MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): A systematic review and extracted individual patient data meta-analysis.

2024· review· en· W4399480487 on OpenAlexaff
Mateus Trinconi Trinconi Cunha, Rubens Copia Sperandio, Kelvin Chan, Ines B. Menjak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeMeta-analysisOncologyLung cancerImmunotherapyAtezolizumabNeoadjuvant therapyInternal medicineCancerSurgeryPembrolizumab

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

8045 Background: Neoadjuvant and perioperative immunotherapy are emerging approaches for resectable NSCLC. However, survival outcomes are still immature and subgroup analyses are underpowered. We report extracted individual patient (pt) data (eIPD) and trial-level (TL) meta-analyses of phase II and III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in this setting. Methods: The systematic review included Cochrane, Embase, and major oncology conferences (ASCO annual meetings, ESMO meetings, WCLC meetings). Primary objectives were eIPD event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Secondary objectives included eIPD and TL meta-analysis of subgroups. Kaplan-Meier plots of time-to-event outcomes were reconstructed with WebPlotDigitizer (v4.6, 2022), and eIPD was estimated with IPDfromKM (v0.1.10, 2020) stratified by study. Comparisons between arms were made in a 1-stage model with a Cox Proportional Hazards model stratified by study. The difference of restricted mean survival time (D-RMST), a quantification of the postponement of an event during a specified interval, was used to compare survival when the proportional hazard assumption (PHA) was violated, tau being the shortest follow-up time of the available trials. TL meta-analysis was performed with a random effects model. This meta-analysis was registered in the PROSPERO database under CRD42024502150. Results: Seven RCTs (AEGEAN, CM816, CM77T, KN671, NADIM II, NeoTorch, and Lei et al. [ESMO IOTECH 2022, #56O]) were identified, comprising 2995 pts. EFS analysis included all pts, with HR of 0.58 (0.52-0.65; p<0.01). OS analysis (1645 evaluable pts from 4 trials) showed a D-RMST of 5.17 mo. (p<0.01) due to PHA violation. Full eIPD analysis in the table. TL meta-analysis showed benefit in all subgroups, including PD-L1 expression, histology, stage, smoking status, sex, and age. TL EFS and OS results were comparable to results obtained from eIPD analysis, with low heterogeneity measures. Conclusions: This meta-analysis provides robust and nuanced insights into the positive impact of immunotherapy in resectable NSCLC. While evidence supports its efficacy, uncertainty surrounding the benefit in stage < III disease highlights the need for additional research and more mature results to guide clinical decision-making effectively. [Table: see text]

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.043
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.298
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→