A retrospective real-world study: the efficacy of immune-related combination therapies in advanced non-small cell lung cancer after resistance to EGFR-TKIs

Abstract

Abstract Background Whether patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) should choose an immune-combination therapy regimen after EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs) resistance is currently unclear. Methods We evaluated 118 NSCLC patients treated by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) + chemotherapy (I + C), ICIs + chemotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy (I + C + A), chemotherapy + antiangiogenic therapy (C + A) after inefficacy of EGFR-TKIs. We assessed the objective remission rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and progression-free survival (PFS) of these treatments. Results The ORR was 26.1% vs 38.2% vs 16.3% in the three groups (P = 0.093). The divergence in DCR was also statistically significant (65.2% vs 85.3% vs 74.4%, P = 0.209). The median PFS was no statistically significant difference in PFS (3.09 vs 6.31 vs 5.91 months, P = 0.809), but the Kaplan–Meier survival curve of 12-month-PFS indicated an apparent survival advantage in the I + C + A group (P = 0.001). In addition, the I + C/I + C + A group showed higher median PFS than the C + A group in patients with brain metastases (median PFS, 6.44 vs 4.21 months, P = 0.022). The divergence in ORR of patients in the brain group was also statistically significant (P = 0.045). The I + C + A group showed superior efficacy in patients with liver metastases (median PFS, 0.95 vs 6.44 vs 3.48 months, P < 0.0001). The Cox proportional hazard modeling analysis suggested that the age, brain metastases, and liver metastases were all connected with the prognosis. Conclusions This study suggests that advanced NSCLC patients after resistance to EGFR-TKIs may achieve better outcomes from triple therapy. Patients with brain metastases favor ICIs-related combination therapies and patients with liver metastases prefer I + C + A therapy.