). Moreover, the progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of ES‐SCLC patients receiving immunotherapy as the FL treatment were better than the chemotherapy group (6.7 months vs. 5.1 months, p < 0.001, and 12.5 months vs. 11.2 months, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the OS of ES‐SCLC patients who received immunotherapy as second‐line treatment was better than that in the chemotherapy group (15.9 months vs. 12.9 months, p = 0.036). Conclusion ICIs combined with chemotherapy as the FL treatment could be beneficial to the ORR, DCR, PFS, and OS of ES‐SCLC patients. Furthermore, ES‐SCLC patients can benefit from ICIs in the second‐line treatment, even if they had not received ICIs in the FL treatment.

Keywords