Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, and EMbase databases were searched for clinical randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of ICIs as first-line treatment for NSCLC patients. The search period was from database inception to January 2023. Quality evaluation was conducted using the improved Jadad scale, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. ResultsTwelve RCTs were included, all of which were assessed as high-quality literature, involving a total of 7 121 patients. Meta-analysis results showed that, compared with chemotherapy, ICIs as first-line treatment for NSCLC patients significantly improved median overall survival (OS) [HR=0.72, 95%CI (0.64, 0.80), P<0.001] and median progression-free survival (PFS) [HR=0.65, 95%CI (0.53, 0.78), P<0.001], and improved objective response rate (ORR) [RR=1.52, 95%CI (1.28, 1.79), P<0.001]. Subgroup analysis showed that, compared with the ICIs monotherapy group, the ICIs combination therapy group significantly improved OS, PFS, and ORR in NSCLC patients. In terms of safety, the risk of any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and grade 3-5 TRAEs in the ICIs group was lower than that in the chemotherapy group. The incidence of TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation was higher in the ICIs group than in the chemotherapy group. Subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of any grade, grade 3-5, and TRAEs leading to treatment discontinuation was higher in the immune combination therapy group than in the immune monotherapy group. Conclusion ICIs as first-line treatment for NSCLC patients can significantly improve OS, PFS, and ORR compared with chemotherapy. Compared to immune monotherapy, immune combination therapy can significantly improve the efficacy in NSCLC patients, but patients have a higher risk of TRAEs.
Objective To systematically review the sex differences in efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Methods We conducted a computer search of Medline, The Cochrane Library, and EMbase from inception to November 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of ICIs in patients with NSCLC. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. ResultsFinally 16 RCTs with a total of 9 653 patients were included, and the modified Jadad scale score was≥4 points. Meta-analysis results showed that in female NSCLC patients receiving immune therapy, the median overall survival (OS) [HR=0.72, 95%CI (0.61, 0.85), P<0.001] was longer than that in males [HR=0.73, 95%CI (0.69, 0.78), P<0.001]. Males [HR=0.64, 95%CI (0.58, 0.71), P<0.001] had an advantage over females [HR=0.76, 95%CI (0.57, 1.03), P=0.760] in median progression-free survival (PFS). Conclusion Females receiving ICIs have an advantage over males in terms of median OS. However, males tend to derive greater benefit from ICIs in terms of median PFS.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in treating esophageal cancer patients of different genders. MethodsComputer searches were conducted on PubMed, The Cochrane Library, and EMbase databases to collect randomized controlled trial (RCT) on ICIs treatment for esophageal cancer patients from the establishment of the databases to January 25, 2024. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted data according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The outcome indicators were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and RevMan 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. The modified Jadad scoring scale was used to evaluate the quality of the included literature. ResultsA total of 10 RCT involving 5364 esophageal cancer patients were included in this study, with 2684 patients in the experimental group and 2680 patients in the control group. The Jadad scores of the included literature were all ≥6 points, indicating high-quality RCT. Meta-analysis results showed that female esophageal cancer patients receiving ICIs treatment [HR=0.72, 95%CI (0.59, 0.87), P<0.001] had a more significant median OS prolongation than male patients [HR=0.73, 95%CI (0.68, 0.78), P<0.001]; while male patients [HR=0.57, 95%CI (0.52, 0.64), P<0.001] had a more significant PFS prolongation than female patients [HR=0.72, 95%CI (0.55, 0.94), P=0.01]. Female patients treated with ICIs alone [HR=0.66, 95%CI (0.50, 0.87), P=0.003] had a more significant median OS prolongation than male patients [HR=0.79, 95%CI (0.72, 0.87), P<0.001]; while male patients receiving ICIs combined with chemotherapy [HR=0.67, 95%CI (0.61, 0.74), P<0.001] had a more significant median OS prolongation than female patients [HR=0.77, 95%CI (0.59, 1.01), P=0.06]. ConclusionFemale patients receiving ICIs have a slight advantage in OS compared to male patients, while male patients have an advantage in PFS. Male patients receiving ICIs combined with chemotherapy have better survival benefits than female patients, while female patients using ICIs monotherapy have better survival benefits than male patients.
Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) with different numbers of ports in the treatment of spontaneous pneumothorax. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search of CNKI, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMbase, Wanfang Data, and the Chinese Medical Journal Full-text Database for clinical controlled trials on VATS with different port numbers for spontaneous pneumothorax, from their inception to March 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature and assessed its quality.The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the methodological quality of cohort and case-control studies, and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCT). Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. Results A total of 107 studies were included, comprising 35 RCT, 2 cohort studies, and 70 case-control studies. All cohort and case-control studies included in the analysis had NOS scores≥7. The meta-analysis revealed that compared to two-port VATS (2P-VATS) and three-port VATS (3P-VATS), single-port thoracoscopic surgery (SPTS) was associated with less intraoperative blood loss (SMD=–1.58, 95%CI: –1.93 to –1.22, P<0.001; and SMD=–1.59, 95%CI: –2.03 to –1.14, P<0.001, respectively), shorter postoperative hospital stay (SMD=–1.05, 95%CI: –1.29 to –0.82, P<0.001; and SMD=–1.08, 95%CI: –1.39 to –0.77, P<0.001), shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (SMD=–0.75, 95%CI: –1.00 to –0.50, P<0.001; and SMD=–1.23, 95%CI: –1.72 to –0.75, P<0.001), fewer postoperative complications (OR=0.34, 95%CI: 0.26 to 0.45, P<0.001; and OR=0.47, 95%CI: 0.33 to 0.68, P<0.001), and lower pain scores at 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery (P<0.05). The operative time for SPTS was shorter than that for 2P-VATS (SMD=–0.53, 95%CI: –0.90 to –0.16, P=0.005) but showed no significant difference compared to 3P-VATS (P=0.21). When comparing 2P-VATS with 3P-VATS, 2P-VATS demonstrated less intraoperative blood loss (SMD=–1.02, 95%CI: –1.81 to –0.22, P=0.01), shorter postoperative hospital stay (SMD=–0.59, 95%CI: –1.11 to –0.06, P=0.03), shorter duration of chest tube drainage (SMD=–0.46, 95%CI: –0.85 to –0.08, P=0.02), fewer postoperative complications (OR=0.36, 95%CI: 0.22 to 0.59, P<0.001), and lower pain scores at 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery (P≤0.05). Conclusion Both SPTS and 2P-VATS are effective and safe surgical options for spontaneous pneumothorax, deserving further promotion and application in clinical practice. However, due to limitations in the quantity and quality of the included studies, more large-sample, high-quality research is needed to validate these findings.