Efficacy and Safety of First-line Therapies for Advanced Unresectable Oesophageal Squamous Cell Cancer: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Aim: To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of first-line treatments for advanced unresectable oesophageal squamous cell cancer.
Materials and Methods: A systematic review and network meta-analysis was carried out by retrieving and retaining relevant literature from databases. The studies were randomised controlled trials comparing first-line treatments for advanced unresectable oesophageal squamous cell cancer. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was used to assess clinical outcomes.
Results: Nine studies including 4499 patients receiving first-line treatments were analysed. For all populations, toripalimab plus chemotherapy tended to provide the best overall survival (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence intervals 0.43-0.78) and sintilimab plus chemotherapy provided the best progression-free survival (0.56, 0.46-0.68). Nivolumab plus chemotherapy presented the best objective response rate (odds ratio 2.45, 1.78-3.42) and camrelizumab plus chemotherapy (0.47, 0.29-0.74) appeared to be the safest. Sintilimab plus chemotherapy (0.55, 0.40-0.75) and nivolumab (0.54, 0.37-0.80) plus chemotherapy had the best overall survival in programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumour proportion score <1% and ≥1% subgroups. Toripalimab plus chemotherapy (0.61, 0.40-0.93) and pembrolizumab (0.57, 0.43-0.75) were the best in overall survival in combined positive score <10 and ≥10 subgroups, respectively. Toripalimab plus chemotherapy showed the best overall survival in the Asian group; pembrolizumab presented better overall survival in the Asian population than the non-Asian group.
Conclusion: Most immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy showed superior clinical benefits and sintilimab plus chemotherapy, toripalimab plus chemotherapy and tislelizumab plus chemotherapy had better comprehensive clinical efficacy. PD-L1 expression detection and ethnicity differences are still of great significance and most suitable regimens varied from each subgroup.
(Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)